Patients' understanding of blood tests and attitudes to HIV screening in the emergency department of a Swiss teaching hospital: a cross-sectional observational study

Assessing attitudes to ED-based HIV testing: Development of a short-structured survey instrument

INTRODUCTION

Emergency Department (ED)-based HIV counseling and testing (HCT) has had a significant impact on improving rates of HIV diagnosis and linkage to care. Unfortunately, expansion of this strategy to low- and middle-income countries has been limited. Successful implementation of ED-based HCT is dependent on patient and provider acceptance of the intervention, and their attitudes and pre-existing biases towards the disease. This study sought to develop validated survey instruments to assess attitudes towards ED-based HCT.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study surveyed patients and providers in three EDs in the Eastern Cape province, South Africa. A convenience sample of patients and providers in the ED were surveyed. Exploratory factor analysis was conducted using questions on attitudes to HIV testing to develop validated survey instruments. An ANOVA test assessed variance in attitudes towards HCT based on demographic variables collected.

RESULTS

A total of 104 patient and 132 provider surveys were completed. Exploratory factor analysis resulted in a 17- and 7-question attitudes survey for patients and providers, respectively. Overall, 92.3% of patients and 70.7% of providers supported ED-based HCT, however, both groups displayed only mildly positive attitudes. Questions representing 'confidentiality' and 'stigma around HIV testing' had the least positive influence on patients' overall attitudes. Questions representing 'comfort with HIV testing' had the least positive influence on providers' overall attitudes.

CONCLUSION

Our study demonstrated ED patients and providers are generally supportive of ED-based HCT. A validated survey instrument was able to provide a standardized approach to identify barriers to HCT implementation in an ED setting, across contexts. For successful implementation, behavioral interventions must focus on strengthening patient beliefs around confidentiality and the consent process, and providers' comfort levels with providing HIV testing services in the ED.

"That Can't Be!": Perceptions of HIV and Hepatitis C Screening during Admission to an Acute Care Surgery Service

Background:

A large number of patients live with undiagnosed HIV and/or hepatitis C despite broadened national screening guidelines. European studies, however, suggest many patients falsely believe they have been screened during a prior hospitalization. This study aims to define current perceptions among trauma and emergency general surgery (EGS) patients regarding HIV and hepatitis C screening practices.

Methods:

Prospective survey administered to adult (>18 years old) acute care surgery service (trauma and EGS) patients at a Level 1 academic trauma center. The survey consisted of 13 multiple choice questions: demographics, whether admission tests included HIV and hepatitis C at index and prior hospital visits and whether receiving no result indicated a negative result, prior primary care screening. Response percentages calculated in standard fashion.

Results:

One hundred and twenty-five patients were surveyed: 80 trauma and 45 EGS patients. Overall, 32% and 29.6% of patients believed they were screened for HIV and hepatitis C at admission. There was no significant difference in beliefs between trauma and EGS. Sixty-eight percent of patients had a hospital visit within 10 years of these, 49.3% and 44.1% believe they had been screened for HIV and hepatitis C. More EGS patients believed they had a prior screen for both conditions. Among patients who believed they had a prior screen and did not receive any results, 75.9% (HIV) and 80.8% (hepatitis C) believed a lack of results meant they were negative. Only 28.9% and 23.6% of patients had ever been offered outpatient HIV and hepatitis C screening.

Conclusions:

A large portion of patients believe they received admission or prior hospitalization HIV and/or hepatitis C screening and the majority interpreted a lack of results as a negative diagnosis. Due to these factors, routine screening of trauma/EGS patients should be considered to conform to patient expectations and national guidelines, increase diagnosis and referral for medical management, and decrease disease transmission.

Effect of national HIV testing recommendations and local interventions on HIV testing practices in a Swiss university hospital: a retrospective analysis between 2012 and 2015

OBJECTIVES

Despite HIV testing recommendations published by the Federal Office of Public Health (FOPH) since 2007, many individuals living with HIV are diagnosed late in Switzerland. The aim of this study is to examine the effect of the 2013 FOPH HIV testing recommendations on HIV testing rates.

SETTING

Ten clinical services at Lausanne University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients attending between 1 January 2012 and 31 December 2015.

DESIGN

Retrospective analysis using two existing hospital databases. HIV testing rates calculated as the percentage of tests performed (from the Immunology Service database) per number of patients seen (from the central hospital database).

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was testing rate change following the 2013 FOPH testing recommendations, comparing testing rates 2 years before and 2 years after their publication. Secondary outcomes were demographic factors of patients tested or not tested for HIV.

RESULTS

147 884 patients were seen during the study period of whom 9653 (6.5%) were tested for HIV, with 34 new HIV diagnoses. Mean testing rate increased from 5.6% to 7.8% after the recommendations (p=0.001). Testing rate increases were most marked in services involved in clinical trials on HIV testing, whose staff had attended training seminars on testing indications and practice. Testing rates were lower among older (aged >50 years), female and Swiss patients compared with younger, male and non-Swiss patients, both globally (p=0.001) and in specific clinical services.

CONCLUSIONS

This simple two-database tool demonstrates clinical services in which HIV testing practice can be optimised. Improved testing rates in services involved in clinical trials on testing suggest that local engagement complements the effect of national recommendations. While, overall, HIV testing rates increased significantly over time, testing rates were lower among patients with similar demographic profiles to individuals diagnosed late in Switzerland.

Targeted versus non-targeted HIV testing offered via electronic questionnaire in a Swiss emergency department: A randomized controlled study

Background

In Switzerland, the national HIV testing recommendations propose targeted testing. Although the emergency department (ED) is mentioned specifically as a site where HIV testing should take place, the testing rate in our ED is 1% of patients seen. The aim of this study was to use electronic tablets to offer testing to ED patients and to examine whether non-targeted screening increased testing rates compared to targeted testing.

Methods

This randomised, cross-over design study took place at Lausanne University Hospital, Switzerland, between August and November 2015. Eligible patients were randomised to a targeted testing or a non-targeted screening arm. Using electronic tablets, targeted arm patients completed a risk factor assessment; patients with risk factors were offered free rapid HIV testing. Non-targeted arm patients received information about HIV and HIV testing on their tablet and were then offered testing. In a second step, patients who declined testing were crossed over to the other strategy. The primary endpoint was the HIV testing rate per arm.

Results

Eighty patients were recruited to each study arm. In the targeted arm, 17 patients (of 80, 21%) had at least one risk factor and were offered testing, of whom eight (of 17, 47%) accepted. HIV testing rate in the targeted arm was 10% (8/80) compared to 48% (38/80) in the non-targeted arm (P<0.001). Secondary cross–screening, where targeted arm patients without risk factors were offered non-targeted screening, increased the testing rate in the targeted arm to 45% (36/80). Among patients offered testing, the acceptance rate did not differ between targeted and non-targeted arms, at 48% and 53%, respectively (P = 0.9)

Discussion

In our centre, non-targeted HIV screening resulted in a higher testing rate than targeted testing due to more patients being offered a test. The acceptance rate of testing offered did not differ between targeted and non-targeted arms. Electronic tablets were well-received by patients and easy to use. We conclude that non-targeted HIV screening using electronic tablets would increase the HIV testing rate in our ED.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03038724

Patient and doctor perspectives on HIV screening in the emergency department: A prospective cross-sectional study

Background

The emergency department (ED) is mentioned specifically in the Swiss HIV testing recommendations as a site at which patients can benefit from expanded HIV testing to optimise early HIV diagnosis. At our centre, where local HIV seroprevalence is 0.2–0.4%, 1% of all patients presenting to the ED are tested for HIV. Barriers to HIV testing, from the patient and doctor perspective, and patient acceptability of rapid HIV testing were examined in this study.

Methods

Between October 2014 and May 2015, 100 discrete patient-doctor encounter pairs undertook a survey in the ED of Lausanne University Hospital, Switzerland. Patients completed a questionnaire on HIV risk factors and were offered free rapid HIV testing (INSTI^™). For every patient included, the treating doctor was asked if HIV testing had 1) been indicated according to the national testing recommendations, 2) mentioned, and 3) offered during the consultation.

Results

Of 100 patients, 30 had indications for HIV testing through risk factors or a suggestive presenting complaint (PC). Fifty patients accepted rapid testing; no test was reactive. Of 50 patients declining testing, 82% considered themselves not at risk or had recently tested negative and 16% wished to focus on their PC. ED doctors identified 20 patients with testing indications, mentioned testing to nine and offered testing to six. The main reason for doctors not mentioning or not offering testing was the wish to focus on the PC.

Discussion

Patients and doctors at our ED share the testing barrier of wishing to focus on the PC. Rapid HIV testing offered in parallel to the patient-doctor consultation increased the testing rate from 6% (offered by doctors) to 50%. Introducing this service would enable testing of patients not offered tests by their doctors and reduce missed opportunities for early HIV diagnosis.

Patient and provider attitudes to emergency department-based HIV counselling and testing in South Africa

Background

The national South African HIV Counselling and Testing (HCT) guidelines mandate that voluntary counselling and testing (VCT) should be offered in all healthcare facilities. Emergency departments (EDs) are at the forefront of many healthcare facilities, yet VCT is not routinely implemented in this setting.

Methods

We conducted a cross-sectional study that surveyed patients and healthcare providers at a tertiary care ED in the spring and summer of 2016 to ascertain their attitudes to VCT in the ED. We also used two previously validated survey instruments to gather data on patients’ HIV knowledge and providers’ stigma against patients living with HIV, as we anticipated that these may have an impact on providers’ and patients’ attitudes to the provision of HIV testing within the ED, and may offer insights for future intervention development.

Results

A total of 104 patients and 26 providers were enrolled in the study. Overall, patients responded more favourably to ED-based HIV testing (92.3%) compared to providers (only 40% responded favourably). When asked about potential barriers to receiving or providing HIV testing, 16.4% of patients and 24% of providers felt that the subject of HIV was too sensitive and 58.7% of patients and 80% of providers indicated that privacy and confidentiality issues would pose major barriers to implementing ED-based HIV testing.

Conclusion

This study shows that while ED-based HIV testing is overall highly acceptable to patients, providers seem less willing to provide this service. The survey data also suggest that future development of ED-based testing strategies should take into consideration privacy and confidentiality concerns that may arise within a busy emergency care setting. Furthermore, every effort should be made to tackle HIV stigma among providers to improve overall attitudes towards HIV-positive individuals that present for care in the ED.

Investigating Barriers in HIV-Testing Oncology Patients: The IBITOP Study, Phase I

BACKGROUND

Although the prevalence of non-AIDS-defining cancers (non-ADCs) among people living with HIV is rising, we observed HIV testing rates below 5% at our oncology center, against a regional HIV prevalence of 0.2%-0.4%. We performed the Investigating Barriers in HIV-Testing Oncology Patients (IBITOP) study among oncology physicians and patients.

METHODS

Between July 1 and October 31, 2013, patients of unknown HIV status newly diagnosed with solid-organ non-ADCs referred to Lausanne University Hospital Oncology Service, Switzerland, were offered free HIV testing as part of their oncology work-up. The primary endpoints were (a) physician willingness to offer and patient acceptance of HIV testing and (b) physicians' reasons for not offering testing.

RESULTS

Of 239 patients of unknown HIV status with a new non-ADC diagnosis, 43 (18%) were offered HIV testing, of whom 4 declined (acceptance rate: 39 of 43; 91%). Except for 21 patients tested prior to oncology consultation, 175 patients (of 239; 73%) were not offered testing. Testing rate declined among patients who were >70 years old (12% versus 30%; p = .04); no non-European patients were tested. Physicians gave reasons for not testing in 16% of cases, the main reason being patient follow-up elsewhere (10 patients; 5.7%). HIV testing during the IBITOP study increased the HIV testing rate to 18%.

CONCLUSION

Although the IBITOP study increased HIV testing rates, most patients were not tested. Testing was low or nonexistent among individuals at risk of late HIV presentation (older patients and migrants). Barriers to testing appear to be physician-led, because patient acceptance of testing offered was very high (91%). In November 2013, the Swiss HIV testing recommendations were updated to propose testing in cancer patients. Phase II of the IBITOP study is examining the effect of these recommendations on HIV testing rates and focusing on physician-led testing barriers.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Patients of unknown HIV status newly diagnosed with solid-organ non-AIDS-defining cancers were offered free HIV testing. Physician and patient barriers to HIV testing were examined. Most patients (82%) were not offered testing, and testing of individuals at risk of late HIV presentation (older patients and migrants) was low or nonexistent. Conversely, patient acceptance of testing offered was very high (91%), suggesting that testing barriers in this setting are physician-led. Since this study, the Swiss HIV testing recommendations now advise testing cancer patients before chemotherapy. Phase II of the Investigating Barriers in HIV-Testing Oncology Patients study is examining the effect of these recommendations on testing rates and physician barriers.