BACKGROUND: Expanded HIV screening efforts in the United States have increased the use of rapid HIV tests in emergency departments. The reported sensitivity and specificity of rapid HIV tests exceed 99%. OBJECTIVE: To assess whether a reactive rapid oral HIV test result correctly identifies adults with HIV infection in the emergency department. DESIGN: Diagnostic test performance assessment within the framework of a randomized, clinical trial. SETTING:Brigham and Women's Hospital emergency department (Boston, Massachusetts) from 7 February to 1 October 2007. PATIENTS: 849 adults with valid rapid oral HIV test results. INTERVENTION: Rapid HIV testing with the OraQuick ADVANCE Rapid HIV-1/2 Antibody Test (OraSure Technologies, Bethlehem, Pennsylvania). Patients with reactive rapid test results were offered enzyme-linked immunoassay, Western blot, and plasma HIV-1 RNA testing for confirmation. MEASUREMENTS: Specificity and positive likelihood ratio. RESULTS: 39 patients had reactive results (4.6% [95% CI, 3.2% to 6.0%]). On confirmation, 5 patients were HIV-infected (prevalence, 0.6% [CI, 0.1% to 1.1%]) and 26 were non-HIV-infected (8 patients declined confirmation). The estimated rapid test specificity was 96.9% (CI, 95.7% to 98.1%). Sensitivity analyses of the true HIV status of unconfirmed cases and test sensitivity resulted in a positive likelihood ratio of 8 to 32. Western blot alone as a confirmation test provided conclusive HIV status in only 50.0% (CI, 30.8% to 69.2%) of patients at first follow-up. The addition of HIV-1 RNA testing to the confirmation protocol improved this rate to 96.2% (CI, 88.8% to 100.0%). LIMITATION: Test sensitivity cannot be assessed because nonreactive OraQuick test results were not confirmed. CONCLUSION: Although patients with a reactive oral OraQuick HIV screening test in the emergency department had an 8- to 32-fold increased odds of HIV infection compared with the pretest odds, the specificity of the test was lower than anticipated.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Expanded HIV screening efforts in the United States have increased the use of rapid HIV tests in emergency departments. The reported sensitivity and specificity of rapid HIV tests exceed 99%. OBJECTIVE: To assess whether a reactive rapid oral HIV test result correctly identifies adults with HIV infection in the emergency department. DESIGN: Diagnostic test performance assessment within the framework of a randomized, clinical trial. SETTING: Brigham and Women's Hospital emergency department (Boston, Massachusetts) from 7 February to 1 October 2007. PATIENTS: 849 adults with valid rapid oral HIV test results. INTERVENTION: Rapid HIV testing with the OraQuick ADVANCE Rapid HIV-1/2 Antibody Test (OraSure Technologies, Bethlehem, Pennsylvania). Patients with reactive rapid test results were offered enzyme-linked immunoassay, Western blot, and plasma HIV-1 RNA testing for confirmation. MEASUREMENTS: Specificity and positive likelihood ratio. RESULTS: 39 patients had reactive results (4.6% [95% CI, 3.2% to 6.0%]). On confirmation, 5 patients were HIV-infected (prevalence, 0.6% [CI, 0.1% to 1.1%]) and 26 were non-HIV-infected (8 patients declined confirmation). The estimated rapid test specificity was 96.9% (CI, 95.7% to 98.1%). Sensitivity analyses of the true HIV status of unconfirmed cases and test sensitivity resulted in a positive likelihood ratio of 8 to 32. Western blot alone as a confirmation test provided conclusive HIV status in only 50.0% (CI, 30.8% to 69.2%) of patients at first follow-up. The addition of HIV-1 RNA testing to the confirmation protocol improved this rate to 96.2% (CI, 88.8% to 100.0%). LIMITATION: Test sensitivity cannot be assessed because nonreactive OraQuick test results were not confirmed. CONCLUSION: Although patients with a reactive oral OraQuick HIV screening test in the emergency department had an 8- to 32-fold increased odds of HIV infection compared with the pretest odds, the specificity of the test was lower than anticipated.
Authors: Abigail Silva; Nancy R Glick; Sheryl B Lyss; Angela B Hutchinson; Thomas L Gift; Lisa N Pealer; Dawn Broussard; Steven Whitman Journal: Ann Emerg Med Date: 2006-11-20 Impact factor: 5.721
Authors: Kevin P Delaney; Bernard M Branson; Apurva Uniyal; Peter R Kerndt; Patrick A Keenan; Krishna Jafa; Ann D Gardner; Denise J Jamieson; Marc Bulterys Journal: AIDS Date: 2006-08-01 Impact factor: 4.177
Authors: A David Paltiel; Rochelle P Walensky; Bruce R Schackman; George R Seage; Lauren M Mercincavage; Milton C Weinstein; Kenneth A Freedberg Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2006-12-05 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: David R Eitel; Debbie A Travers; Alexander M Rosenau; Nicki Gilboy; Richard C Wuerz Journal: Acad Emerg Med Date: 2003-10 Impact factor: 3.451
Authors: Henry D Anaya; Jaimi N Butler; Herschel Knapp; Kee Chan; Erin E Conners; Sophia F Rumanes Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2015-01 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Jason S Haukoos; Michael S Lyons; Douglas A E White; Yu-Hsiang Hsieh; Richard E Rothman Journal: Ann Emerg Med Date: 2014-08-13 Impact factor: 5.721
Authors: Jason S Haukoos; Michael S Lyons; Christopher J Lindsell; Emily Hopkins; Brooke Bender; Richard E Rothman; Yu-Hsiang Hsieh; Lynsay A Maclaren; Mark W Thrun; Comilla Sasson; Richard L Byyny Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2012-03-19 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: L F Haynes; J E Korte; B E Holmes; L Gooden; T Matheson; D J Feaster; J A Leff; L Wilson; L R Metsch; B R Schackman Journal: Eval Program Plann Date: 2011-03-01
Authors: Jason S Haukoos; Douglas A E White; Michael S Lyons; Emily Hopkins; Yvette Calderon; Brian Kalish; Richard E Rothman Journal: Ann Emerg Med Date: 2011-07 Impact factor: 5.721
Authors: Christian Arbelaez; Brian Block; Elena Losina; Elizabeth A Wright; William M Reichmann; Regina Mikulinsky; Jessica D Solomon; Matthew M Dooley; Rochelle P Walensky Journal: Int J Emerg Med Date: 2009-09-01
Authors: Gillian D Sanders; Henry D Anaya; Steven Asch; Tuyen Hoang; Joya F Golden; Ahmed M Bayoumi; Douglas K Owens Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2010-03-04 Impact factor: 5.128