HIV screening practices in U.S. hospitals, 2009-2010

Innovation and implementation determinants of HIV testing and linkage-to-care in the U.S.: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To identify innovation and implementation determinants of HIV testing, diagnosis, and linkage-to-care in the U.S.

DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SETTING

Between November 2020 and January 2022, a broad search strategy was employed in three literature databases: Ovid MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Web of Science.

STUDY DESIGN

A systematic review guided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement.

DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS

A team of master's and Ph.D.-level researchers screened eligible studies against the inclusion criteria and extracted the data using COVIDENCE software in pairs with consensus performed by a senior member of the team. Barriers and facilitators were extracted and analyzed according to the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). Frequency of determinants across studies was mapped according to CFIR, valence, study design, delivery setting, unit of analysis, population of interest, region of the U.S., and year.

RESULTS

We identified 1,739 implementation and innovation determinants from 186 articles. Most determinants were for HIV testing rather than linkage-to-care. Most determinants were identified in the inner setting and individuals domains of CFIR, with the fewest identified in the process and innovations domains. Determinants of providers were only slightly more frequently identified than determinants of recipients. However, determinants of organizations and systems were rarely identified.

CONCLUSION

This review provides a synthesis of innovation and implementation determinants of HIV testing and linkage-to-care using the most-cited implementation science (IS) framework, CFIR. This synthesis enables the larger field of HIV science to utilize IS in efforts to end the HIV epidemic and positions IS to consider the application of IS frameworks to fields like HIV.

Underdetection of pre-existing HIV/AIDS during psychiatric hospitalizations

OBJECTIVES

People with severe mental illness are 10 times more likely to have HIV/ AIDS than the general population, yet little is known about the characteristics and frequency of recognition of pre-existing HIV/AIDS diagnoses among inpatients with severe mental illness. This study examines documentation rates of pre-existing HIV/ AIDS among inpatients within psychiatric hospitals in New York State.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study to examine recognition of pre-existing HIV/AIDS among psychiatric inpatients.

METHODS

Patient-level Medicaid claims records were linked with hospital and regional data for people admitted to psychiatric inpatient units in New York State. Presence of HIV/AIDS diagnoses prior to psychiatric hospitalization was coded for each inpatient (n = 14 602). Adjusted odds ratios of undocumented HIV/AIDS diagnoses at the time of discharge were calculated using logistic regression analyses.

RESULTS

About 5.1% (741/14 602) of unique psychiatric inpatients had pre-existing HIV/AIDS diagnoses. Of these inpatients, 58.3% (432/741) were not coded as having HIV/AIDS upon discharge. Higher rates of missed detection were associated with younger age, non-Hispanic white race/ethnicity, shorter length of stay, more distal coding of an HIV/AIDS diagnosis, and fewer HIV/AIDS-related Medicaid claims in the past year. Hospitals with higher readmission rates also had higher rates of undetected HIV/AIDS diagnoses.

CONCLUSION

Over half of inpatients previously diagnosed with HIV/AIDS did not have their HIV-positive status noted upon discharge from psychiatric hospitalization. This finding underscores how frequently clinically significant medical comorbidities fail to be incorporated into psychiatric treatment and treatment planning. Inpatient clinicians are missing important opportunities to optimize HIV/AIDS treatment and reduce morbidity and mortality.

Incorporation of Social Determinants of Health in the Peer-Reviewed Literature: A Systematic Review of Articles Authored by the National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD, and TB Prevention

OBJECTIVES

Social determinants of health (SDHs) are the complex, structural, and societal factors that are responsible for most health inequities. Since 2003, the National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD, and TB Prevention (NCHHSTP) has researched how SDHs place communities at risk for communicable diseases and poor adolescent health. We described the frequency and types of SDHs discussed in articles authored by NCHHSTP.

METHODS

We used the MEDLINE/PubMed search engine to systematically review the frequency and type of SDHs that appeared in peer-reviewed publications available in PubMed from January 1, 2009, through December 31, 2014, with a NCHHSTP affiliation. We chose search terms to identify articles with a focus on the following SDH categories: income and employment, housing and homelessness, education and schooling, stigma or discrimination, social or community context, health and health care, and neighborhood or built environment. We classified articles based on the depth of topic coverage as "substantial" (ie, one of ≤3 foci of the article) or "minimal" (ie, one of ≥4 foci of the article).

RESULTS

Of 862 articles authored by NCHHSTP, 366 (42%) addressed the SDH factors of interest. Some articles addressed >1 SDH factor (366 articles appeared 568 times across the 7 categories examined), and we examined them for each category that they addressed. Most articles that addressed SDHs (449/568 articles; 79%) had a minimal SDH focus. SDH categories that were most represented in the literature were health and health care (190/568 articles; 33%) and education and schooling (118/568 articles; 21%).

CONCLUSIONS

This assessment serves as a baseline measurement of inclusion of SDH topics from NCHHSTP authors in the literature and creates a methodology that can be used in future assessments of this topic.

Increasing HIV Testing in Inpatient Psychiatry

BACKGROUND

People with serious mental illness (SMI) are at elevated risk of HIV infection, but do not receive HIV tests regularly. Inpatient psychiatric admissions provide opportunities for HIV testing.

OBJECTIVE

This study retrospectively examined the impact of three sequential interventions designed to increase HIV testing on an acute inpatient psychiatry service: (1) advocacy by an administrative champion, (2) an on-site HIV counselor, and (3) a clinician championing HIV testing.

METHOD

Demographic and HIV testing data were extracted from hospital data systems for 11,360 admissions of HIV-negative patients to an inpatient psychiatry service between 2006 and 2012. Relationships among interventions, length of stay, patient demographics, and receipt of an HIV test were examined using general estimating equation methods.

RESULTS

In the year prior to the intervention, 7.2% of psychiatric inpatients received HIV tests. After 1 year of administrative advocacy, 11.2% received tests. Following the HIV counseling intervention, 25.1% of patients were tested. After the counseling intervention ended, continued administrative and clinical advocacy was associated with further increases in testing. In the final year studied, 30.3% of patients received HIV tests. Patients with shorter inpatient stays and those of Black or Asian race/ethnicity were less likely to be tested. Further, 1.6% of HIV tests were positive.

CONCLUSION

Three interventions of varying intensity were associated with a 5-fold increase in HIV testing on an acute inpatient psychiatry service. Nonetheless, 70% of inpatients were not tested. Continued efforts are needed to increase HIV testing in inpatient psychiatric settings.

Targeted HIV Screening in Eight Emergency Departments: The DICI-VIH Cluster-Randomized Two-Period Crossover Trial

STUDY OBJECTIVE

This study compares the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of nurse-driven targeted HIV screening alongside physician-directed diagnostic testing (intervention strategy) with diagnostic testing alone (control strategy) in 8 emergency departments.

METHODS

In this cluster-randomized, 2-period, crossover trial, 18- to 64-year-old patients presenting for reasons other than potential exposure to HIV were included. The strategy applied first was randomly assigned. During both periods, diagnostic testing was prescribed by physicians following usual care. During the intervention periods, patients were asked to complete a self-administered questionnaire. According to their answers, the triage nurse suggested performing a rapid test to patients belonging to a high-risk group. The primary outcome was the proportion of new diagnoses among included patients, which further refers to effectiveness. A secondary outcome was the intervention's incremental cost (health care system perspective) per additional diagnosis.

RESULTS

During the intervention periods, 74,161 patients were included, 16,468 completed the questionnaire, 4,341 belonged to high-risk groups, and 2,818 were tested by nurses, yielding 13 new diagnoses. Combined with 9 diagnoses confirmed through 97 diagnostic tests, 22 new diagnoses were established. During the control periods, 74,166 patients were included, 92 were tested, and 6 received a new diagnosis. The proportion of new diagnoses among included patients was higher during the intervention than in the control periods (3.0 per 10,000 versus 0.8 per 10,000; difference 2.2 per 10,000, 95% CI 1.3 to 3.6; relative risk 3.7, 95% CI 1.4 to 9.8). The incremental cost was €1,324 per additional new diagnosis.

CONCLUSION

The combined strategy of targeted screening and diagnostic testing was effective.

Routine Inpatient Human Immunodeficiency Virus Screening: Missed Prevention Opportunities

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES

This article reviews the current guidelines for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) screening among inpatients and explores adherence to the guidelines and barriers to their implementation.

BACKGROUND

In 2006, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released updated recommendations suggesting HIV screening for all patients in all healthcare settings.

DESCRIPTION

A nonsystematic review of current HIV screening guidelines, as well as research and nonresearch literature, addressing rates of inpatient screening was performed.

RESULTS

Between 2000 and 2010, there was a significant increase in testing in healthcare settings. Despite these advances, 10 years after the updated Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines were released, many hospitals still have not fully implemented the recommendations. Barriers to implementation of the guidelines include provider misconceptions and lack of time and reimbursement.

CONCLUSIONS

Screening for HIV identifies new infections, reduces transmission, prevents complications, and encourages a discussion about prevention. Increasing adherence to screening recommendations can help prevent new cases and disease progression. The nursing focus on prevention makes clinical nurse specialists and other advanced practice registered nurses uniquely positioned to increase screening. Clinical nurse specialists should implement research projects to understand adherence in their facilities and identify and address site-specific barriers. Quality improvement programs can then be implemented to improve screening rates.

Trigger-oriented HIV testing at Internal Medicine hospital Departments in Northern Italy: an observational study (Fo.C.S. Study)

BACKGROUND

Early detection of undiagnosed HIV infected patients is of paramount importance. The attitude of Italian hospital-based Internal Medicine physicians to prescribe HIV testing following the detection of HIV-associated signs, symptoms and behaviours (triggers) has been reported to be poor. The aim of the study is to quantify the extent of the missed opportunities for early HIV diagnosis in Internal Medicine Departments (IMD).

METHODS

Patients admitted to IMD of a General University Hospital in Italy in March-June 2013 were interviewed using a structured questionnaire investigating the presence of triggers for HIV testing, including patient's characteristics, symptoms and conditions associated with HIV infection. HIV tests performed during hospitalisation were recorded.

RESULTS

HIV testing was performed in 73 (6.6%) out of 1113 hospitalisations (1072 patients), providing positive results in three cases (4.1%). All of them presented ≥1 triggers. Conversely, 853 triggers were identified in 528 hospitalisations with at least one trigger (47.4%). The proportion of hospitalisations where an HIV testing was prescribed was 3.1%, 9.5% and 16.0% in the presence of zero, one-to-two or more triggers, respectively. Age <70 years, female gender, length of hospital stay, haematological disease, HBV infection, multiple sexual partners and lymphadenopathy were predictors of HIV testing by logistic regression analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Although chances of an HIV test being performed in patients hospitalised in IMD increases along with the number of triggers, the number of tests being performed in people presenting with triggers is unacceptably low and requires educational interventions in order to obtain individual and public health advantages.

Increased HIV testing among hospitalized patients who declined testing in the emergency department

Health-care systems have serial encounters with many of the same patients across care settings; however, few studies have examined the role of reoffering HIV testing after a patient declines. We assessed whether an intervention to increase HIV testing among hospitalized patients was associated with increased testing among those who declined a test while in the Emergency Department (ED). We studied 8-week periods pre- and post-implementation of an electronic medical record (EMR)-based intervention to increase HIV testing among hospitalized patients. We included all patients 21-64 years old who had no prior HIV test, declined HIV testing in the ED, and were subsequently hospitalized. We used logistic regression to test for an association between time of hospital admission (pre- vs. post-intervention) and whether an HIV test was performed prior to discharge. Pre- and post-implementation, 220 and 218 patients who declined HIV testing in the ED were hospitalized, respectively. There were no significant demographic or clinical differences among patients pre- and post-implementation. Pre- and post-implementation, the median proportion of patients tested weekly was 6.7% (IQR 6.5%, 10.0%) and 41.4% (IQR 33.3%, 41.9%), respectively (aOR 6.2: 95%CI: 3.6, 10.6). HIV testing increased among hospitalized patients who declined a test in the ED after implementation of an EMR-based intervention. Almost half of the patients who declined testing in the ED ultimately underwent testing after it was reoffered during hospitalization, suggesting that the decision to undergo HIV testing is a dynamic process. Leveraging EMR resources may be an effective tool for expanding HIV testing, and testing should be reoffered to patients who previously declined.

Evaluation of hidden HIV infections in an urban ED with a rapid HIV screening program

BACKGROUND

To investigate the prevalence of undiagnosed HIV infections in an emergency department (ED) with an established screening program.

METHODS

Evaluation of the prevalence and risk factors for HIV from an 8-week (June 24, 2007-August 18, 2007) identity-unlinked HIV serosurvey, conducted at the same time as an ongoing opt-in rapid oral-fluid HIV screening program. Testing facilitators offering 24/7 bedside rapid testing to patients aged 18 to 64 years, with concordant collection of excess sera collected as part of routine clinical procedures. Known HIV positivity was determined by (1) medical record review or self-report from the screening program and/or (2) presence of antiretrovirals in serum specimens.

RESULTS

Among 3207 patients, 1165 (36.3%) patients were offered an HIV test. Among those offered, 567 (48.7%) consented to testing. Concordance identity-unlinked study revealed that the prevalence of undiagnosed infections was as follows: 2.3% in all patients, 1.0% in those offered testing vs 3.0% in those not offered testing (P < .001); and 1.3% in those who declined testing compared with 0.4% in those who were tested (P = .077). Higher median viral loads were observed in those not offered testing (14255 copies/mL; interquartile range, 1147-64354) vs those offered testing (1865 copies/mL; interquartile range, undetectable-21786), but the difference was not statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

High undiagnosed HIV prevalence was observed in ED patients who were not offered HIV testing and those who declined testing, compared with those who were tested. This indicates that even with an intensive facilitator-based rapid HIV screening model, significant missed opportunities remain with regard to identifying undiagnosed infections in the ED.

Expanding HIV testing: back to the future

The value of HIV testing has grown in parallel with the development of increasingly effective HIV treatment. Evidence for the substantial reductions in transmission when persons receive antiretroviral therapy creates a new impetus to increase testing and early diagnosis. Models of treatment as prevention--dubbed "test and treat"--give reason for optimism that control and elimination of HIV may now be within reach. This will be possible only with widespread testing, prompt and accurate diagnosis, and universal access to immediate antiviral therapy. Many successful approaches for scaling up testing were pioneered in resource-limited countries before they were adopted by countries in the developed world. The future of HIV testing is changing. Lessons learned from other case-finding initiatives can help chart the course for comparable HIV testing endeavors.

HIV screening practices and hospital characteristics in the US, 2009-2010

OBJECTIVES

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends HIV screening in U.S. health-care settings unless providers document a yield of undiagnosed HIV infections of <1 per 1,000 population. However, implementation of this guidance has not been widespread and little is known of the characteristics of hospitals with screening practices in place. We assessed how screening practices vary with hospital characteristics.

METHODS

We used a national hospital survey of HIV testing practices, linked to HIV prevalence for the county, parish, borough, or city where the hospital was located, to assess HIV screening of some or all patients by hospitals. We used multivariate logistic regression analysis to assess the association between screening practices and hospital characteristics that were significantly associated with screening in bivariate analyses.

RESULTS

Of 376 hospitals in areas of prevalence ≥0.1%, only 25 (6.6%) reported screening all patients for HIV and 131 (34.8%) reported screening some or all patients. Among 638 hospitals included, screening some or all patients was significantly (p<0.05) more common at teaching hospitals, hospitals with higher numbers of annual admissions, and hospitals with a high proportion of Medicaid admissions. In multivariable analysis, screening some or all patients was independently associated with admitting more than 15% of Medicaid patients and receiving resources or reimbursement for screening tests.

CONCLUSION

We found that few hospitals surveyed reported screening some or all patients, and failure to screen is common across all types of hospitals in all regions of the country. Expanded reimbursement for screening may increase compliance with the recommendations.