Rapid Oral Fluid Testing for HIV in Veterans With Mental Health Diagnoses and Residing in Community-Assisted Living Facilities

Philadelphia Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
The Journal of the Association of Nurses in AIDS Care: JANAC (Impact Factor: 1.27). 03/2011; 22(2):81-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.jana.2010.07.001
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Veterans with a history of mental health and substance abuse diagnoses, residing in assisted living facilities, are more likely to have an undiagnosed HIV infection related to high-risk behaviors. We determined (a) the cross-sectional prevalence of HIV infection among 65 veterans of unknown HIV serostatus with mental health diagnoses who resided in 11 community-assisted living facilities, and (b) whether patients who had not consented to standard physician-initiated blood testing in the previous 5 years would consent to rapid oral fluid HIV testing by nurses familiar to the subjects. We found an HIV prevalence of 3.1% in the subjects who agreed to be tested (n = 64, 98%). High test acceptance, especially in a group with little HIV screening experience, and the identified high prevalence of disease, suggest that this diagnostic method is effective. Patients' familiarity with the nurses who conducted the testing most likely supported the success of the procedure.

13 Reads
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The authors estimated the treated period prevalence of HIV infection in the Medicaid population and the rate of HIV infection among persons with serious mental illness in that population. This cross-sectional study used Medicaid claims data and welfare recipient files for persons aged 18 years or older for fiscal years 1994 through 1996 in Philadelphia. Claims data were merged with welfare recipient files to calculate the treated period prevalence of serious mental illness, defined as a schizophrenia spectrum disorder or a major affective disorder, and HIV infection in the Medicaid population and the odds of receiving a diagnosis of HIV infection among those who had a diagnosis of serious mental illness. The treated period prevalence of HIV infection was.6 percent among Medicaid recipients who did not have a diagnosis of a serious mental illness and 1.8 percent among those who did. After sex, age, race, and time on welfare during the study period were controlled for, patients with a schizophrenia spectrum disorder were 1.5 times as likely to have a diagnosis of HIV infection, and patients with a diagnosis of a major affective disorder were 3.8 times as likely. The rate of HIV infection is significantly elevated among persons with serious mental illness. Further studies are needed to determine modes of transmission of HIV, special treatment needs, and effective strategies for reducing the risk of HIV infection.
    Psychiatric Services 08/2002; 53(7):868-73. DOI:10.1176/ · 2.41 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: HIV testing is cost-effective in unselected general medical populations, yet testing rates among those at risk remain low, even among those with regular primary care. HIV rapid testing is effective in many healthcare settings, but scant research has been done within primary care settings or within the US Department of Veteran's Affairs Healthcare System. We evaluated three methods proven effective in other diseases/settings: nurse standing orders for testing, streamlined counseling, and HIV rapid testing. Randomized, controlled trial with three intervention models: model A (traditional counseling/testing); model B (nurse-initiated screening, traditional counseling/testing); model C (nurse-initiated screening, streamlined counseling/rapid testing). Two hundred fifty-one patients with primary/urgent care appointments in two VA clinics in the same city (one large urban hospital, one freestanding outpatient clinic in a high HIV prevalence area). Rates of HIV testing and receipt of results; sexual risk reduction; HIV knowledge improvement. Testing rates were 40.2% (model A), 84.5% (model B), and 89.3% (model C; p = <.01). Test result receipt rates were 14.6% (model A), 31.0% (model B), 79.8% (model C; all p = <.01). Sexual risk reduction and knowledge improvement did not differ significantly between counseling methods. Streamlined counseling with rapid testing significantly increased testing and receipt rates over current practice without changes in risk behavior or posttest knowledge. Increased testing and receipt of results could lead to earlier disease identification, increased treatment, and reduced morbidity/mortality. Policymakers should consider streamlined counseling/rapid testing when implementing routine HIV testing into primary/urgent care.
    Journal of General Internal Medicine 06/2008; 23(6):800-7. DOI:10.1007/s11606-008-0617-x · 3.42 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The costs, benefits, and cost-effectiveness of screening for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) in health care settings during the era of highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) have not been determined. We developed a Markov model of costs, quality of life, and survival associated with an HIV-screening program as compared with current practice. In both strategies, symptomatic patients were identified through symptom-based case finding. Identified patients started treatment when their CD4 count dropped to 350 cells per cubic millimeter. Disease progression was defined on the basis of CD4 levels and viral load. The likelihood of sexual transmission was based on viral load, knowledge of HIV status, and efficacy of counseling. Given a 1 percent prevalence of unidentified HIV infection, screening increased life expectancy by 5.48 days, or 4.70 quality-adjusted days, at an estimated cost of 194 dollars per screened patient, for a cost-effectiveness ratio of 15,078 dollars per quality-adjusted life-year. Screening cost less than 50,000 dollars per quality-adjusted life-year if the prevalence of unidentified HIV infection exceeded 0.05 percent. Excluding HIV transmission, the cost-effectiveness of screening was 41,736 dollars per quality-adjusted life-year. Screening every five years, as compared with a one-time screening program, cost 57,138 dollars per quality-adjusted life-year, but was more attractive in settings with a high incidence of infection. Our results were sensitive to the efficacy of behavior modification, the benefit of early identification and therapy, and the prevalence and incidence of HIV infection. The cost-effectiveness of routine HIV screening in health care settings, even in relatively low-prevalence populations, is similar to that of commonly accepted interventions, and such programs should be expanded.
    New England Journal of Medicine 03/2005; 352(6):570-85. DOI:10.1056/NEJMsa042657 · 55.87 Impact Factor
Show more


13 Reads
Available from