Literature DB >> 24033901

Comparison of two HIV testing strategies in primary care centres: indicator-condition-guided testing vs. testing of those with non-indicator conditions.

I Menacho1, E Sequeira, M Muns, O Barba, L Leal, T Clusa, E Fernandez, L Moreno, D Raben, J Lundgren, J M Gatell, F Garcia, L Cayuelas, V Aragunde, M Vergara, M Catalan, M A Moreno, G Hormigo, A Siso, Z Herreras, L Sebastian, L Benito, A Picas, J Hoyo, M J Giner, D Cararach, E Moles, M L Moro, P Arrabal, D Roca, S Prego, X Ferrer, A Egido, C Ventosa, S Garcia, S Muñoz, A Massana, J Sole, M Curiel, F Heras, A Leon.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to compare prospectively indicator-condition (IC)-guided testing versus testing of those with non-indicator conditions (NICs) in four primary care centres (PCCs) in Barcelona, Spain.
METHODS: From October 2009 to February 2011, patients aged from 18 to 65 years old who attended a PCC for a new herpes zoster infection, seborrhoeic eczema, mononucleosis syndrome or leucopenia/thrombopenia were included in the IC group, and one in every 10 randomly selected patients consulting for other reasons were included in the NIC group. A proportion of patients in each group were offered an HIV test; those who agreed to be tested were given a rapid finger-stick HIV test (€6 per test). Epidemiological and clinical data were collected and analysed.
RESULTS: During the study period, 775 patients attended with one of the four selected ICs, while 66,043 patients presented with an NIC. HIV screening was offered to 89 patients with ICs (offer rate 11.5%), of whom 85 agreed to and completed testing (94.4 and 100% acceptance and completion rates, respectively). In the NIC group, an HIV test was offered to 344 persons (offer rate 5.2%), of whom 313 accepted (90.9%) and 304 completed (97.1%) testing. HIV tests were positive in four persons [prevalence 4.7%; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.3-11.6%] in the IC group and in one person in the NIC group (prevalence 0.3%; 95% CI 0.01-1.82%; P < 0.009). If every eligible person had taken an HIV test, we would have spent €4650 in the IC group and €396,258 in the NIC group, and an estimated 36 (95% CI 25-49) and 198 persons (95% CI 171-227), respectively, would have been diagnosed with HIV infection. The estimated cost per new HIV diagnosis would have been €129 (95% CI €107-153) in the IC group and €2001 (95% CI €1913-2088) in the NIC group.
CONCLUSIONS: Although the number of patients included in the study was small and the results should be treated with caution, IC-guided HIV testing, based on four selected ICs, in PCCs seems to be a more feasible and less expensive strategy to improve diagnosis of HIV infection in Spain than a nontargeted HIV testing strategy.
© 2013 British HIV Association.

Entities:  

Keywords:  HIV testing; indicator condition; primary care

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24033901     DOI: 10.1111/hiv.12064

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  HIV Med        ISSN: 1464-2662            Impact factor:   3.180


  8 in total

1.  Lack of awareness in both patients and physicians contributes to a high rate of late presentation in a South West German HIV patient cohort.

Authors:  J M Kittner; L von Bialy; J Wiltink; T Thomaidis; B Gospodinov; A Rieke; F Katz; T Discher; K Rath; B Claus; G Held; G Friese; B Schappert; M Schuchmann; P R Galle
Journal:  Infection       Date:  2015-01-20       Impact factor: 3.553

2.  Current evidence on the adoption of indicator condition guided testing for HIV in western countries: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  S J Bogers; S H Hulstein; M F Schim van der Loeff; G J de Bree; P Reiss; J E A M van Bergen; S E Geerlings
Journal:  EClinicalMedicine       Date:  2021-05-08

3.  Improving the evidence for indicator condition guided HIV testing in Europe: Results from the HIDES II Study - 2012 - 2015.

Authors:  Dorthe Raben; Ann Kathleen Sullivan; Amanda Mocroft; Galyna Kutsyna; Vesna Hadžiosmanović; Anna Vassilenko; Nikoloz Chkhartisvili; Viktar Mitsura; Court Pedersen; Jane Anderson; Josip Begovac; Ulrik Bak Dragsted; Barbara Bertisch; Anna Grzeszczuk; Jane Minton; Valentina Coca Necsoi; Maria Kitchen; Faiza Ajana; Anton Sokhan; Laura Comi; Paymaneh Farazmand; Dragica Pesut; Stephane De Wit; José Maria Gatell; Brian Gazzard; Antonella d'Arminio Monforte; Jürgen Kurt Rockstroh; Yazdan Yazdanpanah; Karen Champenois; Marie Louise Jakobsen; Jens Dilling Lundgren
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-08-13       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 4.  [Recommendations for the screening for infectious diseases, mental health, and female genital mutilation in immigrant patients seen in Primary Care].

Authors:  Ethel Sequeira-Aymar; Ximena diLollo; Yolanda Osorio-Lopez; Alessandra Queiroga Gonçalves; Carme Subirà; Ana Requena-Méndez
Journal:  Aten Primaria       Date:  2019-04-25       Impact factor: 1.137

5.  HIV testing strategies employed in health care settings in the European Union/European Economic Area (EU/EEA): evidence from a systematic review.

Authors:  S Desai; L Tavoschi; A K Sullivan; L Combs; D Raben; V Delpech; S F Jakobsen; A J Amato-Gauci; S Croxford
Journal:  HIV Med       Date:  2019-11-14       Impact factor: 3.180

Review 6.  Measures and Metrics for Feasibility of Proof-of-Concept Studies With Human Immunodeficiency Virus Rapid Point-of-Care Technologies: The Evidence and the Framework.

Authors:  Nitika Pant Pai; Tiago Chiavegatti; Rohit Vijh; Nicolaos Karatzas; Jana Daher; Megan Smallwood; Tom Wong; Nora Engel
Journal:  Point Care       Date:  2017-11-14

Review 7.  HIV testing within general practices in Europe: a mixed-methods systematic review.

Authors:  Jessika Deblonde; Dominique Van Beckhoven; Jasna Loos; Nicole Boffin; André Sasse; Christiana Nöstlinger; Virginie Supervie
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2018-10-22       Impact factor: 3.295

8.  Identifying key elements to inform HIV-testing interventions for primary care in Belgium.

Authors:  Hanne Apers; Christiana Nöstlinger; Dominique Van Beckhoven; Jessika Deblonde; Ludwig Apers; Katleen Verheyen; Jasna Loos
Journal:  Health Promot Int       Date:  2020-04-01       Impact factor: 2.483

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.