Integrated stepped alcohol treatment for patients with HIV and at-risk alcohol use: a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: At-risk levels of alcohol use threaten the health of patients with HIV (PWH), yet evidence-based strategies to decrease alcohol use and improve HIV-related outcomes in this population are lacking. We examined the effectiveness of integrated stepped alcohol treatment (ISAT) on alcohol use and HIV outcomes among PWH and at-risk alcohol use. METHODS: In this multi-site, randomized trial conducted between January 28, 2013 through July 14, 2017, we enrolled PWH and at-risk alcohol use [defined as alcohol consumption of ≥ 14 drinks per week or ≥ 4 drinks per occasion in men ≤ 65 years old or ≥ 7 drinks per week or ≥ 3 drinks per occasion in women or men > 65 years old]. ISAT (n = 46) involved: Step 1- Brief Negotiated Interview with telephone booster, Step 2- Motivational Enhancement Therapy, and Step 3- Addiction Physician Management. Treatment as usual (TAU) (n = 47) involved receipt of a health handout plus routine care. Analyses were conducted based on intention to treat principles. RESULTS: Despite a multi-pronged approach, we only recruited 37% of the target population (n = 93/254). Among ISAT participants, 50% advanced to Step 2, among whom 57% advanced to Step 3. Participants randomized to ISAT and TAU had no observed difference in drinks per week over the past 30 days at week 24 (primary outcome) [least square means (Ls mean) (95% CI) = 8.8 vs. 10.6; adjusted mean difference (AMD) (95% CI) = - 0.4 (- 3.9, 3.0)]. CONCLUSION: An insufficient number of patients were interested in participating in the trial. Efforts to enhance motivation of PWH with at-risk alcohol use to engage in alcohol-related research and build upon ISAT are needed. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01410123, First posted August 4, 2011.

Integrated stepped alcohol treatment for patients with HIV and liver disease: A randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: There is no known safe level of alcohol use among patients with HIV and liver disease. We examined the effectiveness of integrated stepped alcohol treatment (ISAT) on alcohol use, HIV, and liver outcomes among patients with HIV and liver disease. METHODS: In this multi-site, randomized trial conducted between January 28, 2013 through July 15, 2016, we enrolled 95 patients with HIV and liver disease [defined as having active hepatitis C infection or FIB-4 score > 1.45]. ISAT (n = 49) involved: Step 1- Brief Negotiated Interview with telephone booster, Step 2- Motivational Enhancement Therapy, and Step 3- Addiction Physician Management. Treatment as usual (TAU) (n = 46) involved receipt of a health handout plus routine care. Analyses were conducted based on intention to treat. RESULTS: Among ISAT participants, 55% advanced to Step 2, among whom 70% advanced to Step 3. Participants randomized to ISAT and TAU increased abstinence (primary outcome) over time. Abstinence rates were non-significantly higher by self-report (38% vs. 23%, adjusted odds ratio [AOR] [95% CI] = 2.6 [0.8, 9.0]) and phosphatidylethanol (43% vs. 32%, AOR [95% CI] = 1.8 [0.5, 6.3] among those randomized to ISAT vs. TAU at week 24. VACS Index scores (AMD [95% CI] = 1.1 [-3.2, 5.5]) and the proportion with an undetectable HIV viral load (AOR [95% CI] = 0.3 [0.1, 1.3]) did not differ by group at week 24 (p values >0.05). ISAT had non-significantly lower FIB-4 scores (adjusted mean difference [AMD] [95% CI] = -0.2 [-0.9, 0.5]), ALT (AMD [95% CI] = -7 [-20, 7]) and AST (AMD [95% CI] = -4 [-15, 7]) at week 24 compared to TAU. CONCLUSION: ISAT is feasible and potentially effective at enhancing delivery of evidence-based alcohol treatment to promote alcohol abstinence and improve liver biomarkers among patients with HIV and liver disease.

HIV testing of at risk patients in a large integrated health care system.

OBJECTIVE: Early identification of HIV infection is critical for patients to receive life-prolonging treatment and risk-reduction counseling. Understanding HIV screening practices and barriers to HIV testing is an important prelude to designing successful HIV screening programs. Our objective was to evaluate current practice patterns for identification of HIV. METHODS: We used a retrospective cohort analysis of 13,991 at-risk patients seen at 4 large Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) health-care systems. We also reviewed 1,100 medical records of tested patients. We assessed HIV testing rates among at-risk patients, the rationale for HIV testing, and predictors of HIV testing and of HIV infection. RESULTS: Of the 13,991 patients at risk for HIV, only 36% had been HIV-tested. The prevalence of HIV ranged from 1% to 20% among tested patients at the 4 sites. Approximately 90% of patients who were tested had a documented reason for testing. CONCLUSION: One-half to two-thirds of patients at risk for HIV had not been tested within our selected VA sites. Among tested patients, the rationale for HIV testing was well documented. Further testing of at-risk patients could clearly benefit patients who have unidentified HIV infection by providing earlier access to life-prolonging therapy.