HIV/AIDS-related institutional mistrust among multiethnic men who have sex with men: effects on HIV testing and risk behaviors.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate relationships between institutional mistrust (systematic discrimination, organizational suspicion, and conspiracy beliefs), HIV risk behaviors, and HIV testing in a multiethnic sample of men who have sex with men (MSM), and to test whether perceived susceptibility to HIV mediates these relationships for White and ethnic minority MSM. METHOD: Participants were 394 MSM residing in Central Arizona (M age = 37 years). Three dimensions of mistrust were examined, including organizational suspicion, conspiracy beliefs, and systematic discrimination. Assessments of sexual risk behavior, HIV testing, and perceived susceptibility to HIV were made at study entry (T1) and again 6 months later (T2). RESULTS: There were no main effects of institutional mistrust dimensions or ethnic minority status on T2 risk behavior, but the interaction of systematic discrimination and conspiracy beliefs with minority status was significant such that higher levels of systematic discrimination and more conspiracy beliefs were associated with increased risk only among ethnic minority MSM. Higher levels of systematic discrimination were significantly related to lower likelihood for HIV testing, and the interaction of organizational suspicion with minority status was significant such that greater levels of organizational suspicion were related to less likelihood of having been tested for HIV among ethnic minority MSM. Perceived susceptibility did not mediate these relationships. CONCLUSION: Findings suggest that it is important to look further into the differential effects of institutional mistrust across marginalized groups, including sexual and ethnic minorities. Aspects of mistrust should be addressed in HIV prevention and counseling efforts.

Development and usability testing of a Web-based decision aid for families of patients receiving prolonged mechanical ventilation.

BACKGROUND: Web-based decision aids are increasingly important in medical research and clinical care. However, few have been studied in an intensive care unit setting. The objectives of this study were to develop a Web-based decision aid for family members of patients receiving prolonged mechanical ventilation and to evaluate its usability and acceptability. METHODS: Using an iterative process involving 48 critical illness survivors, family surrogate decision makers, and intensivists, we developed a Web-based decision aid addressing goals of care preferences for surrogate decision makers of patients with prolonged mechanical ventilation that could be either administered by study staff or completed independently by family members (Development Phase). After piloting the decision aid among 13 surrogate decision makers and seven intensivists, we assessed the decision aid's usability in the Evaluation Phase among a cohort of 30 surrogate decision makers using the Systems Usability Scale (SUS). Acceptability was assessed using measures of satisfaction and preference for electronic Collaborative Decision Support (eCODES) versus the original printed decision aid. RESULTS: The final decision aid, termed 'electronic Collaborative Decision Support', provides a framework for shared decision making, elicits relevant values and preferences, incorporates clinical data to personalize prognostic estimates generated from the ProVent prediction model, generates a printable document summarizing the user's interaction with the decision aid, and can digitally archive each user session. Usability was excellent (mean SUS, 80 ± 10) overall, but lower among those 56 years and older (73 ± 7) versus those who were younger (84 ± 9); p = 0.03. A total of 93% of users reported a preference for electronic versus printed versions. CONCLUSIONS: The Web-based decision aid for ICU surrogate decision makers can facilitate highly individualized information sharing with excellent usability and acceptability. Decision aids that employ an electronic format such as eCODES represent a strategy that could enhance patient-clinician collaboration and decision making quality in intensive care.