Literature DB >> 25153918

Did CDC's 2006 revised HIV testing recommendations make a difference? Evaluation of HIV testing in the US household population, 2003-2010.

Joseph V Woodring1, Deanna Kruszon-Moran, Alexandra M Oster, Geraldine M McQuillan.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To examine changes in the prevalence of HIV testing among adults following the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's 2006 revised HIV testing recommendations.
DESIGN: The 2003-2010 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, a nationally representative cross-sectional survey of the noninstitutionalized US population.
METHODS: Weighted estimates and multivariable modeling to assess the prevalence of lifetime HIV testing, outside of blood donations, based on 13,975 respondents aged 18-59 years, comparing the 2003-2006 and 2007-2010 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey.
RESULTS: Overall, HIV testing was 42.1% during 2003-2006 and 44.5% during 2007-2010 (P > 0.05). After adjusting for significant predictors in a multivariate model, HIV testing increased from 2003-2006 to 2007-2010 (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.14, P < 0.05), mostly among males (aOR 1.33, P < 0.001) as compared with females (aOR 1.02, P > 0.05). HIV testing also increased significantly among non-Hispanic blacks, heterosexuals, those aged 50-59 years, those without a sexually transmitted infection history, those without health insurance, and those who did not access health care in the past year. HIV testing did not change significantly among high-risk groups, including men who have sex with men, those with a history of injection or illicit drug use, and those with a sexually transmitted infection history.
CONCLUSIONS: In multivariate modeling, we found a modest but significant increase in HIV testing overall and among males after publication of the revised recommendations for HIV testing. The significant increase in non-high-risk groups suggests an expansion in generalized HIV testing, as recommended. However, even in 2007-2010, 56% of the US population has never been tested for HIV.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25153918      PMCID: PMC7241860          DOI: 10.1097/QAI.0000000000000303

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr        ISSN: 1525-4135            Impact factor:   3.731


INTRODUCTION

In the United States, an estimated 1.2 million people are living with HIV infection and approximately 50,000 people become infected with HIV each year.[1] Of those living with HIV infection, 1 out of every 5 is undiagnosed,[2] and persons unaware of their HIV status are estimated to transmit more than half of all infections.[1,3,4] Among those aware of their seropositivity, antiretroviral treatment combined with behavior modifications that decrease high-risk behaviors prevent further HIV transmission to sexual partners.[5,6] The US Department of Health and Human Services Healthy People 2020 program includes an objective to increase the percent of HIV-positive people who know their serostatus with a target of 90% to be reached by 2020.[7] The US National HIV/AIDS Strategy aims to reach this same goal by 2015.[8,9] In September 2006, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) released revised recommendations for HIV testing of adults, adolescents, and pregnant women in health care settings.[10] The revised recommendations broadened HIV screening to include all patients aged 13–64 years in all health care settings, unless the prevalence of undiagnosed HIV infection in health care providers’ patient population is documented to be <0.1%. This shift from focusing testing on at-risk populations to testing all persons aged 13–64 years prompted our research question—namely, was there an increase in HIV screening for the US population and did it vary for known high- and low-risk populations after publication of the 2006 revised recommendations? This report examines changes in any self-reported HIV testing outside of blood donations by key sociodemographic, economic, and behavioral characteristics comparing the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) data from 2003–2006 to 2007–2010.

METHODS

Sample Design

NHANES is a cross-sectional survey designed to provide national statistics on the health and nutritional status of the US noninstitutionalized civilian population through household interviews and standardized physical examinations, including the collection of biologic samples in Mobile Examination Centers (MECs). Starting in 1999, the survey became continuous, collecting demographic, socioeconomic, dietary, and health-related data from approximately 5,000 US participants each year. The sampling plan for the survey is a stratified, multistage probability cluster design.[11] From 2003 to 2006, adolescents aged 12–19 years, low-income whites, non-Hispanic blacks, Mexican Americans and persons aged 70 years and older were sampled at higher frequencies than other populations to obtain more reliable and precise estimates for these subgroups. From 2007 to 2010, oversampled subgroups included all Hispanics instead of just Mexican Americans and all other groups previously mentioned except adolescents. Informed consent was obtained for persons aged 18 years or older. More detailed information on survey design for NHANES, including approval from the CDC Research Ethics Review Board for data collection and analysis, is available from the survey documentation.[11,12]

Study Population

Deidentified nationally representative public use data files are released every 2 years and can be combined with other 2-year data releases to increase the statistical reliability of estimates. For this study, data released in 2003–2004 and 2005–2006 were combined to represent the 4-year survey period before the revised HIV testing recommendations. Similarly, the 2007–2008 and 2009–2010 survey cycles were combined to represent the 4-year period after the revised recommendations.

Measures

HIV testing history was collected at the MEC using computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) during the health examination. Respondents aged 16 years and older were asked, “Except for tests you may have had as part of blood donations, have you ever had blood tested for the AIDS virus infection?” Based on the respondents’ self-reported information, race and Hispanic origin were categorized as non-Hispanic white, non-Hispanic black, and Mexican American. Respondents who did not self-identify into these 3 groups were classified as “other,” which included all non–Mexican American Hispanics and individuals reporting multiple races. The “other” category was not reported separately; however, these respondents were included when calculating estimates for the total combined population. Additional variables analyzed included age, gender, poverty index ratio (PIR) [calculated by dividing family income by a poverty threshold specific for family size using the US Department of Health and Human Services’ poverty guidelines and categorized as either below poverty (<1) or at or above poverty (≥1)],[13] education [self-categorized as having less than high school education, having completed high school or General Educational Development (GED), or having more than high school education], US military service history, any current health insurance, receipt of any health care in the past 12 months, having a regular place to receive health care, injection or illicit drug use history, sexually transmitted infection history, number of lifetime sexual partners, same-sex sexual contact history, and sexual identity. Sensitive questions involving sexual behavior and drug use were collected using the Audio Computer-Assisted Self-Interviewing (ACASI) and CAPI systems, which allow respondents to privately listen and respond to questions delivered through a touch screen computer at the MEC. Studies have shown ACASI to yield more complete reporting of sensitive behaviors compared with self-administered paper-based questionnaires.[14,15] Complete sexual activity and drug use data for the 4-year survey periods was only available among those aged 18–59 years; as a result, we limited our analyses to this age group. Insufficient sample size of respondents reporting a history of injection drug use resulted in merging of both the history of injection and history of illicit drug use categories. Only 1 participant who reported a history of injection drug use denied a history of illicit drug use. Sexual activity data included lifetime number of sexual partners and history of sex with members of the same sex [men who have had sex with men (MSM) or women who have had sex with other women]. Self-reported sexual identity was coded as either heterosexual or non-heterosexual because of the insufficient sample size among individual non-heterosexual categories. Respondents were asked whether a provider had told them they had gonorrhea or chlamydia in the past 12 months and whether they were ever diagnosed with genital herpes or genital warts. Because of the small sample sizes for each self-reported sexually transmitted infection (STI) diagnosis, we used a dichotomous variable of either reporting a history of one or more STIs or none of these STIs.

Statistical Methods

To account for oversampling and nonresponse to the household interview and physical examination, all estimates for prevalence of lifetime HIV testing were weighted to represent the total civilian noninstitutionalized US household population.[16] Standard errors were calculated using software SUDAAN (release version 10.0; Research Triangle Institute, Research Triangle Park, NC). Estimates are indicated as statistically unreliable when the standard error of the estimate relative to the estimate itself was >30%. No such instance occurred for this study. Student t-tests were used (1) to evaluate the association between sociodemographic, economic, and behavioral characteristics and HIV testing; and (2) to examine changes in testing prevalence between 2003–2006 and 2007–2010. No corrections for multiple comparisons were made, and a P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. We then examined which variables were independently associated with HIV testing status, using a backward stepwise logistic modeling procedure in SUDAAN. All variables with significant associations from the univariate analysis, and a variable for survey period (2003–2006 vs. 2007–2010), were eligible for inclusion in the multiple logistic regression model. We tested for interactions between each variable and survey period, and each variable and gender. Variables with a Satterthwaite-adjusted F statistic of P < 0.05 were considered to be significant predictors and were retained in the final model for the total population. Because of significant interactions between gender and survey cycle, and gender and several predictors of HIV testing status, we also calculated univariate estimates and created multiple logistic models individually for both males and females. These gender-specific multivariate models included all variables from the final model for the total population. Four-year population estimates were calculated for 2003–2006 and 2007–2010 based on annual average data from the US Census Bureau’s Current Population Survey.[17]

Response Rates

Overall, 41,156 (79%) of the 51,838 persons sampled in NHANES during 2003–2010 were interviewed in the survey. Among the interviewed, 16,240 persons were aged 18–59 years. Among the 15,704 persons (97% of those interviewed) aged 18–59 years who were examined (and therefore received questions on HIV testing and behavioral characteristics), 13,975 (89%) responded to the question on HIV testing and were included in our analysis.

RESULTS

Overall Prevalence of HIV Testing

Overall, 42.1% of US adults aged 18–59 years during 2003–2006 and 44.5% during 2007–2010 reported any lifetime history of HIV testing, outside of blood donations (P > 0.05, Table 1). This indicates that during 2003–2006, about 70.7 million (95% confidence interval [CI]: 67.1 to 74.4 million) had received HIV testing during their lifetime, whereas during 2007–2010, 76.8 million (95% CI: 73.8 to 79.7 million) had received testing during their lifetime. Females were significantly more likely than males to have HIV testing within both the 2003–2006 (46.9% vs. 37.2%, respectively) and 2007–2010 (48.0% vs. 41.1%, respectively) survey periods. The proportion of males tested significantly increased from 37.2% in 2003–2006 to 41.1% in 2007–2010, whereas the proportion of females tested did not change significantly (46.9% in 2003–2006 and 48.0% in 2007–2010). Other groups with significant increases in HIV testing included persons aged 50–59 years, non-Hispanic blacks, persons without health insurance coverage, persons who did not receive health care in the past 12 months, persons without a history of STIs, persons without a history of same-sex behavior, and heterosexual persons (Table 1).
TABLE 1.

Prevalence of HIV Testing by Descriptive Characteristics and 4 Year Survey Periods, NHANES, 2003–2010

Variable2003–20062007–2010P*
Sample SizePercent Ever Tested95% CISample SizePercent Ever Tested95% CI
Overall669242.140.0 to 44.3728344.542.8 to 46.2NS
Gender
 Male (ref)316937.234.7 to 39.8364141.139.2 to 43.1<0.05
 Female352346.944.1 to 49.8364248.045.7 to 50.2NS
Age, yr
 18–19 (ref)103721.417.6 to 25.151919.414.8 to 23.9NS
 20–29169641.737.8 to 45.6167043.4140.5 to 46.2NS
 30–39142054.551.8 to 57.2170057.354.1 to 60.4NS
 40–49142644.740.7 to 48.7176646.342.8 to 49.8NS
 50–59111330.727.7 to 33.7162836.232.3 to 40.1<0.05
Race/Hispanic origin
 Non-Hispanic white (ref)302340.838.6 to 43.0312242.940.6 to 45.1NS
 Non-Hispanic black165156.753.9 to 59.5144363.960.1 to 67.7<0.01
 Mexican American148135.331.6 to 38.9150635.732.8 to 38.5NS
Education
 Less than high school diploma or GED158937.934.2 to 41.7194842.4139.0 to 45.9NS
 High school diploma or GED163238.334.7 to 42.0175139.937.1 to 42.6NS
 Above high school diploma or GED (ref)339744.942.1 to 47.7355547.145.0 to 49.3NS
PIR
 Below PIR143546.342.7 to 50.0164147.343.3 to 51.3NS
 At or above PIR (ref)496841.739.4 to 43.9502943.941.9 to 45.9NS
Current health insurance coverage?
 Yes480943.140.8 to 45.5485844.442.6 to 46.3NS
 No (ref)184838.135.2 to 41.1241744.942.4 to 47.4<0.001
Regular location for health care?
 Yes534043.240.7 to 45.6573845.744.0 to 47.4NS
 No (ref)135237.533.9 to 41.1154438.935.4 to 42.3NS
Received health care in the past 12 months?
 Yes538744.342.2 to 46.5567546.043.9 to 48.1NS
 No (ref)130132.428.8 to 36.0160338.435.1 to 41.8<0.05
History of US military service?
 Yes46161.255.7 to 66.845169.062.9 to 75.1NS
 No (ref)623140.438.3 to 42.4683142.740.8 to 44.7NS
History of injection or illicit drug use?
 Yes125353.149.2 to 57.1136555.852.5 to 59.1NS
 No (ref)529339.537.2 to 41.9575042.040.2 to 43.9NS
History of sexually transmitted infections?
 Yes53165.759.6 to 71.750766.1160.7 to 71.4NS
 No (ref)600140.138.0 to 42.2657243.241.5 to 44.9<0.05
Number of lifetime sexual partners
 063617.8§14.6 to 21.055120.6§16.3 to 25.0NS
 193926.322.3 to 30.288928.023.9 to 32.1NS
 2–4156933.730.4 to 37.1165636.634.1 to 39.0NS
 5–9143745.241.3 to 49.1164847.944.0 to 51.8NS
 ≥10189358.455.6 to 61.1228258.955.6 to 62.2NS
History of same-sex sexual contact?
 Yes38167.261.7 to 72.848264.5t59.0 to 69.9NS
 No (ref)615840.738.6 to 42.8661243.541.8 to 45.2<0.05
Non-heterosexual sexual identity?
 Yes35964.757.0 to 72.343557.349.0 to 65.6NS
 No (ref)616241.239.3 to 43.2662144.242.6 to 45.8<0.05

Difference between 2003–2006 and 2007–2010.

P < 0.05 for t test comparing subgroup and reference group within the survey cycle.

Includes a self-reported history of chlamydia or gonorrhea in the past 12 months or a self-reported history of ever having genital herpes or genital warts.

P < 0.05 for linear test for trend across all subgroups for lifetime number of sexual partners within survey cycle.

Includes men who had sex with men and women who had sex with women.

Includes whether respondents thought of themselves as either non-heterosexual (homosexual, gay, bisexual, something else or not sure) or heterosexual. GED, General Educational Development; NS, not significant; ref, reference; PIR, Poverty Index Ratio.

Prevalence of HIV Testing by Subgroup Stratified by Gender

For males, there was a significant increase in testing between survey periods for certain subgroups (Table 2). Specifically, testing increased between survey periods from 50.3% to 61.7% among non-Hispanic black men and from 36.1% to 40.3% among non-Hispanic white men, with no significant increase among Mexican American men. Testing also significantly increased from 27.9% to 38.7% among men with less than a high school diploma or GED but not among those with more education. Significant increases between survey periods were also seen for males at or above PIR; males without health insurance; males who have a regular location for health care; males who had not received health care in the past 12 months; males with and without a history of US military service; males without a history of injection or illicit drug use; males without an STI history; males with 5–9 lifetime sexual partners; males with no history of sex with other men; and heterosexual males.
TABLE 2.

Prevalence of HIV Testing Among Males by Descriptive Characteristics and 4 Year Survey Periods, NHANES, 2003–2010

Variable2003–20062007–2010P*
Sample SizePercent Ever Tested95% CISample SizePercent Ever Tested95% CI
Overall316937.234.7 to 39.8364141.139.2 to 43.1<0.05
Age, yr
 18–19 (ref)50014.910.5 to 19.229417.310.6 to 24.0NS
 20–2974233.328.2 to 38.581736.431.9 to 40.9NS
 30–3966945.741.5 to 49.984751.246.5 to 56.0NS
 40–4970840.435.3 to 45.583444.940.0 to 49.7NS
 50–5955033.428.7 to 38.284937.032.3 to 41.8NS
Race/Hispanic Origin
 Non-Hispanic white (ref)143636.132.9 to 39.2156540.337.7 to 42.8<0.05
 Non-Hispanic black79450.347.1 to 53.572161.756.6 to 66.8<0.001
 Mexican American70128.924.0 to 33.877929.725.3 to 34.2NS
Education
 Less than high school diploma or GED78427.923.4 to 32.4101138.734.1 to 43.4<0.01
 High school diploma or GED83036.531.4 to 41.794437.634.2 to 41.0NS
 Above high school diploma or GED (ref)151340.436.8 to 43.9166643.640.9 to 46.4NS
PIR
 Below PIR63038.233.9 to 42.575439.035.0 to 43.1NS
 At or above PIR (ref)240637.234.6 to 39.8257241.239.0 to 43.5<0.05
Current health insurance coverage?
 Yes211938.235.4 to 41.0226641.339.2 to 43.3NS
 No (ref)102633.829.8 to 37.9137240.837.6 to 43.9<0.01
Regular location for health care?
 Yes227738.234.9 to 41.5262642.640.4 to 44.8<0.05
 No (ref)89234.330.4 to 38.2101536.332.2 to 40.4NS
Received health care in the past 12 months?
 Yes225039.736.7 to 42.8254943.040.5 to 45.5NS
 No (ref)91630.326.3 to 34.3108736.132.3 to 39.9<0.05
History of US military service?
 Yes40159.753.9 to 65.639468.862.6 to 75.1<0.05
 No (ref)276833.130.5 to 35.7324637.535.2 to 39.9<0.05
History of injection or illicit drug use?
 Yes77147.442.5 to 52.388251.747.1 to 56.3NS
 No (ref)233134.031.1 to 36.8267837.835.7 to 39.9<0.05
History of sexually transmitted infections?
 Yes17559.548.5 to 70.517067.458.7 to 76.1NS
 No (ref)291735.933.3 to 38.5337040.238.1 to 42.2<0.05
Number of lifetime sexual partners
 037118.2§13.3 to 23.135824.9§19.4 to 30.5NS
 129617.212.2 to 22.329723.818.5 to 29.1NS
 2–460627.321.8 to 32.963627.324.0 to 30.6NS
 5–962733.629.1 to 38.174640.635.3 to 45.8<0.05
 10 or more115953.950.2 to 57.5148155.251.7 to 58.7NS
History of same-sex sexual contact?
 Yes14972.562.5 to 82.517264.754.8 to 74.6NS
 No (ref)295035.633.1 to 38.0337740.338.4 to 42.4<0.01
Non-heterosexual sexual identity?
 Yes15568.658.6 to 78.616463.452.1 to 74.7NS
 No (ref)293936.033.7 to 38.3337840.538.7 to 42.4<0.01

Difference between 2003–2006 and 2007–2010.

P < 0.05 for t test comparing subgroup and reference group within the survey cycle.

Includes a self-reported history of chlamydia or gonorrhea in the past 12 months or a self-reported history of ever having genital herpes or genital warts.

P < 0.05 for linear test for trend across all subgroups for lifetime number of sexual partners within survey cycle.

Includes men who had sex with men.

Includes whether respondents thought of themselves as either non-heterosexual (homosexual, gay, bisexual, something else or not sure) or heterosexual. GED, General Educational Development; NS, not significant; ref, reference; PIR, Poverty Index Ratio.

Among females, the only subgroups that experienced a significant increase in testing between survey periods were females aged 50–59 years (28.1% vs. 35.4%, P < 0.05) and females without health insurance coverage (43.8% vs. 50.5%, P < 0.05; Table 3).
TABLE 3.

Prevalence of HIV Testing Among Females by Descriptive Characteristics and 4 Year Survey Periods, NHANES, 2003–2010

Variable2003–20062007–2010P*
Sample SizePercent Ever Tested95% CISample SizePercent Ever Tested95% CI
Overall352346.944.1 to 49.8364248.045.7 to 50.2NS
Age
 18–19 (ref)53727.922.6 to 33.222521.814.5 to 29.1NS
 20–2995450.345.9 to 54.785350.747.4 to 54.0NS
 30–3975163.1 59.3 to 66.985363.560.3 to 66.6NS
 40–4971848.743.4 to 54.093247.843.3 to 52.2NS
 50–5956328.123.7 to 32.577935.430.4 to 40.4<0.05
Race/Ethnicity
 Non-Hispanic white (ref)158745.542.2 to 48.8155745.542.4 to 48.6NS
 Non-Hispanic black85762.258.2 to 66.272265.961.7 to 70.1NS
 Mexican American78042.637.7 to 47.572743.339.9 to 46.6NS
Education
 Less than high school diploma or GED80549.344.5 to 54.193746.542.4 to 50.6NS
 High school diploma or GED80240.436.2 to 44.780742.537.7 to 47.3NS
 Above high school diploma or GED (ref)188448.945.2 to 52.5188950.447.6 to 53.2NS
PIR
 Below PIR80553.147.8 to 58.588754.348.8 to 59.7NS
 At or above PIR (ref)256246.142.6 to 49.7245746.744.1 to 49.3NS
Current health insurance coverage?
 Yes269047.644.3 to 50.8259247.444.9 to 49.9NS
 No (ref)82243.839.4 to 48.2104550.546.8 to 54.1<0.05
Regular location for health care?
 Yes306347.244.1 to 50.4311248.546.3 to 50.7NS
 No (ref)46044.538.4 to 50.752944.238.0 to 50.5NS
Received health care in the past 12 months?
 Yes313748.045.0 to 51.0312648.646.0 to 51.1NS
 No (ref)38537.831.5 to 44.051643.738.5 to 48.8NS
History of US military service?
 Yes6076.057.4 to 94.75769.751.5 to 88.0NS
 No (ref)346346.543.8 to 49.2358547.545.1 to 50.0NS
History of injection or illicit drug use?
 Yes48261.856.1 to 67.648362.957.1 to 68.6NS
 No (ref)296244.341.3 to 47.4307245.843.7 to 47.9NS
History of sexually transmitted infections?
 Yes35669.162.7 to 75.533765.559.0 to 72.0NS
 No (ref)308444.441.5 to 47.4320246.544.0 to 48.9NS
Number of lifetime sexual partners
 026517.1§11.1 to 23.119313.2§8.2 to 18.2NS
 164331.426.8 to 36.059230.825.2 to 36.3NS
 2–496338.232.8 to 43.6102042.738.8 to 46.7NS
 5–981055.050.6 to 59.490254.349.6 to 58.9NS
 ≥1073465.461.5 to 69.380165.160.5 to 69.7NS
History of same-sex sexual contact?
 Yes23263.757.7 to 69.731064.358.1 to 70.6NS
 No (ref)320845.942.9 to 48.8323546.844.4 to 49.3NS
Non-heterosexual sexual identity?
 Yes20461.452.2 to 70.727153.845.4 to 62.1NS
 No (ref)322346.443.6 to 49.2324348.145.8 to 50.5NS

Difference between 2003–2006 and 2007–2010.

P < 0.05 for t test comparing subgroup and reference group within the survey cycle.

Includes a self-reported history of chlamydia or gonorrhea in the past 12 months or a self-reported history of ever having genital herpes or genital warts.

P < 0.05 for linear test for trend across all subgroups for lifetime number of sexual partners within survey cycle.

Includes women who had sex with women.

Includes whether respondents thought of themselves as either non-heterosexual (homosexual, gay, bisexual, something else or not sure) or heterosexual. GED, General Educational Development; NS, not significant; ref, reference; PIR, Poverty Index Ratio.

Multivariate Results

After adjusting for all significant predictors of HIV testing, the odds of receiving HIV testing were significantly higher in 2007–2010 compared with 2003–2006 overall [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.14, 95% CI: 1.03 to 1.27] but varied by gender (P < 0.05 for interaction term). In separate multivariable models for males and females, the adjusted odds for the increase in testing over time reached statistical significance among males (aOR 1.33, 95% CI: 1.14 to 1.56) but not among females (aOR 1.02, 95% CI: 0.87 to 1.18, Table 4). HIV testing varied by age group and was significantly higher among non-Hispanic blacks as compared with non-Hispanic whites; among those with greater than a high school education compared with those with a high school diploma or GED; among those living below the poverty line compared with those at or above; among those who received health care in the past 12 months compared with those who did not; among those with a history of US military service compared with those without; among those with a history of an STI compared with those with no history; among those with a history of illicit drug use compared with those without a history; among those with a non-heterosexual sexual identity compared with heterosexuals and increased with greater numbers of lifetime sexual partners. These associations were statistically significant (P < 0.05) in multivariate models for the total population and among both males and females for most variables (Table 4).
TABLE 4.

Multivariate Logistic Model of HIV Testing Prevalence for the Total Population and by Gender, NHANES, 2003–2010

VariableTotal PopulationMalesFemales
aOR95% CIPaOR95% CIPaOR95% CIP
Survey cycle
 NHANES 2003–3006RefRefRef
 NHANES 2007–2010*1.141.03 to 1.27<0.051.331.14 to 1.56<0.0011.020.87 to 1.18NS
Gender
 Male0.570.51 to 0.64<0.001N/AN/A
 FemaleRef
Age, yr
 18–19RefRefRef
 20–292.301.82 to 2.91<0.0012.011.35 to 2.99<0.0012.521.85 to 3.42<0.001
 30–39*3.652.88 to 4.62<0.0012.882.01 to 4.12<0.0014.263.14 to 5.78<0.001
 40–492.311.86 to 2.86<0.0012.241.55 to 3.23<0.0012.201.60 to 3.02<0.001
 50–591.301.03 to 1.65<0.051.280.89 to 1.85NS1.200.87 to 1.66NS
Race/Hispanic Origin
 Non-Hispanic whiteRefRefRef
 Non-Hispanic black2.091.80 to 2.42<0.0012.081.71 to 2.53<0.0012.081.76 to 2.47<0.001
 Mexican American*0.990.88 to 1.12NS0.860.71 to 1.05NS1.110.94 to 1.32NS
Education
 Less than high school diploma or GED0.830.69 to 1.00NS0.760.59 to 0.96<0.050.900.72 to 1.14NS
 High school diploma or GED0.790.69 to 0.89<0.0010.810.69 to 0.95<0.010.770.63 to 0.95<0.05
 Above high school diploma or GEDRefRefRef
PIR
 Below PIR1.281.10 to 1.49<0.011.231.01 to 1.51<0.051.301.05 to 1.62<0.05
 At or above PIRRefRefRef
Received health care in the past 12 months?
 Yes1.341.17 to 1.54<0.0011.271.05 to 1.53<0.051.361.07 to 1.74<0.05
 NoRefRefRef
History of US military service
 Yes3.222.63 to 3.94<0.0013.342.71 to 4.13<0.0012.041.13 to 3.68<0.05
 NoRefRefRef
History of injection or illicit drug use
 Yes1.281.12 to 1.46<0.0011.371.15 to 1.63<0.0011.210.98 to 1.50NS
 NoRefRefRef
History of sexually transmitted infections?
 Yes1.701.35 to 2.13<0.0011.661.14 to 2.42<0.011.741.33 to 2.26<0.001
 NoRefRefRef
Number of lifetime sexual partners
 0RefRefRef
 1*1.561.20 to 2.02<0.010.990.64 to 1.51NS2.821.89 to 4.21<0.001
 2–4*2.041.58 to 2.63<0.0011.310.92 to 1.88NS3.792.49 to 5.76<0.001
 5–9*2.952.31 to 3.76<0.0011.841.35 to 2.52<0.0015.803.92 to 8.59<0.001
 ≥10*4.453.47 to 5.71<0.0013.172.32 to 4.32<0.0017.645.10 to 11.44<0.001
Non-heterosexual sexual identity
 Yes*2.031.58 to 2.60<0.0013.972.88 to 5.47<0.0011.301.00 to 1.68NS
 NoRefRefRef

Association of subgroup with outcome significantly (P < 0.05) interacted with gender.

Includes a history of chlamydia or gonorrhea in the past 12 months or a history of ever having genital herpes or genital warts.

Includes whether respondents thought of themselves as either non-heterosexual (homosexual, gay, bisexual, something else or not sure) or heterosexual. GED, General Educational Development; N/A, not applicable; NS, not significant; Ref, reference; PIR, Poverty Index Ratio.

DISCUSSION

CDC’s revised HIV testing recommendations indicated that HIV testing should be routinely performed for all patients aged 13–64 years in health care settings. In brief, our results show that 42.1% (95% CI: 40.0% to 44.3%) of US adults aged 18–59 years during 2003–2006 and 44.5% (95% CI: 42.8% to 46.2%) during 2007–2010 reported any lifetime history of HIV testing, outside of blood donations (P > 0.05). In comparison, a study using data from the National Health Interview Survey reported that 38.5% (95% CI: 38.0% to 39.0%) of respondents aged 18 years and older self-reported previous HIV testing outside of blood donations in 2007–2010.[18] After adjustment for the significant predictors of HIV testing, we found that the proportion of persons reporting any previous HIV testing significantly increased, albeit modestly, from 2003–2006 to 2007–2010. This is consistent with data from the National Health Interview Survey, which also showed that from 2003 to 2010, HIV testing outside of blood donations among respondents 18 years and older increased from 35.4% (95% CI: 34.7% to 36.1%) in 2003 to 39.5% (95% CI: 38.6% to 40.4%) in 2010.[19] Some populations experienced significant increases in HIV testing after the revised recommendations, namely, males, non-Hispanic blacks, those aged 50–59 years, those denying a history of STIs, those without current health insurance, those who did not receive health care in the past year, those who denied having same-sex sexual contact, and heterosexual persons. Excluding non-Hispanic blacks and male demographic groups, the other groups provide evidence that HIV testing has expanded beyond known at-risk groups to encompass more of the general and previously non-targeted population. Still, gains in most groups were modest, and in 2007–2010, more than half of respondents denied ever having an HIV test. Therefore, although our analysis demonstrates progress, additional work remains to ensure that testing is delivered broadly to the general population. We did not detect a significant increase in HIV testing among known high-risk populations, including MSM, a history of injection or illicit drug use, or those reporting an STI history. Each of these groups, for whom annual HIV testing is recommended, had significantly higher HIV testing prevalence than their counterparts (i.e., non-MSM males, those denying an injection or illicit drug use history, and those denying a history of STIs) within both survey periods. Sample sizes for these groups were small; therefore, the power to detect change and differences for these groups may have been limited. Other CDC behavioral surveillance systems, such as the National HIV Behavioral Surveillance System, which focuses on MSM, injection drug users, and heterosexuals at increased risk, may be better poised to assess changes in HIV testing behavior among these populations. Although NHANES does not currently inquire about HIV testing within the past year, 34%–44% of respondents from 2007–2010 in these aforementioned high-risk populations denied having any HIV testing outside of blood donations. HIV testing increased significantly among persons who did not receive health care in the past year. Interpretation of this finding is difficult because NHANES does not currently assess whether a participant was tested in the past year. This increase in testing may reflect a shift from never testing to infrequently testing for persons at self-perceived low risk for infection. This was shown in a recent National Health Interview Survey analysis where perceived low risk of HIV exposure was the most common reason given for 61% of the participants during 2007–2010 who reported never receiving HIV testing.[18] Also, the US Food and Drug Administration approved the first rapid home-use HIV test in July 2012.[20] As a result, understanding when and where participants’ last HIV testing was performed will become increasingly important to understand future changes in HIV testing. We found that significant increases in testing only occurred among males. Although females had a significantly higher prevalence of HIV testing than males in both univariate and multivariate analyses, increased testing among males indicates that disparities in HIV testing behavior between women and men are narrowing. In 2005, CDC estimated that 15% of new infections were acquired by adults aged 50 years and older.[21] By 2015, half of all persons living with HIV in the United States will be 50 years and older.[22] Our study shows that participants aged 50–59 years were the only age group with a significant increase in HIV testing prevalence between survey periods. With the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services allowing Medicare reimbursement for routine HIV testing since December 2009[23] and with the US Preventive Services Task Force giving a Grade A Recommendation to screen adolescents and adults aged 15–65 years in April 2013;[24] we may continue to see increases in HIV testing among aging US populations as they can now access HIV testing more readily and without a copayment or coinsurance.[23,25] Our study showed that the revised HIV testing recommendations are reaching populations that may not have been previously targeted but are still at risk. Persons living with HIV are more likely to be uninsured, of low income, and a racial/ethnic minority.[26-28] We also found HIV testing improvements between survey periods among non-Hispanic black and uninsured participants, and in addition, those below the PIR were more likely to have HIV testing than those living at or above poverty index ratio in all 3 models. NHANES excludes homeless and incarcerated populations and those living on military bases who may have differing HIV risk–related behaviors and testing histories. Current or former military members who do not live on military bases are eligible to participate in NHANES. Results show that respondents who served or are serving in the military but live outside military bases are independently more likely to have received HIV testing than other populations. Having conducted routine HIV testing since 1985, the Department of Defense instituted a standard 2-year interval between HIV-1 antibody tests for all service members in 2004.[29] This mandated HIV testing could account for the high rate of lifetime HIV testing among current and former military members. To our knowledge, this is the first national study to assess, through multivariate analysis that adjusted for the significant predictors of HIV testing, whether CDC’s updated and more comprehensive recommendations for HIV testing in clinical settings have affected the testing practices of the general US population. However, limitations include possible bias resulting from those at the highest risk not being within the scope of the NHANES sample (i.e., outside of the civilian, noninstitutionalized household population) and/or those at the highest risk being more likely to not respond to the NHANES survey. In addition, there may be reporting bias with sexual risk behaviors and illicit drug use, which may have led to underreporting by certain subpopulations. Some potential underreporting may be ameliorated by NHANES’ use of ACASI and CAPI, which have been shown to elicit more comprehensive answers to potentially sensitive questions than paper-based questionnaires.[14,15] NHANES assesses lifetime history of HIV testing, and therefore we were not able to determine by means of this cross-sectional study whether testing occurred before or after 2006. In addition, availability of cofactors forced us to limit our sample to 18–59 year olds, and therefore we could not fully assess changes in HIV testing among adolescents. Finally, several subgroups experienced a nonsignificant increase in HIV testing (eg, those with military service, males with an STI history, and males with 0 and 1 lifetime number of sexual partners), possibly because of larger standard errors and smaller sample sizes in these subgroups. In summary, we found that, after accounting for factors associated with HIV testing, there was a significant increase in lifetime HIV testing among the US population between 2003–2006 and 2007–2010. This may reflect adoption of CDC’s revised recommendations for routine HIV testing in clinical settings and efforts to implement these and other testing strategies, such as CDC’s Expanded Testing Initiative, which was funded during 2007–2011 and incorporated into general HIV prevention programs in 2012. Still, even in 2007–2010, less than half of US adults aged 18–59 years reported any history of HIV testing. HIV testing, which is effective, cost-effective, and scalable,[30-33] is a cornerstone of CDC’s High-Impact HIV Prevention strategy.[9] Continued improvements in HIV testing can increase the proportion of HIV-infected persons who are aware of their infection and reduce HIV transmission.
  19 in total

1.  Estimating sexual transmission of HIV from persons aware and unaware that they are infected with the virus in the USA.

Authors:  Gary Marks; Nicole Crepaz; Robert S Janssen
Journal:  AIDS       Date:  2006-06-26       Impact factor: 4.177

2.  Racial and ethnic disparities in future testing intentions for HIV: United States, 2007-2010: results from the National Health Interview Survey.

Authors:  Kenya Murray; Emeka Oraka
Journal:  AIDS Behav       Date:  2014-07

Review 3.  Epidemiology of HIV infection in the United States: implications for linkage to care.

Authors:  Richard D Moore
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2011-01-15       Impact factor: 9.079

4.  Meta-analysis of high-risk sexual behavior in persons aware and unaware they are infected with HIV in the United States: implications for HIV prevention programs.

Authors:  Gary Marks; Nicole Crepaz; J Walton Senterfitt; Robert S Janssen
Journal:  J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr       Date:  2005-08-01       Impact factor: 3.731

5.  Expanded HIV screening in the United States: effect on clinical outcomes, HIV transmission, and costs.

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

6.  Vital signs: HIV prevention through care and treatment--United States.

Authors: 
Journal:  MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep       Date:  2011-12-02       Impact factor: 17.586

7.  Cost-effectiveness of screening for HIV in the era of highly active antiretroviral therapy.

Authors:  Gillian D Sanders; Ahmed M Bayoumi; Vandana Sundaram; S Pinar Bilir; Christopher P Neukermans; Chara E Rydzak; Lena R Douglass; Laura C Lazzeroni; Mark Holodniy; Douglas K Owens
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2005-02-10       Impact factor: 91.245

8.  Expanded screening for HIV in the United States--an analysis of cost-effectiveness.

Authors:  A David Paltiel; Milton C Weinstein; April D Kimmel; George R Seage; Elena Losina; Hong Zhang; Kenneth A Freedberg; Rochelle P Walensky
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2005-02-10       Impact factor: 91.245

9.  Estimation of HIV incidence in the United States.

Authors:  H Irene Hall; Ruiguang Song; Philip Rhodes; Joseph Prejean; Qian An; Lisa M Lee; John Karon; Ron Brookmeyer; Edward H Kaplan; Matthew T McKenna; Robert S Janssen
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2008-08-06       Impact factor: 56.272

10.  National health and nutrition examination survey: plan and operations, 1999-2010.

Authors:  George Zipf; Michele Chiappa; Kathryn S Porter; Yechiam Ostchega; Brenda G Lewis; Jennifer Dostal
Journal:  Vital Health Stat 1       Date:  2013-08
View more
  16 in total

1.  Compliance with a New York State 2010 HIV Testing Law: Is There Racial/Ethnic Bias in HIV Testing? Experience of Monroe County, New York, 2012.

Authors:  Byron S Kennedy; Anne Kern; John Ricci; Mary Younge; Kathy Carelock; Brenden Bedard; Kim Smith; Roxana Inscho
Journal:  Ethn Dis       Date:  2016-01-21       Impact factor: 1.847

2.  Public Health Benefit of Peer-Referral Strategies for Detecting Undiagnosed HIV Infection Among High-Risk Heterosexuals in New York City.

Authors:  Marya Gwadz; Charles M Cleland; David C Perlman; Holly Hagan; Samuel M Jenness; Noelle R Leonard; Amanda S Ritchie; Alexandra Kutnick
Journal:  J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr       Date:  2017-04-15       Impact factor: 3.731

3.  Evaluating the Evidence for More Frequent Than Annual HIV Screening of Gay, Bisexual, and Other Men Who Have Sex With Men in the United States: Results From a Systematic Review and CDC Expert Consultation.

Authors:  Elizabeth A DiNenno; Joseph Prejean; Kevin P Delaney; Kristina Bowles; Tricia Martin; Amrita Tailor; Gema Dumitru; Mary M Mullins; Angela Hutchinson; Amy Lansky
Journal:  Public Health Rep       Date:  2017-11-28       Impact factor: 2.792

4.  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.

Authors:  Eleanor E Friedman; Hazel D Dean; Wayne A Duffus
Journal:  Public Health Rep       Date:  2018-06-06       Impact factor: 2.792

5.  HIV Testing Among Black and Hispanic Immigrants in the United States.

Authors:  Bisola O Ojikutu; Emanuele Mazzola; Andrew Fullem; Rodolfo Vega; Stewart Landers; Rebecca S Gelman; Laura M Bogart
Journal:  AIDS Patient Care STDS       Date:  2016-07       Impact factor: 5.078

6.  Men Who Have Sex With Men-Identification Criteria and Characteristics From the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 1999 to 2014.

Authors:  Precious Esie; Joseph Kang; Elaine W Flagg; Jaeyoung Hong; Tianqi Chen; Kyle Bernstein
Journal:  Sex Transm Dis       Date:  2018-05       Impact factor: 2.830

7.  Trends in HIV Testing Among US Adults, Aged 18-64 Years, 2011-2017.

Authors:  Deesha Patel; Christopher H Johnson; Amy Krueger; Barbara Maciak; Lisa Belcher; Norma Harris; Elizabeth A DiNenno
Journal:  AIDS Behav       Date:  2020-02

8.  HIV Testing Among Men at Risk for Acquiring HIV Infection Before and After the 2006 CDC Recommendations.

Authors:  Candice K Kwan; Charles E Rose; John T Brooks; Gary Marks; Catlainn Sionean
Journal:  Public Health Rep       Date:  2016 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 2.792

Review 9.  Hepatitis C Virus Elimination in the Human Immunodeficiency Virus-Coinfected Population: Leveraging the Existing Human Immunodeficiency Virus Infrastructure.

Authors:  Meredith E Clement; Lauren F Collins; Julius M Wilder; Michael Mugavero; Taryn Barker; Susanna Naggie
Journal:  Infect Dis Clin North Am       Date:  2018-06       Impact factor: 5.982

10.  HIV testing and service delivery among Blacks or African Americans--61 health department jurisdictions, United States, 2013.

Authors:  Puja Seth; Tanja Walker; NaTasha Hollis; Argelia Figueroa; Lisa Belcher
Journal:  MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep       Date:  2015-02-06       Impact factor: 17.586

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.