Study ID | Alcohol use measure | Viral load measure | CD4 | Adherence | Risky sexual behaviour | Quality of life |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Aharonovich 2017 [19] | Frequency (IRR = 0.67, 95% CI = 0.41–1.07). Quantity (IRR = 0.63 (95% CI = 0.36–1.11) | – | – | – | – | – |
Chander 2015 [35] | Less likely to have a drinking day (OR 0.42 (95% CI 0.23–0.75) (p = 0.005). 90-day drinking frequency in the intervention group was 4.6 [95% CI 0.9, 7.1] Intervention effect 2.9 [95% CI 0.8, 4.4] | Odds ratio 1.30 95% CI 0.65–2.61). | – | (OR 1.11 95% CI (0.853, 1.447) (p = .43)). No diff. | Odds of having unprotected vaginal sex compared with the usual care group (AOR = 0.386 with 95% CI (0.156, 0.952), p = 0.041) | – |
Dawson-Rose 2017 [40] | − 1.59 (95% CI − 2.19, − 1.00) | – | – | – | – | – |
Gilbert 2008 [25] | Any drinking at 3 months RR 0.84 (0.651, 1.080) p = 0.172 Any drinking at 6 months RR 0.87 (0.666, 1.130) p = 0.291 Risk of drinking at 3 month RR 0.88 (0.628, 1.220) p = 0.432 Risk of drinking at 6 months 0.85 (0.606, 1.191) p = 0.343 | – | – | – | Unprotected sex (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.773, 0.993, p = 0.039 at 3 months; and RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.686, 0.941, p = 0.007 at 6 months) | – |
Hasin 2013 [26] | χ2, d.f. = 9.11,2, p = 0.01) | – | – | – | – | – |
Kahler 2018 [32] | Quantity of alcohol use Cohen’s d − 5.0 p < .001 at 6 months and − 3.3 p < 0.04 at 12 months Frequency d = −.42 p < 01 and .40 p < .01 at 12 months | d = .02 p = .99 at 6 months and d = − .11 p = .72 at 12 months | d = −.25 p = .08 at 6 months and d = −.21 p = .15 at 12 months | – | Condomless sex d = −.08 p = .79 at 6 months and d = −.19 p = .10 Sex under influence d = −.04 p = .20 at 6 months and d = −.09 p = .11 at 6 months | – |
Meade 2010 [28] | Quantity (Wald χ2(4) = 10.77, p < .05) | – | – | – | – | – |
Naar-King 2008 [39] | t(48) = 1.65, p = .05 | t(45) = 1.91, p = .03 |  | – | t(47) = .53, p = .30 | – |
Papas 2011 [27] | Percentage daily drinking (d = .95, p = .0002, mean difference = 24.93 (95% CI 12.43, 37.43) Drinks per drinking day (d = .76, p = .002, mean difference = 2.88 (95% CI 1.05, 4.70) | – | – | – | – | – |
Parsons 2007 [29] | Standard drinks from baseline to 3 months [F(1, 112) = 62.7; p < 0.001] 6-month follow-up [F(1, 93) = 48.7; p < 0.001] | (OR = 2.7; p = 0.03) | [F(1, 115) = 6.44; p < 0.02] OR = 3.4; p = 0.013) | Percent dose adherence [F(1, 107) = 13.5; p < 0.001] [F(1, 111) = 21.9; p < 0.001] | – | – |
Rongkavilit 2013 [41] | Frequency S = − 0.64, p = 0.52 S = − 0.84, p = 0.40 Quantity S = − 0.33, p = 0.74 S = − 0.79, p = 0.43 | t = 0.75, p = 0.47 t = − 0.14, p = 0.89 | – | S = − 0.85, p = 0.40 S = − 0.71, p = 0.48 | – | Condom use t = − 0.87, p = 0.39 t = − 1.92, p = 0.06 Avoiding multiple partners t = − 1.00, p = 0.32 t = − 1.64, p = 0.11 HIV disclosure to partners t = − 0.18, p = 0.86 t = − 0.83, p = 0.41 |
Rotheram-Borus 2012 [36] | t = − 3.46, df = 256, p < 0.01 | 63% had an undetectable viral load | – | Adherence 76% | – | – |
Samet 2005 [30] | No effect on frequency, quantity p > 0.25 | No effect p > 0.25 | No effect p > 0.25 | No effect p > 0.25 | – | – |
Samet 2015 [42] | Quantity OR 1.05 (0.77, 1.43)p = 0.76 AOR 1.04 (0.77, 1.40) p = 0.80 Frequency OR 1.00 (0.72, 1.40) p = 0.98 AOR 1.00 (0.72, 1.39) p = 1.00 | Needle sharing OR 1.12 (0.75, 1.69) p = 0.58 AOR 1.13 (0.74, 1.73) p = 0.56 Distributive needle sharing OR 1.18 (0.75, 1.86) p = 0.47 AOR 1.20 (0.76, 1.91) p = 0.43 | – | – | STI OR 0.65 (0.35, 1.19) p = 0.16 AOR 0.63 (0.34, 1.18) p = 0.15 Decrease in unprotected sex OR 0.91 (0.69, 1.20 p = 0.50 AOR 0.91 (0.69, 1.20) p = 0.51 | – |
Sikkema 2011 [34] | Mean diff. (MD Interv.0.17) (MD Control 0.04 (0.13) | – | – | 62.1% at baseline and 57.1% at 6 months | MD 0.16 (− 0.28) 0.44 | – |
Velasquez 2009 [33] | (Odds ratio [OR] = 1.38; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.02–1.86) Higher number of heavy drinking days per 30-day period by a factor of 1.5 (OR = 1.5; 95% CI = 1.08–2.10) | – | – | – | χ2(33, N = 216) = 67.5, p < .001 2.19 (OR = 2.19; 95% CI = 1.17–4.11). | – |
Wandera 2017 [43] | Mean AUDIT-C difference of the differences = − 0.07, 95% CI − 0.70–0.56, p = 0.8266 | – | – | – | – | – |
Weiss 2011 [37] | Miami Alcohol Use Questionnaire (F[2486] = 3.39, p < 0.05) | Reduction significant (p < 0.01) | – | (t[44] = 3.08, p < 0.01) |  | (p < 0.05) |
Wong 2008 [31] | (t = − 15.4, df = 935, p < 0.0001) (alcohol and marijuana) | – | – | – | – | – |
Liu YU 2018 [44] | 23 to 9% (p = 0.001) | – | – | – | 50 to 16% (p < 0.001) | – |
Zule 2014 [38] | (Odds ratio [OR] = 3.61; 95% confidence intervals [CI] = 1.23, 11.70; p = 0.016) | – | – | – | – | – |