Stigma Consciousness, Coping Strategies And Cd4 Counts Of Persons With Hiv/aids

information coping, and problem coping at a stretch. Four-way analysis of variance is appropriate statistic for a complex design study that adopts 2 X 2 X 2 X 2 - factorial design.

In the second analysis, analysis of covariate (ANCOVA) was used and treatment was entered as a covariate. Hinkle, Wiersma and Jurs (1998) stated two assumptions and their alternative for using ANCOVA as statistical control. The conditions are that relationship between the dependent variable and independent variable must be linear and that a test of homogeneity of regression lines must be parallel; or in alternative, the covariate is categorized into levels and is made additional independent variable. This study did not test for linearity or homogeneity of regression lines, but adopted the alternative option and categorized treatment into two levels, using drug and not using drug. And so, the researcher made treatment additional independent variable. Thus, ANCOVA was used statistically to control for influence of treatment in this study.

FOLLOW UP STUDY

Application of cognitive therapy on stigma consciousness, social support, information coping, and problem coping

It became imperative to establish strong evidence for recommending Gluhoski, (1996) proposed cognitive therapy for management of HIV/AIDS since it was proposed based on mere review of literatures. As such, a follow up study was conducted to test the effectiveness of the cognitive therapy. In this study, treatment group experienced intervention measure using cognitive therapy but not control group.

The assumption is that any cognitive therapy that affects stigma consciousness, social support, information coping or problem coping, will invariably affect immune system as indicated in CD4 counts.

Therefore, the following hypotheses were tested:

ï‚· That those PLWHA who experienced intervention measure would score low in stigma consciousness than those PLWHA who did not experience intervention measure.

ï‚· Those PLWHA who experienced intervention measure would score higher in social support measure than those who did not experience intervention measure.

ï‚· Those PLWHA who experienced intervention measures would be more disposed to seek information than those who did not receive intervention measure.

ï‚· And, that those PLWHA who experienced intervention measure would be more disposed to focus on problem than those who did not experience intervention measure. The hypotheses were tested at .05 level of significance using multivariate analysis of variance statistic.

METHOD

Participant One hundred and eighty-seven (85= men & 102=women) participated in this study. The participants’ age ranged between 17 and 63 years with the mean age of 35.86 years and standard deviation of 8.27 years. One hundred and six (106) participated in treatment group whereas eighty-one (81) participated in the control group. The participants were drawn from the original sample used in the main study and so bear the same characteristics with the original sample. Also, the same method of sampling technique adopted in the main study was used for data collection in this study.

Instrument

Stigma consciousness questionnaire Pinnel (1999), social support scale Turner, Frankel and Levin (1983), ways of coping inventory Folkman and Lazarus (1980), information coping scale (Kalichman & others, 2006) and patients’ folders were used for data collection. The validity and reliability of the instruments remained as reported in the main study.

Procedure

Instruments on stigma consciousness, social support, information, and problem copings, as usual, were administered to people living with HIV/AIDS as part of routine evaluation during adherence counseling. Participants were systematically assigned to treatment and control groups. Participants in treatment group received discussions as intervention measure when they attended routine anti retroviral therapy (ART) whereas the control group did not. The discussion was held every two months with treatment group for three sessions.

The intervention was based on Gluhoski (1996) cognitive therapy aimed at changing self view, easing health concerns, addressing relationship issues, developing a view of the future, and finding meaning. (For details, refer to Gluhoski (1996) cognitive therapy.) When the participants revisited for the ART at six months, instruments on stigma consciousness, social support, information, and problem copings were re-administered to both treatment and control groups. Multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was used to compare experiencing intervention and not experiencing intervention (independent variable) on stigma consciousness, social support, information and problem copings (dependent variables).