Self-efficacy for self-management and its influencing factors among adults living with HIV on antiretroviral therapy in northwest Ethiopia

ABSTRACT

Previous research has identified that self-efficacy is an essential factor in the process of self-management; however, the evidence is lacking concerning factors influencing self-efficacy in low-income countries. Therefore, this study examined factors influencing self-efficacy. A validated survey tool was orally administered to 415 adults living with HIV. Many of the respondents, 82.4%, do not have a regular job while one-fourth (25.5%) of the respondents were from a rural area. A mean self-efficacy score, 19.76 ± 0.12 out of a maximum of 24 was identified. This self-efficacy score was positively correlated with age, educational level, income and job status, but negatively correlated with gender, residency and drug side effects. Income, residency in rural, and experiencing drug side effects were significant predictors of self-efficacy and explained 5.4% of the variance. Better income (β = 0.514, p = 0.029) was associated with a higher self-efficacy score but living in rural areas (β = −0.520, p = 0.043) and experiencing drug side effects (β = −1.246, p = 0.001) were associated with a lower self-efficacy score. The use of Individual and Family Self-Management Theory helps clinician and patients to work together to identify factors influencing self-efficacy and to intervene.

KEYWORDS:

• Self-efficacy
• adults living with HIV
• self-management

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank The University of Adelaide for supporting the study. We would also like to thank the study participants, data collectors, and HIV care providers for their facilitation during data collection.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Conflicts of interest

None.

Funding source

The University of Adelaide, Adelaide Nursing School, supported the study. The funder was not involved in study design, data collection, analysis, interpretation of the result, and decision to publish.

Authors’ contributions

HAA design the study, collected data, analysed, and interpreted data, wrote, and revised the manuscript. AM advised in developing the study, interpreted the data, and critically revised the manuscript. GH advised in designing the study, interpreted the data, and critically revised the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final version of the paper.