Silva A, Glick NR, Lyss SB, Hutchinson AB, Gift TL, Pealer LN, et al. Implementing an HIV and sexually transmitted disease screening program in an emergency department

Sinai Urban Health Institute, Sinai Health System, Mount Sinai Hospital, Chicago, IL 60608, USA.
Annals of emergency medicine (Impact Factor: 4.68). 06/2007; 49(5):564-72. DOI: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2006.09.028
Source: PubMed


We assess the feasibility, effectiveness, and cost of routinely recommended HIV/sexually transmitted disease screening in an urban emergency department (ED).
From April 2003 to August 2004, patients aged 15 to 54 years were offered rapid HIV testing, and those aged 15 to 25 years were also offered gonorrhea and chlamydia testing (nucleic acid amplification), Monday through Friday, 11 am to 8 pm. Infected patients were referred for treatment and care. Prevalence, treatment rates, and cost were assessed.
Among 3,030 patients offered HIV testing, 1,447 (47.8%) accepted, 8 (0.6%) tested positive, and 3 (37.5%) were linked to care. Among 791 patients offered sexually transmitted disease testing, 386 (48.8%) accepted, 320 provided urine (82.9%), 48 (15.0%) tested positive, and 42 (87.5%) were treated for gonorrhea or chlamydia. The program cost was $72,928. Costs per HIV-infected patient identified and linked to care were, respectively, $9,116 and $24,309; cost per sexually transmitted disease-infected patient treated was $1,736. The program cost for HIV/sexually transmitted disease screening was only $14,340 more than if we screened only for HIV.
Through ED-based HIV/sexually transmitted disease screening, we identified and treated many sexually transmitted disease-infected patients but identified few HIV-infected patients and linked even fewer to care. However, sexually transmitted disease screening can be added to HIV screening at a reasonable cost.

Download full-text


Available from: Angela B Hutchinson,
  • Source
    • "HIV screening uptake in EDs has been associated with the perception of personal risk for acquiring HIV, as well as varying by patient demographic characteristics [43,62]. One of the most common reasons for declining HIV screening is lack of perception of risk for HIV infection [25,28,30,32,35,39-41,50,51],[53,58,61-64]. Due to the high prevalence of reported sexual risk and alcohol misuse by ED patients, many techniques have been utilized, with mixed results, to increase uptake of HIV screening, including opt-out HIV screening [36,45,54-57,60,61,65], financial incentives [66], ED staff or clinician-initiated testing [51,54,67], oral fluid sampling for testing [53], prevention counseling [64], and video or computer-based interventions [43,68,69]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background Emergency department (ED) patients comprise a high-risk population for alcohol misuse and sexual risk for HIV. In order to design future interventions to increase HIV screening uptake, we examined the interrelationship among alcohol misuse, sexual risk for HIV and HIV screening uptake among these patients. Methods A random sample of 18-64-year-old English- or Spanish-speaking patients at two EDs during July-August 2009 completed a self-administered questionnaire about their alcohol use using the Alcohol Use Questionnaire, the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT), and the HIV Sexual Risk Questionnaire. Study participants were offered a rapid HIV test after completing the questionnaires. Binging (≥ five drinks/occasion for men, ≥ four drinks for women) was assessed and sex-specific alcohol misuse severity levels (low-risk, harmful, hazardous, dependence) were calculated using AUDIT scores. Analyses were limited to participants who had sexual intercourse in the past 12 months. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess the associations between HIV screening uptake and (1) alcohol misuse, (2) sexual risk for HIV, and (3) the intersection of HIV sexual risk and alcohol misuse. Adjusted odds ratios (AORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated. All models were adjusted for patient demographic characteristics and separate models for men and women were constructed. Results Of 524 participants (55.0% female), 58.4% identified as white, non-Hispanic, and 72% reported previous HIV testing. Approximately 75% of participants reported drinking alcohol within the past 30 days and 74.5% of men and 59.6% of women reported binge drinking. A relationship was found between reported sexual risk for HIV and alcohol use among men (AOR 3.31 [CI 1.51-7.24]) and women (AOR 2.78 [CI 1.48-5.23]). Women who reported binge drinking were more likely to have higher reported sexual risk for HIV (AOR 2.55 [CI 1.40-4.64]) compared to women who do not report binge drinking. HIV screening uptake was not higher among those with greater alcohol misuse and sexual risk among men or women. Conclusions The apparent disconnection between HIV screening uptake and alcohol misuse and sexual risk for HIV among ED patients in this study is concerning. Brief interventions emphasizing these associations should be evaluated to reduce alcohol misuse and sexual risk and increase the uptake of ED HIV screening.
    BMC Emergency Medicine 05/2013; 13(1):9. DOI:10.1186/1471-227X-13-9
  • Source
    • "We also found that the patients enrolled in the morning were more likely to refuse testing than evening enrollees, a finding not observed by Merchant et al. in their analysis of a random sample of ED patients offered screening [13]. Other studies of routine rapid HIV testing in ED settings which may have provided information regarding patient receptiveness to testing by time of offer enrolled during limited day and evening hours and did not examine the association of test refusal with time of enrollment [10, 12, 29]. Many counselor-based programs and traditional venues for voluntary counseling and testing (VCT) operate during regular work-day hours, a schedule that may not maximize participation with routine testing. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: HIV screening studies in the emergency department (ED) have demonstrated rates of HIV test refusal ranging from 40-67%. This study aimed to determine the factors associated with refusal to undergo routine rapid HIV testing in an academic ED in Boston. HIV counselors offered routine testing to 1,959 patients; almost one-third of patients (29%) refused. Data from a self-administered survey were used to determine independent correlates of HIV testing refusal. In multivariate analysis, women and patients with annual household incomes of $50,000 or more were more likely to refuse testing, as were those who reported not engaging in HIV risk behaviors, those previously HIV tested and those who did not perceive a need for testing. Enrollment during morning hours was also associated with an increased risk of refusal. Increased educational efforts to convey the rationale and benefits of universal screening may improve testing uptake among these groups.
    AIDS and Behavior 10/2010; 15(4):734-42. DOI:10.1007/s10461-010-9837-2 · 3.49 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "In our trial, the test costs were similar for rapid versus traditional testing. Our results about receipt of testing are consistent with a number of studies that indicate that rapid testing substantially increases the receipt of results16,38–41 and is acceptable to patients.42,43 Recent studies have also indicated the potential economic benefits of rapid testing strategies.44,45 "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The CDC recommends routine voluntary HIV testing of all patients 13-64 years of age. Despite this recommendation, HIV testing rates are low even among those at identifiable risk, and many patients do not return to receive their results. To examine the costs and benefits of strategies to improve HIV testing and receipt of results. Cost-effectiveness analysis based on a Markov model. Acceptance of testing, return rates, and related costs were derived from a randomized trial of 251 patients; long-term costs and health outcomes were derived from the literature. SETTING/TARGET POPULATION: Primary-care patients with unknown HIV status. Comparison of three intervention models for HIV counseling and testing: Model A = traditional HIV counseling and testing; Model B = nurse-initiated routine screening with traditional HIV testing and counseling; Model C = nurse-initiated routine screening with rapid HIV testing and streamlined counseling. Life-years, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), costs and incremental cost-effectiveness. Without consideration of the benefit from reduced HIV transmission, Model A resulted in per-patient lifetime discounted costs of $48,650 and benefits of 16.271 QALYs. Model B increased lifetime costs by $53 and benefits by 0.0013 QALYs (corresponding to 0.48 quality-adjusted life days). Model C cost $66 more than Model A with an increase of 0.0018 QALYs (0.66 quality-adjusted life days) and an incremental cost-effectiveness of $36,390/QALY. When we included the benefit from reduced HIV transmission, Model C cost $10,660/QALY relative to Model A. The cost-effectiveness of Model C was robust in sensitivity analyses. In a primary-care population, nurse-initiated routine screening with rapid HIV testing and streamlined counseling increased rates of testing and receipt of test results and was cost-effective compared with traditional HIV testing strategies.
    Journal of General Internal Medicine 03/2010; 25(6):556-63. DOI:10.1007/s11606-010-1265-5 · 3.42 Impact Factor
Show more