HIV Testing In Health Care Settings Research Articles

HIV testing in a high prevalence urban area in the US: Identifying missed opportunities two ways.

Routine opt-out HIV testing in healthcare settings is often not implemented to its fullest extent. We assessed factors contributing to missed HIV testing opportunities at an academic medical center in Chicago, Illinois, with a routine HIV screening program. Retrospective analysis of HIV testing in clinical encounters was performed using multivariate regession models. Missed opportunities were defined as 1) an encounter during which an HIV test was not conducted on a patient later diagnosed with HIV, or 2) an encounter in which a bacterial STI test was performed without HIV testing. Of 122 people newly diagnosed with HIV from 2011-2018, 98 patients had 1215 prior encounters, of which 82.8% were missed opportunities. Female gender, persons not known to be men who have sex with men, and encounter location other than inpatient had higher odds of a missed opportunity. Nearly half (48.4%) of 104,678 bacterial STI testing encounters were missed opportunities. Female gender, older age, lack of syphilis testing, and location outside the emergency department had higher odds of a missed opportunity. We found a high number of missed HIV testing opportunities, which could be reduced by strengthening routine screening and increasing targeted testing concurrent with STI screening.

HIV Risk and Sociodemographic Factors Associated with Physician-Advised HIV Testing: What Factors Are Overlooked in African American Populations?

HIV is diagnosed at eight times the rate in African Americans (AAs) compared to whites. One-third of AAs have never been tested for HIV. Studies indicate low rates of HIV testing in healthcare settings, so understanding missed opportunities for HIV testing can inform prevention effortsin these settings. Our study examined predictors of self-reported physician-advised HIV testing using baseline survey data (N = 1500) from Taking It to the Pews (TIPS), a church-basedHIV/STD testing and education intervention. One-third (33%) of participants reported that their physician ever suggested an HIV test. Results indicated that participants who identified as homosexual/bisexual, received Medicaid or were uninsured, and/or had previously diagnosed STDs were more likely to report physician-advised HIV testing. AA churches provide a unique opportunity to increase the reach of HIV testing and may bewell-positioned to equip their church and community members with information on HIV risk and strategies to advocate for physician-advised routine HIV testing in medical settings.

HIV testing in Acute Care

Readers may be aware of the need to improve uptake of HIV testing in health care-settings to reduce the number of individuals with undiagnosed infection who later present with advanced disease. Late presentation of HIV infection is associated with a poorer immune response to antiretroviral therapy, an increased morbidity and mortality with a resultant higher cost burden to health-care services. Individuals with undiagnosed HIV infection who inadvertently transmit their infection to others are thought to be responsible for more than half of new HIV infections in the USA.

Delays in HIV diagnosis and associated factors among patients presenting with advanced disease at a tertiary care hospital in Beijing, China.

Delayed diagnosis of HIV infection is associated with advanced immunosuppression and increased risk of onward transmission. Little data exists regarding factors associated with diagnostic delays among patients presenting with advanced HIV disease in China. Medical records of patients with HIV/AIDS hospitalized at a 2000-bed tertiary hospital in Beijing, China between 1997 and 2012 were retrospectively reviewed. Demographic and clinical data of patients newly diagnosed with HIV at the hospital were abstracted. Patient characteristics, disease parameters, and the time interval between the first medical visit and the visit leading to HIV diagnosis were compared among three periods: 1997–2002, 2003–2008 and 2009–2012. Chi-square, Kruskal-Wallis and logistic regression analyses were used as appropriate. A quarter of patients (72/279) were newly diagnosed with HIV at the hospital, consisting of 11, 29 and 32 patients in 1997–2002, 2003–2008 and 2009–2012 respectively. The median time delay between the first medical visit and the visit leading to HIV diagnosis decreased over time from 91 days among patients diagnosed before 2002, to 75 days between 2003 to 2008, and 39 days after 2009 (p = 0.036). However, the median CD4+T cell count at diagnosis was 26 cells/μL [interquartile range 3–132 cells/μL] in 1997–2002, and remained unchanged across time intervals. Forty-one (57%) patients had AIDS-defining conditions and Pneumocystis jiroveci pneumonia was the most common opportunistic infection (31 cases). These results reveal persistent missed opportunities for timely HIV testing among patients with advanced disease. Strategies for promoting early HIV testing in healthcare settings are needed in China.

The importance of registration of sexual orientation and recognition of indicator conditions for an adequate HIV risk-assessment

BackgroundHIV testing among risk groups and guided by HIV indicator conditions (IC) is widely recommended by European guidelines. In this study we investigated how these strategies are used by general practitioners (GP) and in other healthcare settings. The objectives of our study were to describe: 1) the proportion of consultations in primary care and other healthcare settings in the five years prior to diagnosis; 2) patient and GP perspectives on the primary healthcare providers’ awareness and registration of sexual orientation and ethnicity in the electronic medical record (EMR); and 3) the proportion of HIV-infected patients who had been diagnosed with an IC prior to HIV diagnosis.MethodsA survey study (2014–2016) was conducted among newly diagnosed HIV-infected patients presenting at two HIV outpatient clinics in Amsterdam. We collected information on the number of consultations and extent of HIV testing in healthcare settings in the 5 years prior to HIV diagnosis; on patient and GP perspectives on the primary healthcare providers’ awareness of sexual orientation and ethnicity; and on preselected ICs and symptoms of acute HIV infection prior to diagnosis. GPs were also approached for further information.ResultsIn the 5 years prior to HIV diagnosis, 82.9% of the 111 patients had one or more consultations with their GP, but only 34.8% had one or more HIV tests performed in general practice during this period. In more than 50% of cases the patients took the initiative for the positive HIV test. GPs stated that they were aware of the sexual orientation of 59.6% of their patients who were men who have sex with men (MSM); however, sexual orientation was only documented in the EMR in 34.0% of these cases. GPs also reported that they were aware that a patient was from an HIV endemic country in more than half of the cases. GPs diagnosed 48.3% of all ICs and 39.5% of this group was offered an HIV test at that time.ConclusionsDocumentation of sexual orientation and ethnicity, and IC-guided testing by GPs could be the starting point for more proactive provider-initiated HIV testing.

Routinization of HIV Testing in an Inpatient Setting: A Systematic Process for Organizational Change.

In 2006, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released revised recommendations for routinization of HIV testing in healthcare settings. Health professionals have been challenged to incorporate these guidelines. In March 2013, a routine HIV testing initiative was launched at a large urban academic medical center in a high prevalence region. The goal was to routinize HIV testing by achieving a 75% offer and 75% acceptance rate and promoting linkage to care in the inpatient setting. A systematic six-step organizational change process included stakeholder buy-in, identification of an interdisciplinary leadership team, infrastructure development, staff education, implementation, and continuous quality improvement. Success was measured by monitoring the percentage of offered and accepted HIV tests from March to December 2013. The targeted offer rate was exceeded consistently once nurses became part of the consent process (September 2013). Fifteen persons were newly diagnosed with HIV. Seventy-eight persons were identified as previously diagnosed with HIV, but not engaged in care. Through this process, patients who may have remained undiagnosed or out-of-care were identified and linked to care. The authors propose that this process can be replicated in other settings. Increasing identification and treatment will improve the individual patient's health and reduce community disease burden.

Barriers to Routine HIV Testing in Healthcare Settings and Potential Solutions from the Get Tested Coachella Valley Campaign.

Barriers to Routine HIV Testing in Healthcare Settings and Potential Solutions from the Get Tested Coachella Valley Campaign.

The views and experiences of nurses and midwives in the provision and management of routine (provider initiated) HIV testing: protocol for a systematic review of qualitative evidence

Review question/objective The objective of this review is to explore nurses’ and midwives’ views and experiences in the provision and management of routine (provider initiated) HIV testing in healthcare settings. The specific questions to be addressed are: 1. What are nurses’/midwives’ views and experiences of conducting routine ‘provider initiated HIV testing and counselling’ (PITC)? 2. What are nurses’/midwives’ views and experiences of establishing and managing routine HIV (PITC) testing services? 3. From a nurse/midwife’s perspective, what personal factors, practices or contexts facilitate or hinder the implementation of routine HIV (PITC) testing within their role or setting? 4. From a nurse/midwife’s perspective, what constitutes high quality care in the provision of routine HIV (PITC) testing and what factors facilitate or hinder the provision of high quality care in routine HIV (PITC) testing services? Inclusion criteria Types of participants All cadres of nurses and midwives will be considered, including those who undertake testing as part of a diverse role and those who are specifically trained as ‘HIV counsellors’. Nurses and midwives are included together, as in many countries these are not separate cadres of health professionals but represent one professional group. Preliminary searching has revealed that some research studies focus on a collective ‘provider’ or ‘counsellor’ perspective, without distinguishing the professional group. In this situation, the study will be included if more than 50% of the sample are stated to be nurses or midwives; in this case, an attempt will be made to discern the nurse/midwife view in particular, however if ‘provider’ perspectives are reported in a non-specific manner as being representative of the overall ‘provider perspective’, they will still be included as the majority of the sample are nurses/midwives. In some studies, the nurse/midwife proportion of the ‘provider’ sample may be less than 50%, but the views of nurses/midwives are reported separately to those of other providers revealing particular professional issues; in this case, the findings from the nurses/midwives will be included, but not those of the other providers. If the constitution of the ‘provider’ or ‘counsellor’ sample is not clearly specified in terms of professional group, TRUNCATED AT 350 WORDS

Routine HIV Testing in U.S. Healthcare Settings

In 2006, the CDC recommended routine HIV testing in healthcare settings (http://viajwat.ch/We68T9). Even though this recommendation was evidence based,

HIV testing in non-traditional settings--the HINTS study: a multi-centre observational study of feasibility and acceptability.

BackgroundUK guidelines recommend routine HIV testing in healthcare settings if the local diagnosed HIV prevalence >2/1000 persons. This prospective study assessed the feasibility and acceptability, to patients and staff, of routinely offering HIV tests in four settings: Emergency Department, Acute Care Unit, Dermatology Outpatients and Primary Care. Modelling suggested the estimated prevalence of undiagnosed HIV infection in attendees would exceed 1/1000 persons. The prevalence identified prospectively was not a primary outcome.MethodsPermanent staff completed questionnaires assessing attitudes towards routine HIV testing in their workplace before testing began. Subsequently, over a three-month period, patients aged 16–65 were offered an HIV test by study staff. Demographics, uptake, results, and departmental activity were collected. Subsets of patients completed questionnaires. Analyses were conducted to identify factors associated with test uptake.FindingsQuestionnaires were received from 144 staff. 96% supported the expansion of HIV testing, but only 54% stated that they would feel comfortable delivering testing themselves, with 72% identifying a need for training. Of 6194 patients offered a test, 4105 (66·8%) accepted (61·8–75·4% across sites). Eight individuals were diagnosed with HIV (0–10/1000 across sites) and all transferred to care. Younger people, and males, were more likely to accept an HIV test. No significant associations were found between uptake and ethnicity, or clinical site. Questionnaires were returned from 1003 patients. The offer of an HIV test was acceptable to 92%. Of respondents, individuals who had never tested for HIV before were more likely to accept a test, but no association was found between test uptake and sexual orientation.ConclusionsHIV testing in these settings is acceptable, and operationally feasible. The strategy successfully identified, and transferred to care, HIV-positive individuals. However, if HIV testing is to be included as a routine part of patients’ care, additional staff training and infrastructural resources will be required.

Rapid HIV testing program implementation: lessons from the emergency department.

BackgroundThe US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidelines and the World Health Organization (WHO) both recommend HIV testing in health-care settings. However, neither organization provides prescriptive details regarding how these recommendations should be adapted into clinical practice in an emergency department.MethodsWe have implemented an HIV-testing program in the ED of a major academic medical center within the scope of the Universal Screening for HIV Infection in the Emergency Room (USHER) Trial—a randomized clinical trial evaluating the feasibility and cost-effectiveness of HIV screening in this setting.Results and conclusionDrawing on our collective experiences in establishing programs domestically and internationally, we offer a practical framework of lessons learned so that others poised to embark on such HIV testing programs may benefit from our experiences.

Missteps, Misunderstandings, and Missed Opportunities: HIV Testing Among Young African Americans

Missteps, Misunderstandings, and Missed Opportunities: HIV Testing Among Young African Americans

Experience in the USA

In November 2006, the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention updated their recommendations for HIV-testing in healthcare settings in the USA. The new guidelines recommended routine HIV-testing not based on patient risk, opt-out testing, no separate consent for HIV-testing and no requirement for pretest counselling. Three cardinal points underlie the changes: risk-based testing has not identified all HIV-infected individuals in the USA, opportunities for diagnosis and management of HIV are being missed and routine HIV screening is cost-effective. Routine screening for HIV is desirable and should be achievable, but challenges still remain in introducing it in the USA. State-by-State changes in laws have had to be made, the impact on providers and payers must be considered and proactive screening programmes must be supported by faith and cultural leaders in the highly affected communities. Furthermore, non-specialist clinicians must be trained to deal with all aspects of HIV-testing in an appropriate and professional manner. Despite fears that the public would not accept the new approach, many Americans believe that HIV-testing is an appropriate part of a medical check-up. With the public's support, newly diagnosed HIV-infected individuals will benefit from treatment, and society will benefit because of reduced HIV transmission.

The Sexual Ethics of HIV Testing and the Rights and Responsibilities of Partners

The discourse of much of the international AIDS community champions the rights of individuals in low-income countries to "just say no" to routine HIV testing in health-care settings and, if tested and found positive, not to inform their sexual partner(s) if such disclosure could result in substantial personal harm. This study contends that the right of individuals to refuse testing ignores the right of their sexual partners--male or female, regular or casual--to be informed of the health risks to which they may be exposed on entering or continuing a sexual relationship or engaging in particular sexual acts. If, as the UN has declared, all persons have the right to decide freely and responsibly on matters relating to their sexuality, including their sexual and reproductive health, free from coercion, discrimination, and violence, then all persons have the right and the responsibility to know their own and their partner's serostatus and to protect themselves and their partner(s) from sexually transmitted infections (STIs). Support by AIDS activists for policies of routine STI/HIV testing, counseling, and disclosure between both partners in a sexual relationship would help to promote an ethic of equal rights and shared responsibility for sexual behavior and its consequences.

Late Diagnosis of HIV Infection: Epidemiological Features, Consequences and Strategies to Encourage Earlier Testing

A substantial proportion of HIV-infected individuals do not present for HIV testing until late in infection; these individuals are often ill, have a high mortality risk, and are less likely to respond to treatment when initiated. Furthermore, late presentation means that opportunities to reduce onward transmission, either by reducing high-risk behaviours or by reducing an individual's infectivity, are missed. The proportion of HIV-infected individuals who present late has remained relatively stable over the past decade, despite several attempts to encourage earlier diagnosis. Late presenters tend to be those at lower perceived risk of infection, those who are not routinely offered HIV testing, and are often from marginalized groups. Strategies that encourage earlier testing, including routine HIV testing in healthcare settings where high-risk individuals attend frequently, the availability of HIV testing services in non-medical settings, and partner notification schemes or peer-led projects to encourage high-risk individuals to attend for testing, may all increase the proportion of HIV-infected individuals who are aware of their HIV status, thus helping to control the spread of the epidemic. This review summarizes recent evidence on the epidemiology of late presentation and its impact on clinical progression, and describes several key strategies that may encourage earlier diagnosis.

Current HIV epidemiology and revised recommendations for HIV testing in health-care settings

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimates that about one quarter of the 1-1.2 million persons living with HIV/AIDS in the United States are unaware they are infected. Persons who do not know they are HIV infected are unable to access effective treatment and, compared with those who know they are infected with HIV, are more likely to transmit HIV to others. Pregnant women need to know if they are HIV infected so they can take steps to avoid transmitting HIV to their infants and access medical care for themselves. Despite past CDC recommendations for routine, voluntary HIV testing of all persons in acute-care hospitals with high HIV prevalence and those with risks for HIV, many HIV-infected persons who encounter the health-care system are not tested. Promoting HIV testing as a routine part of medical care is a key strategy of the CDC's Advancing HIV Prevention initiative launched in 2003. The CDC has recently revised recommendations for HIV testing of adults, adolescents, and pregnant women in health-care settings to help increase the number of HIV-infected Americans who are aware they are infected so they can receive prevention, care, and treatment. The new recommendations advocate voluntary "opt-out" HIV screening in health-care settings, with appropriate follow-up care and treatment; eliminating requirements for separate, written consent for HIV testing; annual retesting for persons with known risk factors; and expanded rescreening in the third trimester for women who test negative for HIV early in pregnancy. The CDC issued the revised recommendations on September 22, 2006, and is now engaged with numerous professional organizations on practical strategies for implementation.