HIV antibody testing among those at risk for infection. The National AIDS Behavioral Surveys.
ABSTRACT To determine the prevalence of testing for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) antibody among adults with various risk factors for infection, particularly those residing in large metropolitan areas where the bulk of cases of acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) have occurred.
A nationwide, population-based telephone survey eliciting testing, sexual, and injection drug use histories.
A total of 2673 randomly chosen US residents and 8263 randomly chosen residents of 23 metropolitan areas containing 64% of reported cases of AIDS.
Testing for HIV antibody.
Overall, rates of individuals ever tested were only slightly higher in the urban areas (23%) than in the nation as a whole (21%). Testing frequencies were low among all risk groups (less than 40%), except men engaging in same-sex sexual activity (60%) and male and female injection drug users (46% and 73%, respectively). The low rate of testing (35%) among the largest risk group, heterosexual men and women engaging in unprotected sexual intercourse with multiple partners, was particularly worrisome.
To encourage antibody testing among the many at risk for infection who have not yet been tested, promotional campaigns should explain the universal susceptibility to infection among those at risk, and the availability of prophylactic medical therapies and social support services to persons who are HIV-seropositive. As there were comparable levels of risk-taking behavior among subjects in both samples, these campaigns must be designed to reach all segments of the population.
SourceAvailable from: Kate M Davidson[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Objectives: To evaluate factors that predict HIV testing using the model of health care utilisation as its conceptual framework and to analyse some of the factors that encourage or inhibit seeking an HIV test in this population. M e t h o d : A cross sectional questionnaire study in two G e n i t o -U r i n a ry Medicine (GUM) clinics in central Scotland. A final sample of 195 re p resented a 91% response rate. Participants were categorised by their HIV testing status (already tested, planning to be tested, no intention to seek testing). Results: The 'already tested' and 'planning to be tested' g roups were combined as there were no significant d i ff e rences on re p o rted risk behaviours. Analysis there f o re c o m p a red two groups those 'testing' (n = 66) and 'not testing' (n = 129). 67% of those n o t tested for HIV re p o rted at least one HIV risk factor. Perceived risk was the strongest predictor of HIV testing using our model. P e rception of risk and actual risk were not corre l a t e d . Those not seeking testing endorsed less benefits of testing and more denial of the need to be tested. Same day testing and testing without an appointment were endorsed as factors to promote testing. C o n c l u s i o n : To encourage people who have high risk factors to access HIV testing, programmes should: (1) highlight the benefits of testing which would be lost if people do not test, eg. effective drug treatments (2) i n c rease the range of HIV testing services available (eg. same day testing). Furt h e rm o re, studies to determine the main predictors of perceived risk are needed if we are to increase testing in relevant populations. K e y w o rd s : HIV test; Risk behaviour; Perceived risk; GUM clinic; Health promotion. Introduction Although the actual number of HIV tests has incre a s e d since its inception in 1985, re s e a rch has identified that a p p roximately 40% of individuals with risk factors for HIV infection have not been tested for the HIV antibody. 1 Furthermore, research in both the US and in Scotland has found that HIV positive individuals were tested late in their course of HIV infection. 2 , 3 The identification (and removal) of factors which prevent or delay persons with risk factors from seeking testing, and if positive from seek-ing early medical care, is an issue which must be addre s s e d in all high risk populations. 3,4 Evidence from previous studies suggests that both phys-ical availability and psychological access 5 appear to affect utilisation of testing services. Potential barriers to testing include: fear of a positive test re s u l t ; 6 fear of stigma and d i s c r i m i n a t i o n ; 5 and negative consequences in re l a t i o n-s h i p s . 7 In addition concerns over the confidentiality/ anonymity of the testing process 8,9,10 and increased anxiety at having to wait for test re s u l t s 1 1 , 1 2 , 1 3 p revent many of those at high risk from entering the testing process. F u rt h e rm o re, the association between perceived risk and seeking testing is unclear. Several studies 1 4 , 5 found perc e i v e d risk to be a leading reason for seeking testing, whereas a m o re recent paper did not re p o rt this finding. 3 The inter-action between risk behaviours, risk perceptions, and intentions to be tested, has been identified as a specific are a for future research. 4 T h e re are several criticisms of the work cited above. F i r s t l y, gay male populations have been utilised to re s e a rc h individual elements of either service provision or social/ psychological barriers to testing. There is a need to evalu-ate these elements in combination across a range of risk g roups. With the incidence of heterosexually transmitted HIV increasing over recent years both in Scotland 1 5 a n d w o r l d w i d e , 1 6 , 1 7 this is one risk group that re q u i res furt h e r re s e a rch. Secondly, the studies reviewed are pre d o m i n a n t l y American, and therefore the generalisation of their results is unknown. Finally, re s e a rch of the HIV testing pro c e s s has been mainly atheoretical. 18 The model of health care utilisation 1 9 has been used in prior studies to conceptualise the factors that predict both intentions to be tested and actual HIV testing. 4 , 2 0 T h i s model hypothesises that predisposing characteristics (eg. demographics), enabling characteristics (eg. family re s o u rces), and need characteristics (eg. perceived and actual risk of disease) influence utilisation. The present study intends to compare three groups of subjects categorised by their HIV testing status (alre a d y tested, planning to be tested and not testing) in order to : q evaluate factors that predict HIV testing using the model of health care utilisation 20 as its conceptual framework. q analyse some of the factors that encourage or inhibit seeking an HIV test in this population.
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: This study was conducted to describe voluntary HIV testing in the general population in Switzerland and to estimate yearly HIV test incidence. In 1994, a representative telephone survey of individuals aged 17 to 45 years obtained self-reported information on HIV testing. In addition to describing cumulative HIV test incidence, yearly HIV test incidence over time was estimated by a Bayesian hurdle model allowing for the plausible scenario of test consumption differing between first test and subsequent retests. Overall, 33% of the Swiss population (age 17 to 45 years) has been tested at some time for HIV on a voluntary basis (30% men, 36% women). For the time period 1990–1994, the result showed for 35-year-old individuals with supposedly low risk behavior, that 1) annual test incidence (first test or retest) showed a greater increase for men (4.2 to 5.9%) than for women (5.0 to 6.0% 2) annual first test incidence increased moderately and differed for men and women (2.9 to 3.4% for men, 4.6 to 5.2% for women), and 3) annual retest incidence was twice as high for men (17.6%) as for women (8.6%). In conclusion, a substantial part of the Swiss population has been tested at some stage for HIV on a voluntary basis, and differences exist for testing and retesting between men and women.European Journal of Epidemiology 01/2000; 16(2):123-133. DOI:10.1023/A:1007638823567 · 5.15 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Background: New rapid HIV antibody tests have allowed provision of results and result-specific counseling on the day of initial visit, and have the potential to increase the efficiency of HIV counseling and testing. Methods: To evaluate the use of rapid testing with same-day results in public clinics, the Single Use Diagnostic System HIV-1 rapid assay was used for a 3-month period at an anonymous testing clinic and a sexually transmitted disease (STD) clinic in Dallas, Texas. Non-reactive rapid test results were reported as HIV-negative. Reactive results were reported as 'preliminary positive'. These procedures were compared with standard testing during a baseline period, with respect to number of clients receiving results and post-test counseling, client satisfaction, counselor acceptance, cost, and effectiveness at reducing HIV risk. Results: Rapid testing resulted in an increase in the number of persons learning their serostatus: a 4% increase for uninfected and a 16% increase for infected clients at the Anonymous Testing Clinic; a 210% increase for uninfected patients and a 23% increase for infected patients at the STD clinic. Rapid testing resulted in a cost saving of US$ 11 per test in both the anonymous and STD clinics. Of those previously tested, 88% responded that they preferred the rapid test. In the year following initial HIV test, clients tested with rapid and standard procedures were equally likely to return to the clinic with a new STD (odds ratio, 0.97; 95% confidence interval, 0.7-1.4). Conclusions: Rapid, on-site HIV testing was feasible, preferred by clients, and resulted in significant improvement in the number of persons learning their serostatus, without increasing the costs or decreasing the effectiveness of counseling and testing. (C) Lippincott-Raven Publishers.AIDS 07/1997; 11(10). DOI:10.1097/00002030-199708000-00014 · 6.56 Impact Factor