HIV Testing in Emergency Departments in the United States: A National Survey
Objectives In 2006, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) published recommendations for HIV testing in health care settings, calling for nontargeted opt-out rapid HIV screening in most settings, including emergency departments (EDs). Although a number of ED-based testing strategies ex...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Annals of emergency medicine 2011-07, Vol.58 (1), p.S10-S16.e8 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | S16.e8 |
---|---|
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | S10 |
container_title | Annals of emergency medicine |
container_volume | 58 |
creator | Haukoos, Jason S., MD, MSc Hopkins, Emily, MSPH Hull, Amber, BA Dean, Christian, MS Donahoe, Kevin, BS Ruzas, Christopher M., MD Bauerle, Jessica D., BS Terrien, Brian, MD Forsyth, Jessica, MSW Kalish, Brian, BA Thrun, Mark, MD Rothman, Richard, MD, PhD |
description | Objectives In 2006, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) published recommendations for HIV testing in health care settings, calling for nontargeted opt-out rapid HIV screening in most settings, including emergency departments (EDs). Although a number of ED-based testing strategies exist, it is unclear to what extent they are used. The objective of this study is to survey academic and community EDs throughout the United States to determine ED-based HIV testing practices. Methods This was a cross-sectional survey study of all academic EDs and a weighted random sample of all community-based EDs in the United States. A standardized survey instrument was developed and administered with an Internet-based survey platform, followed by direct contact and mail. The survey included domains related to perceived HIV testing barriers, whether HIV testing was performed and methods used, and familiarity with the CDC recommendations and whether they had been adopted. Results Of the 131 total academic sites and the 435 community sites, 99 (76%) and 150 (35%) completed the survey, respectively. A larger proportion of academic sites believed HIV testing was needed ( P =.02) and a larger proportion actually provided HIV testing (65% versus 50%; P =.04). Among the academic and community EDs that provided testing, 74% and 62% performed diagnostic testing, 26% and 22% performed targeted screening, and 16% and 6% performed nontargeted screening, respectively. A larger proportion of academic EDs reported receiving external funding to support testing (23% versus 4%; P =.001), whereas a large proportion of community sites considered costs a significant barrier to testing ( P =.03). A larger proportion of academic EDs reported being familiar with the 2006 CDC recommendations (64% versus 40%; P |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2011.03.033 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_873704581</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0196064411002678</els_id><sourcerecordid>873704581</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c431t-e7a5d8a62081380e48e23fd454eaee7105c59d7a6e96c3a3312162773db2fbfa3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkU1v1DAQhi0EardL_wIKJ05Zxh-xEw5I1dLSSis4bMvV8jqT4iVxFtuptP8eR9tKiBPSSHOYd96ZeYaQ9xRWFKj8uF8Z73HA8Dhgu2JA6Qp4Dv6KLCg0qpRKwmuyANrIEqQQ5-Qixj0ANILRM3LOqKwFr9WCbG7vfhT3GJPzj4XzxfXsit4eiy94MCEN6FOcC-knFg_eJWyLbTIJ46fiqvhmkhu96YvtFJ7w-Ja86Uwf8fI5L8nDzfX9-rbcfP96t77alFZwmkpUpmprIxnUlNeAokbGu1ZUAg2iolDZqmmVkdhIyw3nNO_LlOLtjnW7zvAl-XDyPYTx95SX14OLFvveeBynqGvFFYgquy9Jc1LaMMYYsNOH4AYTjpqCnlnqvf6LpZ5ZauA5eO599zxl2s21l84XeFmwPgkw3_rkMOhoXWaHrQtok25H919jPv_jYnvnnTX9Lzxi3I9TyISjpjoyDXo7P3X-KaUATKqa_wHc258Q</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>873704581</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>HIV Testing in Emergency Departments in the United States: A National Survey</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Haukoos, Jason S., MD, MSc ; Hopkins, Emily, MSPH ; Hull, Amber, BA ; Dean, Christian, MS ; Donahoe, Kevin, BS ; Ruzas, Christopher M., MD ; Bauerle, Jessica D., BS ; Terrien, Brian, MD ; Forsyth, Jessica, MSW ; Kalish, Brian, BA ; Thrun, Mark, MD ; Rothman, Richard, MD, PhD</creator><creatorcontrib>Haukoos, Jason S., MD, MSc ; Hopkins, Emily, MSPH ; Hull, Amber, BA ; Dean, Christian, MS ; Donahoe, Kevin, BS ; Ruzas, Christopher M., MD ; Bauerle, Jessica D., BS ; Terrien, Brian, MD ; Forsyth, Jessica, MSW ; Kalish, Brian, BA ; Thrun, Mark, MD ; Rothman, Richard, MD, PhD</creatorcontrib><description>Objectives In 2006, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) published recommendations for HIV testing in health care settings, calling for nontargeted opt-out rapid HIV screening in most settings, including emergency departments (EDs). Although a number of ED-based testing strategies exist, it is unclear to what extent they are used. The objective of this study is to survey academic and community EDs throughout the United States to determine ED-based HIV testing practices. Methods This was a cross-sectional survey study of all academic EDs and a weighted random sample of all community-based EDs in the United States. A standardized survey instrument was developed and administered with an Internet-based survey platform, followed by direct contact and mail. The survey included domains related to perceived HIV testing barriers, whether HIV testing was performed and methods used, and familiarity with the CDC recommendations and whether they had been adopted. Results Of the 131 total academic sites and the 435 community sites, 99 (76%) and 150 (35%) completed the survey, respectively. A larger proportion of academic sites believed HIV testing was needed ( P =.02) and a larger proportion actually provided HIV testing (65% versus 50%; P =.04). Among the academic and community EDs that provided testing, 74% and 62% performed diagnostic testing, 26% and 22% performed targeted screening, and 16% and 6% performed nontargeted screening, respectively. A larger proportion of academic EDs reported receiving external funding to support testing (23% versus 4%; P =.001), whereas a large proportion of community sites considered costs a significant barrier to testing ( P =.03). A larger proportion of academic EDs reported being familiar with the 2006 CDC recommendations (64% versus 40%; P <.001), although only 26% and 37% reported having implemented any part of them, respectively. Conclusion Academic EDs only make up approximately 3% of all EDs in the United States. Significant differences exist between academic and community EDs as they relate to performing HIV testing. Increased efforts should be made to improve the ability of community EDs to provide this service.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0196-0644</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1097-6760</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2011.03.033</identifier><identifier>PMID: 21684387</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Mosby, Inc</publisher><subject>AIDS Serodiagnosis - statistics & numerical data ; Attitude of Health Personnel ; Cross-Sectional Studies ; Emergency ; Emergency Service, Hospital - statistics & numerical data ; Guideline Adherence ; Health Care Surveys ; HIV Infections - diagnosis ; Humans ; United States</subject><ispartof>Annals of emergency medicine, 2011-07, Vol.58 (1), p.S10-S16.e8</ispartof><rights>American College of Emergency Physicians</rights><rights>2011</rights><rights>Copyright © 2011. Published by Mosby, Inc.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c431t-e7a5d8a62081380e48e23fd454eaee7105c59d7a6e96c3a3312162773db2fbfa3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c431t-e7a5d8a62081380e48e23fd454eaee7105c59d7a6e96c3a3312162773db2fbfa3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0196064411002678$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3537,27903,27904,65309</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21684387$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Haukoos, Jason S., MD, MSc</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hopkins, Emily, MSPH</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hull, Amber, BA</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dean, Christian, MS</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Donahoe, Kevin, BS</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ruzas, Christopher M., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bauerle, Jessica D., BS</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Terrien, Brian, MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Forsyth, Jessica, MSW</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kalish, Brian, BA</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thrun, Mark, MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rothman, Richard, MD, PhD</creatorcontrib><title>HIV Testing in Emergency Departments in the United States: A National Survey</title><title>Annals of emergency medicine</title><addtitle>Ann Emerg Med</addtitle><description>Objectives In 2006, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) published recommendations for HIV testing in health care settings, calling for nontargeted opt-out rapid HIV screening in most settings, including emergency departments (EDs). Although a number of ED-based testing strategies exist, it is unclear to what extent they are used. The objective of this study is to survey academic and community EDs throughout the United States to determine ED-based HIV testing practices. Methods This was a cross-sectional survey study of all academic EDs and a weighted random sample of all community-based EDs in the United States. A standardized survey instrument was developed and administered with an Internet-based survey platform, followed by direct contact and mail. The survey included domains related to perceived HIV testing barriers, whether HIV testing was performed and methods used, and familiarity with the CDC recommendations and whether they had been adopted. Results Of the 131 total academic sites and the 435 community sites, 99 (76%) and 150 (35%) completed the survey, respectively. A larger proportion of academic sites believed HIV testing was needed ( P =.02) and a larger proportion actually provided HIV testing (65% versus 50%; P =.04). Among the academic and community EDs that provided testing, 74% and 62% performed diagnostic testing, 26% and 22% performed targeted screening, and 16% and 6% performed nontargeted screening, respectively. A larger proportion of academic EDs reported receiving external funding to support testing (23% versus 4%; P =.001), whereas a large proportion of community sites considered costs a significant barrier to testing ( P =.03). A larger proportion of academic EDs reported being familiar with the 2006 CDC recommendations (64% versus 40%; P <.001), although only 26% and 37% reported having implemented any part of them, respectively. Conclusion Academic EDs only make up approximately 3% of all EDs in the United States. Significant differences exist between academic and community EDs as they relate to performing HIV testing. Increased efforts should be made to improve the ability of community EDs to provide this service.</description><subject>AIDS Serodiagnosis - statistics & numerical data</subject><subject>Attitude of Health Personnel</subject><subject>Cross-Sectional Studies</subject><subject>Emergency</subject><subject>Emergency Service, Hospital - statistics & numerical data</subject><subject>Guideline Adherence</subject><subject>Health Care Surveys</subject><subject>HIV Infections - diagnosis</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>United States</subject><issn>0196-0644</issn><issn>1097-6760</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2011</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkU1v1DAQhi0EardL_wIKJ05Zxh-xEw5I1dLSSis4bMvV8jqT4iVxFtuptP8eR9tKiBPSSHOYd96ZeYaQ9xRWFKj8uF8Z73HA8Dhgu2JA6Qp4Dv6KLCg0qpRKwmuyANrIEqQQ5-Qixj0ANILRM3LOqKwFr9WCbG7vfhT3GJPzj4XzxfXsit4eiy94MCEN6FOcC-knFg_eJWyLbTIJ46fiqvhmkhu96YvtFJ7w-Ja86Uwf8fI5L8nDzfX9-rbcfP96t77alFZwmkpUpmprIxnUlNeAokbGu1ZUAg2iolDZqmmVkdhIyw3nNO_LlOLtjnW7zvAl-XDyPYTx95SX14OLFvveeBynqGvFFYgquy9Jc1LaMMYYsNOH4AYTjpqCnlnqvf6LpZ5ZauA5eO599zxl2s21l84XeFmwPgkw3_rkMOhoXWaHrQtok25H919jPv_jYnvnnTX9Lzxi3I9TyISjpjoyDXo7P3X-KaUATKqa_wHc258Q</recordid><startdate>20110701</startdate><enddate>20110701</enddate><creator>Haukoos, Jason S., MD, MSc</creator><creator>Hopkins, Emily, MSPH</creator><creator>Hull, Amber, BA</creator><creator>Dean, Christian, MS</creator><creator>Donahoe, Kevin, BS</creator><creator>Ruzas, Christopher M., MD</creator><creator>Bauerle, Jessica D., BS</creator><creator>Terrien, Brian, MD</creator><creator>Forsyth, Jessica, MSW</creator><creator>Kalish, Brian, BA</creator><creator>Thrun, Mark, MD</creator><creator>Rothman, Richard, MD, PhD</creator><general>Mosby, Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20110701</creationdate><title>HIV Testing in Emergency Departments in the United States: A National Survey</title><author>Haukoos, Jason S., MD, MSc ; Hopkins, Emily, MSPH ; Hull, Amber, BA ; Dean, Christian, MS ; Donahoe, Kevin, BS ; Ruzas, Christopher M., MD ; Bauerle, Jessica D., BS ; Terrien, Brian, MD ; Forsyth, Jessica, MSW ; Kalish, Brian, BA ; Thrun, Mark, MD ; Rothman, Richard, MD, PhD</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c431t-e7a5d8a62081380e48e23fd454eaee7105c59d7a6e96c3a3312162773db2fbfa3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2011</creationdate><topic>AIDS Serodiagnosis - statistics & numerical data</topic><topic>Attitude of Health Personnel</topic><topic>Cross-Sectional Studies</topic><topic>Emergency</topic><topic>Emergency Service, Hospital - statistics & numerical data</topic><topic>Guideline Adherence</topic><topic>Health Care Surveys</topic><topic>HIV Infections - diagnosis</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>United States</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Haukoos, Jason S., MD, MSc</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hopkins, Emily, MSPH</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hull, Amber, BA</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dean, Christian, MS</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Donahoe, Kevin, BS</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ruzas, Christopher M., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bauerle, Jessica D., BS</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Terrien, Brian, MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Forsyth, Jessica, MSW</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kalish, Brian, BA</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thrun, Mark, MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rothman, Richard, MD, PhD</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Annals of emergency medicine</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Haukoos, Jason S., MD, MSc</au><au>Hopkins, Emily, MSPH</au><au>Hull, Amber, BA</au><au>Dean, Christian, MS</au><au>Donahoe, Kevin, BS</au><au>Ruzas, Christopher M., MD</au><au>Bauerle, Jessica D., BS</au><au>Terrien, Brian, MD</au><au>Forsyth, Jessica, MSW</au><au>Kalish, Brian, BA</au><au>Thrun, Mark, MD</au><au>Rothman, Richard, MD, PhD</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>HIV Testing in Emergency Departments in the United States: A National Survey</atitle><jtitle>Annals of emergency medicine</jtitle><addtitle>Ann Emerg Med</addtitle><date>2011-07-01</date><risdate>2011</risdate><volume>58</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>S10</spage><epage>S16.e8</epage><pages>S10-S16.e8</pages><issn>0196-0644</issn><eissn>1097-6760</eissn><abstract>Objectives In 2006, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) published recommendations for HIV testing in health care settings, calling for nontargeted opt-out rapid HIV screening in most settings, including emergency departments (EDs). Although a number of ED-based testing strategies exist, it is unclear to what extent they are used. The objective of this study is to survey academic and community EDs throughout the United States to determine ED-based HIV testing practices. Methods This was a cross-sectional survey study of all academic EDs and a weighted random sample of all community-based EDs in the United States. A standardized survey instrument was developed and administered with an Internet-based survey platform, followed by direct contact and mail. The survey included domains related to perceived HIV testing barriers, whether HIV testing was performed and methods used, and familiarity with the CDC recommendations and whether they had been adopted. Results Of the 131 total academic sites and the 435 community sites, 99 (76%) and 150 (35%) completed the survey, respectively. A larger proportion of academic sites believed HIV testing was needed ( P =.02) and a larger proportion actually provided HIV testing (65% versus 50%; P =.04). Among the academic and community EDs that provided testing, 74% and 62% performed diagnostic testing, 26% and 22% performed targeted screening, and 16% and 6% performed nontargeted screening, respectively. A larger proportion of academic EDs reported receiving external funding to support testing (23% versus 4%; P =.001), whereas a large proportion of community sites considered costs a significant barrier to testing ( P =.03). A larger proportion of academic EDs reported being familiar with the 2006 CDC recommendations (64% versus 40%; P <.001), although only 26% and 37% reported having implemented any part of them, respectively. Conclusion Academic EDs only make up approximately 3% of all EDs in the United States. Significant differences exist between academic and community EDs as they relate to performing HIV testing. Increased efforts should be made to improve the ability of community EDs to provide this service.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Mosby, Inc</pub><pmid>21684387</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.annemergmed.2011.03.033</doi></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0196-0644 |
ispartof | Annals of emergency medicine, 2011-07, Vol.58 (1), p.S10-S16.e8 |
issn | 0196-0644 1097-6760 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_873704581 |
source | MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals |
subjects | AIDS Serodiagnosis - statistics & numerical data Attitude of Health Personnel Cross-Sectional Studies Emergency Emergency Service, Hospital - statistics & numerical data Guideline Adherence Health Care Surveys HIV Infections - diagnosis Humans United States |
title | HIV Testing in Emergency Departments in the United States: A National Survey |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-27T17%3A41%3A48IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=HIV%20Testing%20in%20Emergency%20Departments%20in%20the%20United%20States:%20A%20National%20Survey&rft.jtitle=Annals%20of%20emergency%20medicine&rft.au=Haukoos,%20Jason%20S.,%20MD,%20MSc&rft.date=2011-07-01&rft.volume=58&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=S10&rft.epage=S16.e8&rft.pages=S10-S16.e8&rft.issn=0196-0644&rft.eissn=1097-6760&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.annemergmed.2011.03.033&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E873704581%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=873704581&rft_id=info:pmid/21684387&rft_els_id=S0196064411002678&rfr_iscdi=true |