HIV Testing Preferences and Characteristics of Those Who Have Never Tested for HIV in the United States.

BACKGROUND: The initial phase of the federal Ending the HIV Epidemic in the U.S. (EHE) initiative prioritized efforts in 57 geographic areas. The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends persons aged 13 to 64 years be tested for HIV at least once as part of routine health care; however, it is unclear how effectively these testing recommendations have been implemented in EHE priority areas. METHODS: In 2021 to 2022, we analyzed data from a Web-based, nationally representative survey of adults fielded in 2021. HIV testing preferences were compared by testing history, demographic characteristics, behaviors, and geography. RESULTS: An estimated 72.5% of US adults had never tested for HIV. Never testing was most prevalent among those aged 18 to 29 or those 50 years or older, non-Hispanic White persons, and those living in the Midwest. Among persons living in EHE priority areas and persons reporting at least one behavior that increases risk of HIV transmission, 69.1% and 48.0%, respectively, had never tested for HIV. The top 3 HIV testing preferences among never testers were as follows: testing for HIV during a routine health care visit (41.2%), testing at an urgent care or walk-in clinic (9.6%), and self-testing (8.1%). CONCLUSIONS: Most adults had not been tested for HIV, confirming that US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommendations are not being fully implemented, even in EHE priority areas. Moreover, most adults who never tested preferred testing in clinical settings, highlighting missed opportunities. As the EHE initiative continues to advance, it is critical to leverage preferred HIV testing modalities, such as routine testing in clinical settings or HIV self-testing.

Characterizing the Experience of Spasticity after Spinal Cord Injury: A National Survey Project of the Spinal Cord Injury Model Systems Centers.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize the qualities that individuals with spinal cord injury (SCI) associate with their experience of spasticity and to describe the relationship between spasticity and perceived quality of life and the perceived value of spasticity management approaches. DESIGN: Online cross-sectional survey. SETTING: Multicenter collaboration among 6 Spinal Cord Injury Model Systems hospitals in the United States. PARTICIPANTS: Individuals with SCI (N=1076). INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Qualities of Spasticity Questionnaire, modified Spinal Cord Injury-Spasticity Evaluation Tool (mSCI-SET), and the modified Patient-Reported Impact of Spasticity Measure (mPRISM). RESULTS: Respondents indicated that spasms most often occurred in response to movement-related triggering events. However, spontaneous spasms (ie, no triggering event) were also reported to be among the most common types. Frequency of spasms appears to decline with age. The highest frequency of spasms was reported by 56% of respondents aged <25 years and by only 28% of those >55 years. Stiffness associated with spasticity was reported to be more common than spasms (legs, 65% vs 54%; trunk, 33% vs 18%; arms, 26% vs 15%). Respondents reported negative effects of spasticity more commonly than positive effects. Based on their association with negative scores on the mSCI-SET and the mPRISM, the 5 most problematic experiences reported were stiffness all day, interference with sleep, painful spasms, perceived link between spasticity and pain, and intensification of pain before a spasm. Respondents indicated spasticity was improved more by stretching (48%) and exercise (45%) than by antispasmodics (38%). CONCLUSIONS: The experience of spasticity after SCI is complex and multidimensional, with consequences that affect mobility, sleep, comfort, and quality of life. Stiffness, rather than spasms, appears to be the most problematic characteristic of spasticity. Physical therapeutic interventions to treat spasticity warrant in-depth investigation.

Bruise detection and visibility under alternate light during the first three days post-trauma.

INTRODUCTION: Cutaneous bruises are often hard to detect particularly on individuals with a darker complexion. Researchers and federal agencies have recommended the use of alternate light to aide in the assessment of subtle injury. However, studies are limited in their evaluation of wavelength performance during the first few days of bruise healing. The purpose of this pilot study was to examine whether an alternate light source (ALS) improves detection of bruises when compared to normal light typical of clinical practice during the first three days following induction. METHODS: A sample of eight healthy adults between 22 and 36 years of age with diverse skin color were recruited for this study. One bruise was induced on each participant by dropping a 4-oz (113g) steel ball through a 5-ft (1.5 m) vertical pipe onto the anterior surface of the forearm. Using the ALS, bruises were assessed under 14 different combinations of ultraviolet and short narrowband visible wavelengths and filters along with overhead fluorescent "examination" lighting. Participants were examined 3 to 4 times per day at approximately 4-h intervals for three consecutive days post induction. RESULTS: Repeated bruise assessments on 8 subjects resulted in 59 bruise assessments and 885 total observations under the different wavelengths and filters combinations. A bruise was detectable in 46 (78%) of the assessments, with bruise ages ranging from 30 min to 57 h. Twenty (34%) bruises not detectable under normal light were visible with ASL. Multilevel modeling revealed a strong association between time and detection for shorter wavelengths, such as 365 nm (ultraviolet) and 450 nm. CONCLUSION: The results of our study suggest alternate light is more likely to detect faint bruises than normal lighting during the first three days post injury. However, more research is needed to determine which wavelengths and filter combinations are most effective during that time frame.