Cost-Effectiveness of HIV Screening in Emergency Departments: Results From the Pragmatic Randomized HIV Testing Using Enhanced Screening Techniques in Emergency Departments Trial.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Identification of HIV remains a critical health priority for which emergency departments (EDs) are a central focus. The comparative cost-effectiveness of various HIV screening strategies in EDs remains largely unknown. The goal of this study was to compare programmatic costs and cost-effectiveness of nontargeted and 2 forms of targeted opt-out HIV screening in EDs using results from a multicenter, pragmatic randomized clinical trial. METHODS: This economic evaluation was nested in the HIV Testing Using Enhanced Screening Techniques in Emergency Departments (TESTED) trial, a multicenter pragmatic clinical trial of different ED-based HIV screening strategies conducted from April 2014 through January 2016. Patients aged 16 years or older, with normal mental status and not critically ill, or not known to be living with HIV were randomized to 1 of 3 HIV opt-out screening approaches, including nontargeted, enhanced targeted, or traditional targeted, across 4 urban EDs in the United States. Each screening method was fully integrated into routine emergency care. Direct programmatic costs were determined using actual trial results, and time-motion assessment was used to estimate personnel activity costs. The primary outcome was newly diagnosed HIV. Total annualized ED programmatic costs by screening approach were calculated using dollars adjusted to 2023 as were costs per patient newly diagnosed with HIV. One-way and multiway sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: The trial randomized 76,561 patient visits, resulting in 14,405 completed HIV tests, and 24 (0.2%) new diagnoses. Total annualized new diagnoses were 12.9, and total annualized costs for nontargeted, enhanced targeted, and traditional targeted screening were $111,861, $88,629, and $70,599, respectively. Within screening methods, costs per new HIV diagnoses were $20,809, $23,554, and $18,762, respectively. Enhanced targeted screening incurred higher costs but with similar annualized new cases detected compared with traditional targeted screening. Nontargeted screening yielded an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $25,586 when compared with traditional targeted screening. Results were most sensitive to HIV prevalence and costs of HIV tests. CONCLUSION: Nontargeted HIV screening was more costly than targeted screening largely due to an increased number of HIV tests performed. Each HIV screening strategy had similar within-strategy costs per new HIV diagnosis with traditional targeted screening yielding the lowest cost per new diagnosis. For settings with budget constraints or very low HIV prevalences, the traditional targeted approach may be preferred; however, given only a slightly higher cost per new HIV diagnosis, ED settings looking to detect the most new cases may prefer nontargeted screening.

A Systematic Review of HIV Pre-exposure Prophylaxis (PrEP) Implementation in U.S. Emergency Departments: Patient Screening, Prescribing, and Linkage to Care.

In the pursuit of ending the HIV epidemic, U.S. emergency departments (EDs) have emerged as a valuable setting to increase HIV testing and linkage to care. There is limited data available, however, describing the incorporation of HIV prevention initiatives in U.S. EDs. Over the last decade, HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) has significantly changed the HIV prevention landscape globally and very little is known about the provision of PrEP in U.S. EDs. To address this gap in the literature, we conducted a systematic review of peer-reviewed quantitative studies and conference abstracts spanning July 2012 - October 2022. Of 433 citations, 11 articles and 13 abstracts meet our inclusion criteria, representing 18 unique studies addressing PrEP screening, prescribing, and/or linkage to PrEP care.Most studies describe screening processes to identify PrEP-eligible patients (n = 17); most studies leveraged a patient's STI history as initial PrEP eligibility screening criteria. Fewer studies describe PrEP prescribing (n = 2) and/or linkage to PrEP care (n = 8).Findings from this systematic review highlight the potential for U.S. EDs to increase PrEP uptake among individuals at risk for HIV infection. Despite a growing number of studies exploring processes for incorporating PrEP into the ED setting, such studies are small-scale and time limited. Models providing prescribing PrEP in the ED show higher initiation rates than post-discharge engagement models. Electronic health record (EHR)-based HIV screening is valuable, but post-ED linkage rates are low. Our findings emphasize the need to establish best practices for initiating and supporting prevention effective PrEP use in the ED setting.

Development of a 2-step algorithm to identify emergency department patients for HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis.

BACKGROUND: Expanded access to HIV PrEP is a central pillar of the "Ending the HIV Epidemic" initiative. Identification of PrEP eligible individuals in EDs remains understudied. Our goal was to estimate the accuracy of the Denver HIV Risk Score (DHRS), a quantitative HIV risk tool, for determining PrEP eligibility, and to incorporate it into a novel screening algorithm to optimize sensitivity and specificity. METHODS: We performed a prospective cross-sectional study in two urban EDs. Patients were eligible if ≥18 years of age and without HIV. Research staff collected individual HIV risk, components of the DHRS, and PrEP eligibility per 2017 CDC guidelines. Accuracy estimates were calculated for the DHRS alone and the DHRS plus additional PrEP-specific questions. RESULTS: 1002 patients were enrolled with a median age of 39 years; 54.8% were male, 29.5% Black/non-Hispanic, and 22.5% Hispanic. Overall, 119 (11.9%, 95% CI: 9.9%-14.0%) were PrEP eligible; 5% endorsed history of sex with a partner at higher risk for HIV or condomless sex with multiple partners, 4% an STI, and 2% sharing IDU equipment. A DHRS ≥25 had a sensitivity of 92.4% (95% CI: 86.1%-96.5%) and a specificity of 17.2% (95% CI: 14.8%-19.9%) for PrEP eligibility. A 2-step algorithm, "DHRS-PrEP", beginning with a DHRS ≥25, followed by a step with questions specific to IDU, STI, and sexual partners improved the specificity to 100% (95% CI: 99.6%-100%). CONCLUSIONS: Among a heterogeneous ED sample, a substantial proportion was identified as PrEP eligible, and a 2-step algorithm had high sensitivity and specificity for identifying PrEP-eligible patients.

Racial/ethnic disparities in COVID-19 disease burden & mortality among emergency department patients in a safety net health system.

BACKGROUND: We sought to examine racial and ethnic disparities in test positivity rate and mortality among emergency department (ED) patients tested for COVID-19 within an integrated public health system in Northern California. METHODS: In this retrospective study we analyzed data from patients seen at three EDs and tested for COVID-19 between April 6 through May 4, 2020. The primary outcome was the test positivity rate by race and ethnicity, and the secondary outcome was 30 day in-hospital mortality. We used multivariable logistic regression to examine associations with COVID-19 test positivity. RESULTS: There were 526 patients tested for COVID-19, of whom 95 (18.1%) tested positive. The mean age of patients tested was 54.2 years, 54.7% were male, and 76.1% had at least one medical comorbidity. Black patients accounted for 40.7% of those tested but 16.8% of the positive tests, and Latinx patients accounted for 26.4% of those tested but 58.9% of the positive tests. The test positivity rate among Latinx patients was 40.3% (56/139) compared with 10.1% (39/387) among non-Latinx patients (p < 0.001). Latinx ethnicity was associated with COVID-19 test positivity (adjusted odds ratio 9.6, 95% confidence interval: 3.5-26.0). Mortality among Black patients was higher than non-Black patients (18.7% vs 1.3%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: We report a significant disparity in COVID-19 adjusted test positivity rate and crude mortality rate among Latinx and Black patients, respectively. Results from ED-based testing can identify racial and ethnic disparities in COVID-19 testing, test positivity rates, and mortality associated with COVID-19 infection and can be used by health departments to inform policy.

High Prevalence of Hepatitis C Infection Among Adult Patients at Four Urban Emergency Departments - Birmingham, Oakland, Baltimore, and Boston, 2015-2017.

Identifying persons with hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection has become an urgent public health challenge because of increasing HCV-related morbidity and mortality, low rates of awareness among infected persons, and the advent of curative therapies (1). Since 2012, CDC has recommended testing of all persons born during 1945-1965 (baby boomers) for identification of chronic HCV infection (1); urban emergency departments (EDs) are well positioned venues for detecting HCV infection among these persons. The United States has witnessed an unprecedented opioid overdose epidemic since 2013 that derives primarily from commonly injected illicit opioids (e.g., heroin and fentanyl) (2). This injection drug use behavior has led to an increase in HCV infections among persons who inject drugs and heightened concern about increases in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and HCV infection within communities disproportionately affected by the opioid crisis (3,4). However, targeted strategies for identifying HCV infection among persons who inject drugs is challenging (5,6). During 2015-2016, EDs at the University of Alabama at Birmingham; Highland Hospital, Oakland, California; Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, Maryland; and Boston University Medical Center, Massachusetts, adopted opt-out (i.e., patients can implicitly accept or explicitly decline testing), universal hepatitis C screening for all adult patients. ED staff members offered HCV antibody (anti-HCV) screening to patients who were unaware of their status.* During similar observation periods at each site, ED staff members tested 14,252 patients and identified an overall 9.2% prevalence of positive results for anti-HCV among the adult patient population. Among the 1945-1965 birth cohort, prevalence of positive results for anti-HCV (13.9%) was significantly higher among non-Hispanic blacks (blacks) (16.0%) than among non-Hispanic whites (whites) (12.2%) (p<0.001). Among persons born after 1965, overall prevalence of positive results for anti-HCV was 6.7% and was significantly higher among whites (15.3%) than among blacks (3.2%) (p<0.001). These findings highlight age-associated differences in racial/ethnic prevalences and the potential for ED venues and opt-out, universal testing strategies to improve HCV infection awareness and surveillance for hard-to-reach populations. This opt-out, universal testing approach is supported by new recommendations for hepatitis C screening at least once in a lifetime for all adults aged ≥18 years, except in settings where the prevalence of positive results for HCV infection is <0.1% (7).

A Comparative Effectiveness Study of Two Nontargeted HIV and Hepatitis C Virus Screening Algorithms in an Urban Emergency Department.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: We compare the effectiveness of 2 nontargeted HIV and hepatitis C virus screening protocols integrated consecutively into care in an urban emergency department: a nurse-order HIV/hepatitis C virus screening algorithm followed by an automated-laboratory-order HIV/hepatitis C virus screening algorithm programmed into the electronic health record. METHODS: This was a before-after comparative effectiveness cohort study. All patients aged 18 to 75 years who received treatment during 5-month periods were eligible for participation. The main outcome measures were the number of patients screened and the number with newly diagnosed HIV and hepatitis C virus infection. RESULTS: Of the eligible patients, 6,736 (33.9%) completed HIV screening during the automated-laboratory-order HIV/hepatitis C virus screening algorithm, whereas 4,121 (19.6%) completed HIV screening during the nurse-order HIV/hepatitis C virus screening algorithm (difference 14.3%; 95% confidence interval 13.4% to 15.1%); and 6,972 (35.1%) completed hepatitis C virus screening during the automated-laboratory-order HIV/hepatitis C virus screening algorithm, whereas 2,968 (14.2%) completed hepatitis C virus screening during the nurse-order HIV/hepatitis C virus screening algorithm (difference 20.9%; 95% confidence interval 20.1% to 21.7%). More patients had newly diagnosed HIV (23 versus 17) and hepatitis C virus infection (101 versus 29) during the automated-laboratory-order HIV/hepatitis C virus screening algorithm than the nurse-order HIV/hepatitis C virus screening algorithm. Results were more often available before discharge (HIV 87.2% versus 65.1%; hepatitis C virus 90.0% versus 65.4%) and fewer patients underwent repeated screening (HIV 1.6% versus 5.8%; hepatitis C virus 1.3% versus 4.5%) during the automated-laboratory-order HIV/hepatitis C virus screening algorithm than the nurse-order HIV/hepatitis C virus screening algorithm. CONCLUSION: An electronic health record algorithm that automatically links HIV/hepatitis C virus screening to laboratory ordering for adult patients is more effective than a nurse-driven protocol. With widespread use of electronic health record systems, this model can be easily replicated and should be considered the standard for future programs.

Acute HIV Discovered During Routine HIV Screening With HIV Antigen-Antibody Combination Tests in 9 US Emergency Departments.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Newer combination HIV antigen-antibody tests allow detection of HIV sooner after infection than previous antibody-only immunoassays because, in addition to HIV-1 and -2 antibodies, they detect the HIV-1 p24 antigen, which appears before antibodies develop. We determine the yield of screening with HIV antigen-antibody tests and clinical presentations for new diagnoses of acute and established HIV infection across US emergency departments (EDs). METHODS: This was a retrospective study of 9 EDs in 6 cities with HIV screening programs that integrated laboratory-based antigen-antibody tests between November 1, 2012, and December 31, 2015. Unique patients with newly diagnosed HIV infection were identified and classified as having either acute HIV infection or established HIV infection. Acute HIV infection was defined as a repeatedly reactive antigen-antibody test result, a negative HIV-1/HIV-2 antibody differentiation assay, or Western blot result, but detectable HIV ribonucleic acid (RNA); established HIV infection was defined as a repeatedly reactive antigen-antibody test result and a positive HIV-1/HIV-2 antibody differentiation assay or Western blot result. The primary outcomes were the number of new HIV diagnoses and proportion of patients with laboratory-defined acute HIV infection. Secondary outcomes compared reason for visit and the clinical presentation of acute HIV infection. RESULTS: In total, 214,524 patients were screened for HIV and 839 (0.4%) received a new diagnosis, of which 122 (14.5%) were acute HIV infection and 717 (85.5%) were established HIV infection. Compared with patients with established HIV infection, those with acute HIV infection were younger, had higher RNA and CD4 counts, and were more likely to have viral syndrome (41.8% versus 6.5%) or fever (14.3% versus 3.4%) as their reason for visit. Most patients with acute HIV infection displayed symptoms attributable to acute infection (median symptom count 5 [interquartile range 3 to 6]), with fever often accompanied by greater than or equal to 3 other symptoms (60.7%). CONCLUSION: ED screening using antigen-antibody tests identifies previously undiagnosed HIV infection at proportions that exceed the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's screening threshold, with the added yield of identifying acute HIV infection in approximately 15% of patients with a new diagnosis. Patients with acute HIV infection often seek ED care for symptoms related to seroconversion.

Continuum of Care for Hepatitis C Virus Among Patients Diagnosed in the Emergency Department Setting.

BACKGROUND.: Urban emergency departments (EDs) seem to be able to detect new hepatitis C virus (HCV) infections at a high rate, but it is unknown the extent to which individuals screened in the ED can progress to treatment and cure. We evaluate the HCV Continuum of Care for patients identified with HCV in 2 urban EDs, and consider the results in the context of outcomes from ambulatory screening venues where 2%-10% of chronically infected patients are treated. METHODS.: This is a multicenter, retrospective cohort study of 2 ED HCV screening programs. Patients who screened HCV antibody reactive between 1 May and 31 October 2014 were followed for up to 18 months. The main outcome was the absolute number and proportion of eligible patients who completed each stage of the HCV Continuum of Care. RESULTS.: A total of 3704 ED patients were estimated to have undiagnosed HCV infection, and screening identified 532 (14.4%) HCV antibody-reactive patients. Of the 532 HCV antibody-reactive patients, 435 completed viral load testing (82%), of whom 301 (69%) were chronically infected. Of the 301 chronically infected patients, 158 had follow-up arranged (52%), of whom 97 attended their appointment (61%). Of these 97, 24 began treatment (25%), and 19 of these 24 achieved sustained virological response (79%). CONCLUSIONS.: Urban EDs serve patients with poor access to preventive care services who have a high prevalence of HCV infection. Because ED patients identified with HCV infection can progress to treatment and cure with rates comparable to ambulatory care settings, implementation of ED HCV screening should be expanded.

Evolutionary conservation of candidate osmoregulation genes in plant phloem sap-feeding insects.

The high osmotic pressure generated by sugars in plant phloem sap is reduced in phloem-feeding aphids by sugar transformations and facilitated water flux in the gut. The genes mediating these osmoregulatory functions have been identified and validated empirically in the pea aphid Acyrthosiphon pisum: sucrase 1 (SUC1), a sucrase in glycoside hydrolase family 13 (GH13), and aquaporin 1 (AQP1), a member of the Drosophila integral protein (DRIP) family of aquaporins. Here, we describe molecular analysis of GH13 and AQP genes in phloem-feeding representatives of the four phloem-feeding groups: aphids (Myzus persicae), coccids (Planococcus citri), psyllids (Diaphorina citri, Bactericera cockerelli) and whiteflies (Bemisia tabaci MEAM1 and MED). A single candidate GH13-SUC gene and DRIP-AQP gene were identified in the genome/transcriptome of most insects tested by the criteria of sequence motif and gene expression in the gut. Exceptionally, the psyllid Ba. cockerelli transcriptome included a gut-expressed Pyrocoelia rufa integral protein (PRIP)-AQP, but has no DRIP-AQP transcripts, suggesting that PRIP-AQP is recruited for osmoregulatory function in this insect. This study indicates that phylogenetically related SUC and AQP genes may generally mediate osmoregulatory functions in these diverse phloem-feeding insects, and provides candidate genes for empirical validation and development as targets for osmotic disruption of pest species.

Results of a Rapid Hepatitis C Virus Screening and Diagnostic Testing Program in an Urban Emergency Department.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: We describe the results of an emergency department (ED) hepatitis C virus testing program that integrated birth cohort screening and screening of patients with a history of injection drug use, as well as physician diagnostic testing, according to national guidelines. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using data collected as part of clinical care. The primary outcome was the hepatitis C virus prevalence among tested patients. We evaluated factors associated with testing positive with logistic regression. RESULTS: Of the 26,639 unique adults aged 18 years or older and presenting to the ED during the 6-month study, 2,581 (9.7%) completed hepatitis C virus screening (2,028) or diagnostic testing (553), of whom 267 were antibody positive (10.3% prevalence). Factors associated with testing positive for hepatitis C virus included injection drug use (38.4% prevalence; odds ratio [OR] 10.8; 95% confidence interval [CI] 7.5 to 15.5), homeless (25.5% prevalence; OR 3.1; 95% CI 1.5 to 6.8), diagnostic testing (14.8% prevalence; OR 2.6; 95% CI 1.7 to 3.9), birth cohort (13.7% prevalence; OR 3.6; 95% CI 2.4 to 5.3), and male sex (12.4% prevalence; OR 1.4; 95% CI 1.0 to 2.0). Of the 267 patients testing positive for hepatitis C virus antibody, 137 (51%) had documentation of result disclosure and 180 (67%) had confirmatory ribonucleic acid testing performed, of whom 126 (70%) had a positive result. Follow-up appointments at the hepatitis C virus clinic were arranged for 57 of the 126 (45%) patients with confirmed positive results, of which 30 attended. CONCLUSION: This ED screening and diagnostic testing program found a high prevalence of hepatitis C virus antibody positivity across all groups. Challenges encountered with hepatitis C virus screening included result disclosure, confirmatory testing, and linkage to care. Our results warrant continued efforts to develop and evaluate policies for ED-based hepatitis C virus screening.

High-impact hepatitis C virus testing for injection drug users in an urban ED.

OBJECTIVES: We implemented the "High-Impact Testing for Injection Drug Users", or the "HIT IDU" initiative, an emergency physician (EP)-based hepatitis C virus (HCV) testing program. The objective of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of this clinical protocol. METHODS: This was a prospective observational pilot study. The HIT IDU initiative encouraged EPs to integrate targeted HCV testing into care, with an emphasis on screening all people who inject drugs (PWID). Physicians selected the primary indication for HCV testing from a drop-down menu integrated into the electronic ordering process. The primary outcome was the absolute number and overall proportion of EP-based HCV antibody positive tests, further stratified by the indication for testing. RESULTS: Over the 3-month study period, 14,253 unique patients were evaluated, and EPs tested 155 patients for HCV (1.1%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.9%-1.2%), of which 40 (26%, 95% CI, 19%-33%) were HCV antibody positive. The proportion of HCV antibody positivity by testing indication was as follows: PWID 47% (34/73; 95% CI, 35%-59%), patient requested test 10% (4/40; 95% CI, 3%-24%), confirm patient report 67% (2/3; 95% CI, 9%-99%), liver disease of uncertain etiology 0% (0/3; 95% CI, 0%-71%), and other 0% (0/36; 95% CI, 0%-10%). There were 22 patients chronically infected, 19 had a follow-up appointment arranged, 3 attended their follow-up appointment, and 1 patient was treated at 1 year of follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Although the overall number of EP-based HCV tests performed was low, high rates of infection were identified, particularly among PWID. There were significant challenges with linkage to care.

Differences Between Emergency Nurse Perception and Patient Reported Experience With an ED HIV and Hepatitis C Virus Screening Program.

INTRODUCTION: Nontargeted human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) screening and targeted hepatitis C virus (HCV) screening for selected high-risk patients (those born between 1945 and 1965 and those who report injection drug use) was integrated into our ED triage process and carried out by nurses. Determining whether emergency nurses accurately perceive what patients experience is important to know because staff misperceptions may pose a barrier to program adherence and sustainability. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional survey study of emergency nurses and patients to assess the accuracy of emergency nurses' perception of patient experience with the HIV/HCV screening program. Respondents evaluated their level of agreement using a 5-item Likert scale for 9 statements across 4 domains related to the patient experience with the screening process (satisfaction, sense of autonomy, sense of privacy, and comfort level). RESULTS: Surveys were completed by 65 of the 153 eligible emergency nurses (42%). Of the 1040 patients approached, 610 (59%) were eligible, and 491 of the 610 eligible patients (80%) completed surveys. Across all domains, statistically significant differences were found between emergency nurse perception and patient report, P < .001. Emergency nurses perceived patients to be less satisfied with the screening program, more uncomfortable with being asked screening questions, more concerned about privacy issues, and less likely to feel that the decision to decline screening was autonomous than were patients. DISCUSSION: Emergency nurses not only frequently misperceive how patients experience ED-based HIV/HCV screening, but these misperceptions are skewed toward the negative, representing a type of staff bias. Further research is recommended to determine if such misperceptions adversely affect implementation of screening.

Communicable Disease Screening and Human Immunodeficiency Virus Prevention in the Emergency Department.

Emergency departments (ED) provide care to populations with high rates of communicable diseases, like HIV, hepatitis C virus, and syphilis. For many patients, the ED is their sole entry point into the healthcare system and they do not routinely access screening and prevention services elsewhere. As such, the ED can serve an important public health role through communicable disease identification, treatment, and prevention. In this article, we examine national recommendations, peer-reviewed literature, and expert consensus to provide cutting edge strategies for implementing communicable infectious disease screening and prevention programs into routine ED care.

Outcomes of an Emergency Department Program to Identify and Link Patients at Increased Risk for Acquiring HIV Infection to Outpatient HIV Prevention Services: The HIV PreventED Program.

BACKGROUND: Emergency departments (EDs) provide care to patients at increased risk for acquiring HIV, and for many of them, the ED serves as their sole point of entry into the healthcare system. We implemented the HIV PreventED Program to increase access to HIV prevention services for ED patients. SETTING: ED in Oakland, CA with an annual census of 57,000 visits. METHODS: This cross-sectional study evaluated the first 9 months of the HIV PreventED Program. In this program, a navigator surveyed adult ED patients who tested HIV negative to determine their risk for acquiring HIV infection, incorporating HIV prevention counseling into their assessments. Patients at higher risk for acquiring HIV were referred to outpatient prevention services, if interested. The primary outcome measure was the number and proportion of ED patients at higher risk for acquiring HIV who followed up for outpatient prevention services. RESULTS: In this study, 1233 patients who tested HIV negative were assessed by the navigator and received ED-based HIV prevention counseling. Of these, 193 (15.7%) were identified at higher risk and offered an outpatient referral for prevention services, of which 104 accepted (53.9%), 23 (11.9%) attended the referral, and 13 (6.7%) were prescribed preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP). The median time to linkage was 28 days (interquartile range 15-41 days). CONCLUSION: A navigator focused on providing ED-based HIV prevention counseling and linkage to outpatient services is feasible. Strategies to more efficiently identify ED patients at higher risk for HIV acquisition, such as automated identification of risk data from the electronic health record, and policies to improve follow-up and the receipt of PrEP, such as same-day PrEP initiation, should be prospectively evaluated.

Implementing a Rapid Antiretroviral Therapy Program Using Starter Packs for Emergency Department Patients Diagnosed With HIV Infection.

Background: Emergency departments (ED) have been identified as essential partners in the national plan to end the HIV epidemic. The initiation of rapid antiretroviral therapy (ART) may be an important strategy to minimize the treatment barriers faced by many ED patients diagnosed with HIV. Methods: We describe the implementation and outcomes of a protocol to provide rapid ART by using starter packs for eligible ED patients testing HIV antigen/antibody (Ag/Ab) reactive. Eligible patients were not pregnant, were unlikely to have a false-positive Ag/Ab test result, were discharged home, were ART naive, had acceptable liver and renal function, lacked symptoms of an opportunistic infection, and were judged to be a good candidate. Results: During the 1-year study period, 10 606 HIV tests were performed, and 106 patients were HIV Ag/Ab reactive and assessed for ED rapid ART eligibility. Thirty-one patients (29.2%) were eligible for ED rapid ART; 26 (24.5%) were offered it; and 25 accepted and were provided starter packs for an overall ED rapid ART treatment rate of 23.6%. Two patients receiving ED rapid ART were confirmed to be HIV negative. Patients provided ED rapid ART were more likely to follow up by 30 days (82.6% vs 50.0%, P = .01) than patients not provided ED rapid ART. The 6-month incidence of immune reconstitution inflammatory syndrome was 4.3% among the 23 patients who were HIV positive and receiving ED rapid ART. Conclusions: The initiation of ED rapid ART for patients testing HIV Ag/Ab reactive is feasible, well accepted, and safe and may be an important facilitator of linkage to care.

The Determining Effective Testing in Emergency Departments and Care Coordination on Treatment Outcomes (DETECT) for Hepatitis C (Hep C) Linkage-to-Care Trial: rationale and design of an emergency department-based randomized clinical trial of linkage-to-care strategies for hepatitis C.

BACKGROUND: Hepatitis C (HCV) poses a major public health problem in the USA. While early identification is a critical priority, subsequent linkage to a treatment specialist is a crucial step that bridges diagnosed patients to treatment, cure, and prevention of ongoing transmission. Emergency departments (EDs) serve as an important clinical setting for HCV screening, although optimal methods of linkage-to-care for HCV-diagnosed individuals remain unknown. In this article, we describe the rationale and design of The Determining Effective Testing in Emergency Departments and Care Coordination on Treatment Outcomes (DETECT) for Hepatitis C (Hep C) Linkage-to-Care Trial. METHODS: The DETECT Hep C Linkage-to-Care Trial will be a single-center prospective comparative effectiveness randomized two-arm parallel-group superiority trial to test the effectiveness of linkage navigation and clinician referral among ED patients identified with untreated HCV with a primary hypothesis that linkage navigation plus clinician referral is superior to clinician referral alone when using treatment initiation as the primary outcome. Participants will be enrolled in the ED at Denver Health Medical Center (Denver, CO), an urban, safety-net hospital with approximately 75,000 annual adult ED visits. This trial was designed to enroll a maximum of 280 HCV RNA-positive participants with one planned interim analysis based on methods by O'Brien and Fleming. This trial will further inform the evaluation of cost effectiveness, disparities, and social determinants of health in linkage-to-care, treatment, and disease progression. DISCUSSION: When complete, the DETECT Hep C Linkage-to-Care Trial will significantly inform how best to perform linkage-to-care among ED patients identified with HCV. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT04026867 Original date: July 1, 2019 URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04026867.

Low rate of syphilis screening among high-risk emergency department patients tested for gonorrhea and chlamydia infections.

BACKGROUND: Implementing national recommendations for syphilis screening is not feasible in the emergency department (ED) setting. The purpose of this study was to determine the syphilis screening rate among ED patients tested for gonorrhea and chlamydia (GC/CT) and the syphilis prevalence among those who were tested. METHODS: A 1-year retrospective cohort study in an urban ED. At the time of this study, there were no explicit syphilis screening guidelines and testing was at the discretion of the treating physician. We determined the proportion of all GC/CT-tested patients who also underwent syphilis screening and the prevalence of syphilis among this group. Predictors of syphilis screening among patients tested for GC/CT were identified. RESULTS: GC/CT tests were performed in 3951 (4.7%) of the 83,988 ED visits, of which 332 (8.4%) were reactive. The mean age of GC/CT-tested patients was 22.6 ± 12 years, most were female (67%), black (47%), and English speaking (74%). Syphilis screening was completed in 1218 (31%) of the GC/CT-tested patients, 17 tests (1.4%) were reactive, which included 8 (0.7%) unique patients with newly diagnosed syphilis. In multivariable analysis, the following variables were predictive of syphilis screening: empirical GC/CT treatment (odds ratio [OR]: 1.9, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.6-2.3), evaluation in the low acuity section of the ED (OR: 1.8, 95% CI: 1.4-2.3), a reactive GC/CT test (OR: 1.3, 95% CI: 1.0-1.6), and age ≤25 years (OR: 1.2, 95% CI: 1.0-1.4). CONCLUSION: Among ED patients tested for GC/CT, less than one-third were screened for syphilis. Failure to screen these patients likely resulted in missed opportunities for syphilis diagnosis.

Understanding patient acceptance and refusal of HIV testing in the emergency department.

BACKGROUND: Despite high rates of patient satisfaction with emergency department (ED) HIV testing, acceptance varies widely. It is thought that patients who decline may be at higher risk for HIV infection, thus we sought to better understand patient acceptance and refusal of ED HIV testing. METHODS: In-depth interviews with fifty ED patients (28 accepters and 22 decliners of HIV testing) in three ED HIV testing programs that serve vulnerable urban populations in northern California. RESULTS: Many factors influenced the decision to accept ED HIV testing, including curiosity, reassurance of negative status, convenience, and opportunity. Similarly, a number of factors influenced the decision to decline HIV testing, including having been tested recently, the perception of being at low risk for HIV infection due to monogamy, abstinence or condom use, and wanting to focus on the medical reason for the ED visit. Both accepters and decliners viewed ED HIV testing favorably and nearly all participants felt comfortable with the testing experience, including the absence of counseling. While many participants who declined an ED HIV test had logical reasons, some participants also made clear that they would prefer not to know their HIV status rather than face psychosocial consequences such as loss of trust in a relationship or disclosure of status in hospital or public health records. CONCLUSIONS: Testing for HIV in the ED as for any other health problem reduces barriers to testing for some but not all patients. Patients who decline ED HIV testing may have rational reasons, but there are some patients who avoid HIV testing because of psychosocial ramifications. While ED HIV testing is generally acceptable, more targeted approaches to testing are necessary for this subgroup.

Clinical Utility of the Signal-to-Cutoff Ratio of Reactive HIV Antigen/Antibody Screening Tests in Guiding Emergency Physician Management.

BACKGROUND: The signal-to-cutoff (S/CO) ratio of the HIV antigen/antibody test may help immediately to differentiate true-positive results from false-positive results, which may be particularly useful in time-sensitive circumstances, such as when providing emergency department (ED) care. SETTING: Seven US EDs with HIV screening programs using HIV antigen/antibody assays. METHODS: This cross-sectional study of existing data correlated S/CO ratios with confirmed HIV status. Test characteristics at predetermined S/CO ratios and the S/CO ratio with the best performance by receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve were calculated. RESULTS: Of 1035 patients with a reactive HIV antigen/antibody test, 232 (22.4%) were confirmed HIV-negative and 803 (77.6%) were confirmed HIV-positive. Of the 803 patients, 713 (88.8%) experienced chronic infections and 90 (11.2%) experienced acute infections. S/CO ratios were greater for HIV-positive (median 539.2) than for HIV-negative patients (median 1.93) (P < 0.001) and lower for acute infection (median 22.8) than for chronic infection (median 605.7) (P < 0.001). All patients with an S/CO ratio < 1.58 (n = 93) were HIV-negative (NPV 100%), and nearly all with an S/CO ≥ 20.7 (n = 760) (optimal level by ROC analysis) were HIV-positive (PPV 98.6%). Of patients with S/CO values between 1.58 and 20.7 (n = 182), 29.7% were HIV-positive. CONCLUSIONS: The S/CO ratio may be used in real time to classify most ED patients as almost certain to be either HIV-positive or HIV-negative long before nucleic acid confirmatory testing is available. When combined with clinical judgment, this could guide preliminary result disclosure and management.