AEGiS-14IAC: Measuring relationship power: adaptation of the SRPS for South Africa.

14th International AIDS Conference

Barcelona, Spain - July 7-12, 2002

Measuring relationship power: adaptation of the SRPS for South Africa.

Int Conf AIDS 2002 Jul 7-12; 14:(abstract no. WeOrD1353)

Jewkes RK, Nduna M, Jama PN, Levin JB
Medical Research Council, Pretoria, South Africa

INTRODUCTION: HIV preventive interventions are increasingly focusing on gender dynamics in relationships, creating new demands to develop measures for evaluation tools. Pulerwitz et al (2000) developed a 23-item Sexual Relationship Power Scale (sub-scales: relationship control and decision-making dominance) in the United States. This paper describes its adaptation and testing in South Africa

METHODS: Based on our knowledge of gender issues in South African relationships, the relationship control sub-scale was used alone. Four out of its15 items were removed and one added. The resulting 12-item scale was tested on young people (70 male and 51 female) in a pilot evaluation of the 'Stepping Stones' intervention with pre- and post-intervention interviews.

RESULTS: The sub-scale performed well on reliability testing. Cronbach's alpha for the sample of men was 0.57 and for women was 0.813. The mean score for the scale for women was 39.84 (SD 8.45) and for men was 43.07 (SD 5.51) out of a maximum of 48. A higher score denoted more equitable relationships. At baseline women who had used a condom on last sexual intercourse had a higher mean score than non-condom users (45.6 v. 35.9, p<0.0001). The same association was found for men (44.1 v. 41.0, p=0.027). The intervention was effective in increasing women's power in their relationship for women participants (p=0.022), but the change for men was not significant (p=0.34). This may have resulted from men exaggerating the equitability of their relationships at baseline. The 5 women and 7 men who reported using a condom during last sex on follow up, but not at baseline, improved their sexual relationship power score more than those who did not use a condom (for women 4.8 v 2.1 and for men 2.3 v. -1.5). This change was non-significant (p=0.109), perhaps due to the small numbers.

CONCLUSION: The adapted scale was a useful tool and associations between greater gender equity and condom use were as expected.

Keywords: AEGIS, Condoms, Power (Psychology), Safe Sex, HIV Infections, Interpersonal Relations, Interviews, Decision Making, United States, South Africa, Human, Female, Male

020707
WeOrD1353