Keep It Up! 2.0: A Comparison of Two Online HIV Intervention Programs for Young Men Who Have Sex With Men (KIU!)

August 11, 2022 updated by: Brian Mustanski, Northwestern University

Efficacy of Internet-based HIV Prevention

Young men who have sex with men (YMSM) account for almost 70% of HIV diagnoses among all young people in the U.S. and are alone in facing an increasing rate of infections. Because YMSM are less likely to receive relevant sexual health education in traditional settings (e.g. schools, community), the Internet is a unique route of reaching and helping YMSM.

The purpose of this study is to compare two different versions of an online HIV prevention program for YMSM. The study is being conducted by researchers at Northwestern University in Chicago, Hunter College in New York City, and Emory University in Atlanta. A total of 900 YMSM will be enrolled into this study from the clinics of community partners in Chicago, New York, and Atlanta.

Participants will be randomly assigned to one of two versions of the program. Some topics in the program include HIV facts and myths, sexually transmitted infections (STIs), and condom use. All participants, regardless of the program version they receive, will also take at-home urine and rectal tests for the STIs chlamydia and gonorrhea. After completing the program, participants will be contacted three more times over the course of a year for follow-up sessions and surveys.

The research team hypothesizes that the YMSM-specific prevention program will lead to a significant reduction in the frequency of unprotected anal sex acts and new STI infections compared to the HIV knowledge program that is for a general audience. The YMSM-specific program will also lead to improvements in secondary knowledge, motivation, and skills outcomes.

In order for the research team to measure the effectiveness of the YMSM-specific prevention program and determine if the study hypothesis is correct, participants will be asked questions about themselves, including questions about their sexual orientation, sexual experiences, health practices, including drug use, health knowledge, and questions about their feelings and emotions. Based on this information, the research team hopes to later change, improve, or expand the program to better address the needs of YMSM.

Study Overview

Status

Completed

Conditions

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

901

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

    • Georgia
      • Atlanta, Georgia, United States, 30322
        • Emory University
    • Illinois
      • Chicago, Illinois, United States, 60611
        • Northwestern University
    • New York
      • New York, New York, United States, 10065
        • Hunter College

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

18 years to 29 years (Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Genders Eligible for Study

Male

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Birth male who identifies as male and reports sexual contact with another male
  • Received an HIV negative test result from a participating clinic/recruitment site
  • Unprotected anal sex with another male in the last 6 months
  • Ability to read English at 8th grade level

Exclusion Criteria:

  • HIV positive
  • Female or Transgender
  • No email address for contact
  • Currently in a monogamous relationship lasting longer than 6 months
  • Participated in previous versions of KIU!

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Prevention
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: Double

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: Keep It Up! Intervention
The KIU! intervention is a multi-media online HIV prevention program developed specifically for young (18-29 years old) men who have sex with men (MSM) who recently tested HIV negative. Intervention content includes discussions of community involvement, scenarios on hooking-up online, communication skills in relationships (including negotiating safer sex), condom use, HIV knowledge, and HIV/STI risks. Information is presented in various formats like games, animation, and videos to address gaps in HIV knowledge, motivate safer behaviors, teach behavioral skills, and instill self-efficacy for preventive behaviors. The intervention is completed across three sessions, done at least 24 hours apart (i.e. at least 3 days), and takes about 2 hours total to complete.
Other Names:
  • KIU!
  • KIU! 2.0
  • Keep It Up! 2.0
Active Comparator: HIV Knowledge Control
The control condition reflects HIV information that is currently available on many websites so as to understand how the KIU! intervention improves upon what is currently available online. It is not tailored to YMSM, non-interactive, and focused on HIV/STI knowledge. The control is completed across three sessions done at least 24 hours apart (i.e. at least 3 days).

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Participants Self-Reporting Condomless Anal Sex at Baseline and 3 Months
Time Frame: Baseline, 3 Months
Change in self-report of condomless anal sex acts at three months.
Baseline, 3 Months
Participants Self-Reporting Condomless Anal Sex at Baseline and 6 Months
Time Frame: Baseline, 6 Months
Change in self-report of condomless anal sex acts at six months.
Baseline, 6 Months
Participants Self-Reporting Condomless Anal Sex at Baseline and 12 Months
Time Frame: Baseline, 12 Months
Change in self-report of condomless anal sex acts at twelve months.
Baseline, 12 Months
Number of Participants With Occurrence of Sexually Transmitted Infections (STIs) at Baseline
Time Frame: Baseline
The incidence (number of new cases or diagnoses) of chlamydia and gonorrhea at baseline.
Baseline
Number of Participants With Occurrence of Sexually Transmitted Infections (STIs) at 12 Months
Time Frame: 12 months
The incidence (number of new cases or diagnoses) of chlamydia and gonorrhea at twelve months.
12 months

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Mean Score of Condom Errors at Baseline and 3 Months
Time Frame: Baseline, 3 Months
The change in frequency that a participant has not correctly used a condom (for example, starting sex without a condom or using the wrong lube with condoms) at three months. Must have reported anal sex and using a condom with a partner at both time points. Range of scores - 0-11; higher scores = more errors.
Baseline, 3 Months
Percentage of Correct Responses on HIV Knowledge Assessment at Baseline and 3 Months
Time Frame: Baseline, 3 Months
The change in number of HIV statements (e.g. "Only the receptive/bottom partner is at risk of being infected with HIV during anal sex", "There is a vaccine that can stop people from getting HIV", and "A natural skin (lamb skin) condom works better against HIV than does a latex condom") correctly labeled as true or false at three months. All 26 statements were recoded such that correct responses = 1 and incorrect or 'don't know' responses = 0. Composite scores were calculated to reflect the percentage of correct responses. Higher scores reflect greater knowledge of HIV transmission/risk.
Baseline, 3 Months
Mean Score of Motivation and Behavioral Skills at Baseline and 3 Months
Time Frame: Baseline, 3 Months

At three months, the change in:

  • Motivation (for example, intentions to use condoms, perceived threat of HIV or STI infection, desire to become safer)
  • Social Norms (for example, partners, friends, or family members opinions about condom use)
  • Behavioral Skills (for example, negotiating condom use)

Motivational Self-Rating - higher score = higher motivation; range 1-4 Social Norms - higher score = higher endorsement of social norms; range 1-5 Behavioral Skills - higher score = less perceived difficulty using condoms; range 1-4

Baseline, 3 Months
Mean Score of Health Protective Communication Skills at Baseline and 3 Months
Time Frame: Baseline, 3 Months
The change in how frequently health protection (for example, condom use and regular HIV testing) is discussed with sex partners at three months. Higher score = less HPC skills; range 1-4 for each item on scale (relationship maintenance, condom use, and HIV testing).
Baseline, 3 Months
Number of Participants Reporting Drug Use Before Sex at Baseline and 12 Months
Time Frame: Baseline, 12 Month
The change in number of participants who report using illegal drugs or drugs not prescribed by a doctor before sex.
Baseline, 12 Month
Mean Score of Condom Errors at Baseline and 6 Months
Time Frame: Baseline, 6 Months
The change in frequency that a participant has not correctly used a condom (for example, starting sex without a condom or using the wrong lube with condoms) at six months. Must have reported anal sex and using a condom with a partner at both time points. Range of scores - 0-11; higher scores = more errors
Baseline, 6 Months
Percentage of Correct Responses on HIV Knowledge Assessment at Baseline and 6 Months
Time Frame: Baseline, 6 Months
The change in number of HIV statements (e.g. "Only the receptive/bottom partner is at risk of being infected with HIV during anal sex", "There is a vaccine that can stop people from getting HIV", and "A natural skin (lamb skin) condom works better against HIV than does a latex condom") correctly labeled as true or false at six months. All 26 statements were recoded such that correct responses = 1 and incorrect or 'don't know' responses = 0. Composite scores were calculated to reflect the percentage of correct responses. Higher scores reflect greater knowledge of HIV transmission/risk.
Baseline, 6 Months
Mean Score of Motivation and Behavioral Skills at Baseline and 6 Months
Time Frame: Baseline, 6 Months

At six months, the change in:

  • Motivation (for example, intentions to use condoms, perceived threat of HIV or STI infection, desire to become safer)
  • Social Norms (for example, partners, friends, or family members opinions about condom use)
  • Behavioral Skills (for example, negotiating condom use)

Motivational Self-Rating - higher score = higher motivation; range 1-4 Social Norms - higher score = higher endorsement of social norms; range 1-5 Behavioral Skills - higher score = less perceived difficulty using condoms; range 1-4

Baseline, 6 Months
Mean Score of Health Protective Communication Skills at Baseline and 6 Months
Time Frame: Baseline, 6 Months
The change in how frequently health protection (for example, condom use and regular HIV testing) is discussed with sex partners at six months. Higher score = less HPC skills; range 1-4 for each item on scale (relationship maintenance, condom use, and HIV testing).
Baseline, 6 Months
Mean Score of Condom Errors at Baseline and 12 Months
Time Frame: Baseline, 12 Months
The change in frequency that a participant has not correctly used a condom (for example, starting sex without a condom or using the wrong lube with condoms) at twelve months. Must have reported anal sex and using a condom with a partner at both time points. Range of scores - 0-11; higher scores = more errors.
Baseline, 12 Months
Percentage of Correct Responses on HIV Knowledge Assessment at Baseline and 12 Months
Time Frame: Baseline, 12 Months
The change in number of HIV statements (e.g. "Only the receptive/bottom partner is at risk of being infected with HIV during anal sex", "There is a vaccine that can stop people from getting HIV", and "A natural skin (lamb skin) condom works better against HIV than does a latex condom") correctly labeled as true or false at twelve months. All 26 statements were recoded such that correct responses = 1 and incorrect or 'don't know' responses = 0. Composite scores were calculated to reflect the percentage of correct responses. Higher scores reflect greater knowledge of HIV transmission/risk.
Baseline, 12 Months
Mean Score of Motivation and Behavioral Skills at Baseline and 12 Months
Time Frame: Baseline, 12 Months

At twelve months, the change in:

  • Motivation (for example, intentions to use condoms, perceived threat of HIV or STI infection, desire to become safer)
  • Social Norms (for example, partners, friends, or family members opinions about condom use)
  • Behavioral Skills (for example, negotiating condom use)

Motivational Self-Rating - higher score = higher motivation; range 1-4 Social Norms - higher score = higher endorsement of social norms; range 1-5 Behavioral Skills - higher score = less perceived difficulty using condoms; range 1-4

Baseline, 12 Months
Mean Score of Health Protective Communication Skills at Baseline and 12 Months
Time Frame: Baseline, 12 Months
The change in how frequently health protection (for example, condom use and regular HIV testing) is discussed with sex partners at twelve months. Higher score = less HPC skills; range 1-4 for each item on scale (relationship maintenance, condom use, and HIV testing).
Baseline, 12 Months
Mean Score of Feelings of HIV Invulnerability at Baseline and 12 Months
Time Frame: Baseline, 12 Months
The change in effect that HIV testing has on health beliefs (for example, "I cannot get HIV") and sexual behaviors at twelve months. Range 1-5; higher scores = more feelings of invulnerability
Baseline, 12 Months

Other Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Participant Rating of Intervention Acceptability and Tolerability
Time Frame: Immediately following completion of intervention (up to 3 weeks after intervention is started by participant)
Participant rating of how much they enjoyed the intervention and participant feedback and suggestions for improvement. Range 1-4; higher scores indicate greater acceptability.
Immediately following completion of intervention (up to 3 weeks after intervention is started by participant)
Participant Location
Time Frame: Immediately following completion of intervention (up to 3 weeks after intervention is started by participant)
Log of where participants completed the intervention sessions (participants can select multiple locations).
Immediately following completion of intervention (up to 3 weeks after intervention is started by participant)
Participant Experiences of Harm at 3 Month Follow-up
Time Frame: 3 Months
Log of any negative experiences or harm experienced by participant at three months.
3 Months
Participant Experiences of Harm at 6 Month Follow-up
Time Frame: 6 Months
Log of any negative experiences or harm experienced by participant at six months.
6 Months
Participant Experiences of Harm at 12 Month Follow-up
Time Frame: 12 Months
Log of any negative experiences or harm experienced by participant at twelve months.
12 Months
Occurrence of Sexually Transmitted Infections (STIs) at 3 Months
Time Frame: 3 Months
The incidence (number of new cases or diagnoses) of chlamydia and gonorrhea at 3 month follow-up. Only measured for participants who initially tested positive for chlamydia or gonorrhea at baseline.
3 Months
Occurrence of Sexually Transmitted Infections (STIs) at 6 Months
Time Frame: 6 Months
The incidence (number of new cases or diagnoses) of chlamydia and gonorrhea at 6 month follow-up. Only measured for participants who initially tested positive for chlamydia or gonorrhea at baseline.
6 Months
Level of Privacy
Time Frame: Immediately following completion of intervention (up to 3 weeks after intervention is started by participant)
Log of the levels of privacy of the locations where participants completed intervention.
Immediately following completion of intervention (up to 3 weeks after intervention is started by participant)

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Brian Mustanski, PhD, Northwestern University

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

May 1, 2013

Primary Completion (Actual)

March 1, 2017

Study Completion (Actual)

March 1, 2017

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

April 17, 2013

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

April 17, 2013

First Posted (Estimate)

April 19, 2013

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

August 15, 2022

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

August 11, 2022

Last Verified

August 1, 2022

More Information

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on HIV

Clinical Trials on Keep It Up!

3
Subscribe