Sachin Jain, Erik S Lowman, Adam Kessler, Jaime Harper, Dino P Rumoro, Kimberly Y Smith, Yanina Purim-Shem-Tov, Harold A Kessler
{"title":"Seroprevalence study using oral rapid HIV testing in a large urban emergency department.","authors":"Sachin Jain, Erik S Lowman, Adam Kessler, Jaime Harper, Dino P Rumoro, Kimberly Y Smith, Yanina Purim-Shem-Tov, Harold A Kessler","doi":"10.1016/j.jemermed.2012.02.021","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) recommends universal human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) testing for patients aged 13-64 years in health care settings where the seroprevalence is>0.1%. Rapid HIV testing has several advantages; however, recent studies have raised concerns about false positives in populations with low seroprevalence.</p><p><strong>Study objectives: </strong>To determine the seroprevalence of HIV in our Emergency Department (ED) population, understand patient preferences toward rapid testing in the ED, and evaluate the performance of a rapid oral HIV test.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A serosurvey offered oral rapid HIV 1/2 testing (OraQuick ADVANCE, Bethlehem, PA) to a convenience sample of 1348 ED patients beginning August 2008. Subjects declining participation were asked to complete an opt-out survey.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>1000 patients were tested. Twelve had positive results (1.2%), including one who had newly diagnosed HIV infection; 988 patients tested negative. Of these, 335 (33.3%) had never been tested; 640 had prior history of a negative HIV test. No false-positive rapid HIV results were detected; 98.7% received the results of their preliminary HIV test, including 100% of those who tested positive. Most subjects who declined testing cited either a recent negative HIV test (160/348) or low perceived risk (65/348). A minority cited a concern regarding their privacy (11/348) or that the test might delay their treatment (7/348).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The seroprevalence estimate of 1.2% was above the rate recommended by the CDC for routine universal opt-out testing in our study population. The acceptance rate of rapid HIV testing and the percentage of patients receiving results approximated other recent reports.</p>","PeriodicalId":501218,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Emergency Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"e269-75"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.jemermed.2012.02.021","citationCount":"14","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of Emergency Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jemermed.2012.02.021","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2012/4/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 14
Abstract
Background: The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) recommends universal human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) testing for patients aged 13-64 years in health care settings where the seroprevalence is>0.1%. Rapid HIV testing has several advantages; however, recent studies have raised concerns about false positives in populations with low seroprevalence.
Study objectives: To determine the seroprevalence of HIV in our Emergency Department (ED) population, understand patient preferences toward rapid testing in the ED, and evaluate the performance of a rapid oral HIV test.
Methods: A serosurvey offered oral rapid HIV 1/2 testing (OraQuick ADVANCE, Bethlehem, PA) to a convenience sample of 1348 ED patients beginning August 2008. Subjects declining participation were asked to complete an opt-out survey.
Results: 1000 patients were tested. Twelve had positive results (1.2%), including one who had newly diagnosed HIV infection; 988 patients tested negative. Of these, 335 (33.3%) had never been tested; 640 had prior history of a negative HIV test. No false-positive rapid HIV results were detected; 98.7% received the results of their preliminary HIV test, including 100% of those who tested positive. Most subjects who declined testing cited either a recent negative HIV test (160/348) or low perceived risk (65/348). A minority cited a concern regarding their privacy (11/348) or that the test might delay their treatment (7/348).
Conclusions: The seroprevalence estimate of 1.2% was above the rate recommended by the CDC for routine universal opt-out testing in our study population. The acceptance rate of rapid HIV testing and the percentage of patients receiving results approximated other recent reports.