Risk factors for HIV infection at a large urban emergency department: a cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVES: In 2019, the US Preventative Services Task Force released updated guidelines recommending HIV screening in all individuals aged 15-64 years and all pregnant females. In the current study, we aimed to identify risk factors for HIV infection in an emergency department (ED) population. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional study that employed a post hoc risk factor analysis of ED patients ≥18 years who were screened for HIV between 27 November 2018 and 26 November 2019, at a single urban, quaternary referral academic hospital. Patients were screened using HIV antigen/antibody testing and diagnoses were confirmed using HIV-1/HIV-2 antibody testing. The outcome of interest was the number of positive HIV tests. Multiple logistic regression models were used to identify risk factors associated with HIV positivity. RESULTS: 14 335 adult patients were screened for HIV (mean age: 43±14 years; 52% female). HIV seroprevalence was 0.7%. Independent risk factors for HIV positivity included male sex (adjusted OR (aOR) 3.1 (95% CI 1.7 to 5.6)), unhoused status (aOR 2.9 (95% CI 1.7 to 4.9)), history of illicit drug use (aOR 1.8 (95% CI 1.04 to 3.13)) and Medicare insurance status (aOR 2.2 (95% CI 1.1 to 4.4)). CONCLUSIONS: The study ED services a high-risk population with regard to HIV infection. These data support universal screening of ED patients for HIV. Risk factor profiles could improve targeted screening at institutions without universal HIV testing protocols.

Sexually Transmitted Infection Co-testing in a Large Urban Emergency Department.

Introduction: The incidence of sexually transmitted infections (STI) increased in the United States between 2017-2021. There is limited data describing STI co-testing practices and the prevalence of STI co-infections in emergency departments (ED). In this study, we aimed to describe the prevalence of co-testing and co-infection of HIV, hepatitis C virus (HCV), syphilis, gonorrhea, and chlamydia, in a large, academic ED. Methods: This was a single-center, retrospective cross-sectional study of ED patients tested for HIV, HCV, syphilis, gonorrhea or chlamydia between November 27, 2018-May 26, 2019. In 2018, the study institution implemented an ED-based infectious diseases screening program in which any patient being tested for gonorrhea/chlamydia was eligible for opt-out syphilis screening, and any patient 18-64 years who was having blood drawn for any clinical purpose was eligible for opt-out HIV and HCV screening. We analyzed data from all ED patients ≥13 years who had undergone STI testing. The outcomes of interest included prevalence of STI testing/co-testing and the prevalence of STI infection/co-infection. We describe data with simple descriptive statistics. Results: During the study period there were 30,767 ED encounters for patients ≥13 years (mean age: 43 ± 14 years, 52% female), and 7,866 (26%) were tested for at least one of HIV, HCV, syphilis, gonorrhea, or chlamydia. We observed the following testing frequencies (and prevalence of infection): HCV, 7,539 (5.0%); HIV, 7,359 (0.9%); gonorrhea, 574 (6.1%); chlamydia, 574 (9.8%); and syphilis, 420 (10.5%). Infectious etiologies with universal testing protocols (HIV and HCV) made up the majority of STI testing. In patients with syphilis, co-infection with chlamydia (21%, 9/44) and HIV (9%, 4/44) was high. In patients with gonorrhea, co-infection with chlamydia (23%, 8/35) and syphilis (9%, 3/35) was high, and in patients with chlamydia, co-infection with syphilis (16%, 9/56) and gonorrhea (14%, 8/56) was high. Patients with HCV had low co-infection proportions (<2%). Conclusion: Prevalence of STI co-testing was low among patients with clinical suspicion for STIs; however, co-infection prevalence was high in several co-infection pairings. Future efforts are needed to improve STI co-testing rates among high-risk individuals.

Use of clinical decision support for antibiotic stewardship in the emergency department and outpatient clinics: An interrupted time-series analysis.

Objective: To evaluate the impact of implementing clinical decision support (CDS) tools for outpatient antibiotic prescribing in the emergency department (ED) and clinic settings. Design: We performed a before-and-after, quasi-experimental study that employed an interrupted time-series analysis. Setting: The study institution was a quaternary, academic referral center in Northern California. Participants: We included prescriptions for patients in the ED and 21 primary-care clinics within the same health system. Intervention: We implemented a CDS tool for azithromycin on March 1, 2020, and a CDS tool for fluoroquinolones (FQs; ie, ciprofloxacin, levofloxacin, and moxifloxacin) on November 1, 2020. The CDS added friction to inappropriate ordering workflows while adding health information technology (HIT) features to easily perform recommended actions. The primary outcome was the number of monthly prescriptions for each antibiotic type, by implementation period (before vs after). Results: Immediately after azithromycin-CDS implementation, monthly rates of azithromycin prescribing decreased significantly in both the ED (-24%; 95% CI, -37% to -10%; P < .001) and outpatient clinics (-47%; 95% CI, -56% to -37%; P < .001). In the first month after FQ-CDS implementation in the clinics, there was no significant drop in ciprofloxacin prescriptions; however, there was a significant decrease in ciprofloxacin prescriptions over time (-5% per month; 95% CI, -6% to -3%; P < .001), suggesting a delayed effect of the CDS. Conclusion: Implementing CDS tools was associated with an immediate decrease in azithromycin prescriptions, in both the ED and clinics. CDS may serve as a valuable adjunct to existing antimicrobial stewardship programs.

Patient and researcher stakeholder preferences for use of electronic health record data: a qualitative study to guide the design and development of a platform to honor patient preferences.

OBJECTIVE: This qualitative study aimed to understand patient and researcher perspectives regarding consent and data-sharing preferences for research and a patient-centered system to manage consent and data-sharing preferences. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted focus groups with patient and researcher participants recruited from three academic health centers via snowball sampling. Discussions focused on perspectives on the use of electronic health record (EHR) data for research. Themes were identified through consensus coding, starting from an exploratory framework. RESULTS: We held two focus groups with patients (n = 12 patients) and two with researchers (n = 8 researchers). We identified two patient themes (1-2), one theme common to patients and researchers (3), and two researcher themes (4-5). Themes included (1) motivations for sharing EHR data, (2) perspectives on the importance of data-sharing transparency, (3) individual control of personal EHR data sharing, (4) how EHR data benefits research, and (5) challenges researchers face using EHR data. DISCUSSION: Patients expressed a tension between the benefits of their data being used in studies to benefit themselves/others and avoiding risk by limiting data access. Patients resolved this tension by acknowledging they would often share their data but wanted greater transparency on its use. Researchers expressed concern about incorporating bias into datasets if patients opted out. CONCLUSIONS: A research consent and data-sharing platform must consider two competing goals: empowering patients to have more control over their data and maintaining the integrity of secondary data sources. Health systems and researchers should increase trust-building efforts with patients to engender trust in data access and use.

The Personal Health Network Mobile App for Chemotherapy Care Coordination: Qualitative Evaluation of a Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Cancer care coordination addresses the fragmented and inefficient care of individuals with complex care needs. The complexity of care coordination can be aided by innovative technology. Few examples of information technology-enabled care coordination exist beyond the conventional telephone follow-up. For this study, we implemented a custom-designed app, the Personal Health Network (PHN)-a Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant social network built around a patient to enable patient-centered health and health care activities in collaboration with clinicians, care team members, caregivers, and others designated by the patient. The app facilitates a care coordination intervention for patients undergoing chemotherapy. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to understand patient experiences with PHN technology and assess their perspectives on the usability and usefulness of PHNs with care coordination during chemotherapy. METHODS: A two-arm randomized clinical trial was conducted to compare the PHN and care coordination with care coordination alone over a 6-month period beginning with the initiation of chemotherapy. A semistructured interview guide was constructed based on a theoretical framework of technology acceptance addressing usefulness, usability, and the context of use of the technology within the participant's life and health care setting. All participants in the intervention arm were interviewed on completion of the study. Interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. A summative thematic analysis was completed for the transcribed interviews. Features of the app were also evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 27 interviews were completed. The resulting themes included the care coordinator as a partner in care, learning while sick, comparison of other technology to make sense of the PHN, communication, learning, usability, and usefulness. Users expressed that the nurse care coordinators were beneficial to them because they helped them stay connected to the care team and answered their questions. They shared that the mobile app gave them access to the health information they were seeking. Users expressed that the mobile app would be more useful if it was fully integrated with the electronic health record. CONCLUSIONS: The findings highlight the value of care coordination from the perspectives of cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy and the important role of technology, such as the PHN, in enhancing this process by facilitating better communication and access to information regarding their illness.