Implementation Of Routine HIV Testing Research Articles

A systematic review of routine HIV testing in primary care

BackgroundThis study aims to contribute to the improvement of European progress towards 90–90–90 targets and to identify an intervention with a strong evidence base used in better performing countries such as routine testing in primary care.AimTo evaluate the efficacy of routine HIV testing in primary care and identify the barriers and solutions towards successfully implementation.MethodPeer-reviewed studies which measure changes in provider offer rates, patient uptake rates, seroprevalence or CD4 counts after the implementation of routine HIV testing. Studies which identified barriers and solution to implementation were also included. EMBASE and MEDLINE were searched through April 2018. Risk of bias was assessed using the CASP framework, regarding participant selection, randomisation incomplete outcome data, blinding, and use of sensitivity analyses.ResultsRoutine HIV testing shows increased rates of case finding with earlier diagnosis when compared to standard practice. Factors such as sex, ethnicity, local prevalence, and stigma were found to affect patient uptake, while gaps in training, awareness and organisational implementation affected provider uptake. Provider offer rates require adequate education regarding intervention efficacy, electronic medical record use, and result communication. Addressing time constraints with nurse-initiated testing and combined condition testing can improve the clinical workflow. Normalising HIV testing, including reforming pre-test counselling, rapid testing, and education to reduce stigma can improve patient uptake. Further analysis of cost-effectiveness is also required to effectively consider implementation.ConclusionRoutine HIV testing across primary care can improve testing rates, with consideration to barriers towards implementation and further study.

HIV – lessons from a late diagnosis

Late HIV diagnosis is the most important predictor of HIV-related morbidity and mortality in the UK and often results from missed testing opportunities during earlier contact with health services. The HPA now recommends routine HIV testing be commissioned as a priority for all general medical admissions in high prevalence areas, such as Milton Keynes. We present the case of a patient admitted to our Medical Admissions Unit (MAU) managed initially for presumed septic complications of metastatic disease who was later found to have terminal HIV disease. In keeping with UK-wide experience which we review, a local audit following this case found MAU HIV test coverage increased after routine testing but not after staff education alone, and resulted in implementation of routine HIV testing in our MAU.

Routine HIV Testing in Indiana Community Health Centers.

Objectives. We assessed routine HIV testing in Indiana community health centers (CHCs). Methods. CHC medical directors reported HIV services, testing behaviors, barriers, and health center characteristics via survey from April to May 2013. Standard of care testing was measured by the extent to which CHCs complied with national guidelines for routine HIV testing in clinical settings. Results. Most (85.7%) CHCs reported HIV testing, primarily at patient request or if the patient was symptomatic. Routine HIV testing was provided for pregnant women by 60.7% of CHCs. Only 10.7% provided routine testing for adolescents to adults up to age 65 years. Routine testing was reported by 14.3% for gay and bisexual men, although 46.4% of CHCs reported asking patients about sexual orientation. Linkage to care services for HIV-positive patients, counseling for HIV treatment adherence, and partner testing generally was not provided. Conclusions. Most CHCs reported HIV testing, but such testing did not reflect the standard of care, because it depended on patient request or symptoms. One approach in future studies may be to allow respondents to compare current testing with standard of care and then reflect on barriers to and facilitators of adoption and implementation of routine HIV testing.

Routine HIV testing capacity, practices, and perceptions among school-based health center providers in New York State after enactment of the 2010 amended HIV testing law.

The 2010 New York State (NYS) HIV Testing Law requires that primary care providers routinely offer HIV testing to patients aged 13-64 years, regardless of risk, and link individuals with HIV to medical care. School-based health centers (SBHCs) are in a position to offer HIV screening to a significant proportion of youth. One year after the law went into effect, we conducted a study to assess whether NYS SBHCs implemented these provisions. Medical providers from 83 NYS SBHCs, serving students age 13 and older, participated in a Web-based survey regarding school-based health center capacity for and implementation of routine HIV testing, linkage to care, attitudes, and barriers. On-site HIV testing was reported to be available at 71% of SBHCs. Linkages to age-appropriate HIV care were reported to be available at 85% of SBHCs. The routine offer of HIV testing for eligible students was reported to be implemented at 55% of SBHCs. Forty-one percent reported that HIV testing was offered to at least half of eligible students during the 2010-2011 school year. New York City and high school providers were more likely to report the routine offer of HIV testing, on-site testing, linkages to care, perceive students as willing to test, indicate fewer barriers, and report having offered testing to a majority of eligible students in the previous year. Many SBHCs have adopted key provisions of the amended NYS HIV Testing Law. Additional assistance may be needed to achieve full implementation; however, especially among SBHCs serving younger populations and those located outside New York City.

187 Use of an Electronic Medical Record-Based Triage HIV Screening Flow Sheet to Facilitate Implementation of Routine HIV Testing in a High-Volume, Inner-City Emergency Department

187 Use of an Electronic Medical Record-Based Triage HIV Screening Flow Sheet to Facilitate Implementation of Routine HIV Testing in a High-Volume, Inner-City Emergency Department

Implementation of Routine HIV Testing in an Acute Care Hospital in Rhode Island: A Nurse-Initiated Opt-Out Pilot Project

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) expanded HIV screening of adults ages 13-64 years in 2006 from risk based to routine. Early detection and treatment improve patient outcomes and prevent disease transmission. This article describes a pilot program in which nurses in an adult inpatient unit at an acute care hospital offer HIV testing to all patients ages 18-64 upon admission through standing orders. The pilot, Standing Orders for Routine Testing (SORT), is a response to changes in state law and regulations in the majority of states including Rhode Island, which have occurred following the CDC policy change. The SORT pilot involves collaboration with interdisciplinary partners and education of unit nurses.

Exploring staff attitudes to routine HIV testing in non-traditional settings: a qualitative study in four healthcare facilities

ObjectivesTo explore staff attitudes towards and experiences of the implementation of routine HIV testing in four healthcare settings in areas of high diagnosed HIV prevalence.MethodsAs part of the HINTS (HIV...

Barriers to Routine HIV Testing among Massachusetts Community Health Center Personnel

We assessed the extent to which Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommendations have influenced routine HIV testing among Massachusetts community health center (CHC) personnel, and identified specific barriers and facilitators to routine testing. Thirty-one CHCs were enrolled in the study. We compared those that did and did not receive funding support from the federal Ryan White HIV/AIDS Program. An anonymous survey was administered to a maximum five personnel from each CHC, including a senior administrator, the medical director, and three medical providers. Overall, 137 participants completed the survey. Among all CHCs, 53% of administrators reported having implemented routine HIV testing at their CHCs; however, only 33% of medical directors/providers reported having implemented routine HIV testing in their practices (p<0.05). Among administrators, 60% of those from Ryan White-supported CHCs indicated that both they and their CHCs were aware of CDC's recommendations, compared with 27% of administrators from non-Ryan White-supported CHCs. The five most frequently reported barriers to the implementation of routine HIV testing were (1) constraints on providers' time (68%), (2) time required to administer counseling (65%), (3) time required to administer informed consent (52%), (4) lack of funding (35%), and (5) need for additional training (34%). In a multivariable logistic regression model, the provision of on-site HIV testing by nonmedical staff resulted in increased odds of conducting routine HIV testing (odds ratio [OR] = 9.84, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.77, 54.70). However, the amount of time needed to administer informed consent was associated with decreased odds of providing routine testing (OR=0.21, 95% CI 0.05, 0.92). Routine HIV testing is not currently being implemented uniformly among Massachusetts CHCs. Future efforts to increase implementation should address personnel concerns regarding time and staff availability.

Short Communication Routine HIV Testing in the Emergency Department: Assessment of Patient Perceptions

The CDC released revised HIV testing guidelines in 2006 recommending routine, opt-out HIV testing in acute care settings including emergency departments (ED). Patient attitudes have been cited as a barrier to implementation of routine HIV testing in the ED. We assessed patients' perceptions of HIV testing in the ED through a contextual qualitative approach. The study was conducted during a 72-h period. All adults presenting to the ED without life-threatening trauma or psychiatric crisis completed a standardized questionnaire. The questionnaire explored HIV testing history, knowledge of testing resources, and qualitative items addressing participant perceptions about advantages and disadvantages to ED testing. After completion of the interview, participants were offered a free, confidential, rapid HIV test. Among 329 eligible individuals approached, 288 (87.5%) completed the initial interview. Participants overwhelmingly (n=247, 85.8%) reported support for testing and identified increased knowledge (41%), prevention (12.5%), convenience (11.8%), and treatment (4.9%) among the advantages. Fear and denial about one's HIV status, reported by <5% of patients, were identified as the most significant barriers to ED testing. Bivariate analysis determined race and ethnicity differences between individuals completing the interview and those who refused (p<0.05). Among individuals consenting for testing (n=186, 64.6%), no positives were detected. Most patients support HIV testing in the ED, noting knowledge of status, prevention, convenience, and linkage to early treatment as distinct advantages. These data are of particular benefit to decision makers considering the addition of routine HIV testing in EDs.

Barriers and Facilitators to Testing in Primary Care Among Health Care Providers

PurposeHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV) is a preventable disease that can have improved outcomes with early diagnosis and treatment. The CDC recommends that HIV testing be incorporated into clinical settings as part of routine medical care. MethodsIndividual, open-ended interviews were conducted with primary care providers and administrators to obtain their views regarding the meaning of routine HIV testing and the barriers and facilitators to implementing routine HIV testing in their respective practices. ResultsMost respondents supported routine HIV testing, although their definitions of roufine varied. Barriers for providers included time and financial constraints to appropriately conduct HIV counseling and testing and inadequate HIV education and training. Facilitators for implementing routine HIV testing included patients' feelings of empowerment and reduced HIV stigma. ConclusionsThe implementation of routine HIV testing in primary care practices appears to be an acceptable public health intervention. Next steps should include efforts to standardize the definition of routine HIV testing and working with primary care settings to better understand and reduce barriers to routine testing.

Missed Opportunities for Early HIV Diagnosis in Correctional Facilities

To quantify the extent that South Carolina HIV/AIDS cases could have been diagnosed during a prior arrest we designed a retrospective population-based cohort study linking case reports from HIV/AIDS Reporting System (HARS) and the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division database. Data from individuals newly diagnosed between January 2001 and December 2005 were linked with statewide arrest records from April 1991 through November 2005. Criminal history data for this report were derived from 28 state prisons and more than 250 law enforcement agencies (jails, lockups, detention centers). Odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals were used to determine how demographic variables and arrest reasons affects receipt of HIV testing. There were 1961/4036 (48.6%) incident cases of HIV diagnosis that had at least one arrest prior to their first positive HIV test. When restricted to 1286/1961 (65.6%) individuals most likely to have been HIV-infected at the time of arrest, 592 (46%) were early testers (no AIDS within 1 year) and 694 (54%) developed AIDS more than 1 year of testing (late testers). After controlling for gender, age, race, behavioral risk and source of HIV report, the odds of being a late tester increased with age (p < 0.001). Overall, 3750 separate arrests were recorded for these 1286 individuals and 491 (13%) arrests were for drug and alcohol or sex crimes. Individuals with 4 or more arrests were more likely to be late testers when compared to those with fewer than 4 arrests (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 3.30; 95% confidence [CI] 2.28, 4.72). Correctional facilities present considerable opportunities to identify individuals with undiagnosed HIV infection. Providing correctional facilities with the infrastructure for implementation of routine HIV testing would consequently have a significant impact on the health status of the entire community.

Barriers and Facilitators to Routine HIV Testing in VA Primary Care

Approximately 21% of the 1.1 million HIV-infected persons in the United States are unaware of their HIV status. The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) recommend routine opt-out HIV testing for all patients aged 13-64. Yet little is known about patient and provider perspectives on routine HIV testing. We sought to understand patient and provider perspectives on the adoption of routine HIV testing within the US Department of Veterans Affairs. We conducted four focus groups with patients and two focus groups with primary care providers to explore perceptions of, communication about, and barriers and facilitators to routine HIV testing in primary care. Convenience sample of patients and primary care providers at two geographically diverse Veterans' Affairs Medical Centers. We conducted grounded thematic analyses of transcribed audio-recordings of focus groups to identify major themes, identifying similarities and differences between patient and provider perspectives. Patients and providers concurred that implementation of routine HIV testing, treating HIV like other chronic diseases, and removing requirements for written informed consent and pre-test counseling were of benefit to patients and to public health. Patients, however, wished to have HIV testing routinely offered by providers so that they could decide whether or not to be tested. Veterans also stated that routinizing testing would help destigmatize HIV. Six steps to communicating about routine testing ("the 6 R's") were identified. Patients and providers appear ready for implementation of routine HIV testing. However, providers should use patient-centered communication strategies to ease patients' concerns about confidentiality and stigma associated with HIV disease.