Integrating the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) into a Culturally Responsive Evaluation (CRE) Approach to Conduct Mixed-Method Evaluations of Diabetes Prevention and Management Programs Reaching Underresourced Populations and Communities.

Diabetes is a significant population health threat. Evidence-based interventions, such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Diabetes Prevention Program and diabetes self-management education and support programs, can help prevent, delay, or manage the disease. However, participation is suboptimal, especially among populations who are at an increased risk of developing diabetes. Evaluations of programs reaching populations who are medically underserved or people with lower incomes can help elucidate how best to tailor evidence-based interventions, but it is also important for evaluations to account for cultural and contextual factors. Culturally responsive evaluation (CRE) is a framework for centering an evaluation in the culture of the programs being evaluated. We integrated CRE with implementation and outcome constructs from the Adapted Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to ensure that the evaluation produced useful evidence for putting evidence-based diabetes interventions to use in real-world settings, reaching populations who are at an increased risk of developing diabetes. The paper provides an overview of how we integrated CRE and CFIR approaches to conduct mixed-methods evaluations of evidence-based diabetes interventions.

Transforming Restoration Science: Multiple Knowledges and Community Research Cogeneration in the Klamath and Duwamish Rivers.

AbstractRacism and colonialism within restoration science continue to perpetuate exclusionary and oppressive paradigms in ecosystem restoration and in wider societal contexts, from setting scientific agendas to translating findings into policy. These paradigms impair progress and cause harm by (1) tokenizing epistemic diversity, (2) perpetuating injustice in frontline communities by ignoring power dynamics and other local contexts, and (3) rejecting "unconventional" methods for connecting knowledge to action. To challenge exclusion, biological scientists must listen to path-making conversations in Native American and Indigenous studies on grounded normativity, an ethical framework informed by place-based practices that make respectful, nonexploitative coexistence between human and nonhuman communities possible. Rather than treat Western science as the objective arbiter of truth, Indigenous and feminist science approaches can draw on multiple sciences to design restoration interventions and unsettle power dynamics and historical legacies in the biological sciences. We put these approaches into practice and discuss the methodologies and outcomes of two restoration projects, one on the Duwamish River and one on the Klamath River. We use the lessons learned to discuss how scientists in all biological fields can prevent harmful inequities in restoration work while building capacity in and supporting crucial work by frontline communities.

Sensory-Based Interventions for Adults with Dementia and Alzheimer's Disease: A Scoping Review.

The purpose of this review was to explore the effectiveness of sensory-based interventions for clients with dementia and Alzheimer's disease living in residential facilities. Nine databases and key sources were searched from 2002 to September 2017. Forty-seven articles met the inclusion criteria. There was strong evidence for use of massage. There was moderate evidence for occupationally and environmentally based multisensory activities including light, gardening, mealtime, music, Montessori, animal assisted therapy, dance, and yoga interventions. There was inconclusive evidence for aromatherapy, art, Snoezelen rooms, and combined visual and auditory interventions. Future research should focus on defining protocols for efficacious interventions.

Hepatitis C virus testing for case identification in persons born during 1945-1965: Results from three randomized controlled trials.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and US Preventive Services Task Force recommend one-time hepatitis C virus (HCV) testing for persons born during 1945-1965 (birth cohort). However, few studies estimate the effect of birth cohort (BC) testing implementation on HCV diagnoses in primary care settings. We aimed to determine the probability of identifying HCV infections in primary care using targeted BC testing compared with usual care at three academic medical centers. From December 2012 to March 2014, each center compared one of three distinct interventions with usual care using an independently designed randomized controlled trial. Across centers, BC patients with no clinical documentation of previous HCV testing or diagnosis were randomly assigned to receive a one-time offering of HCV antibody (anti-HCV) testing via one of three independent implementation strategies (repeated-mailing outreach, electronic medical record-integrated provider best practice alert [BPA], and direct patient solicitation) or assigned to receive usual care. We estimated model-adjusted risk ratios (aRR) of anti-HCV-positive (anti-HCV+) identification using BC testing versus usual care. In the repeated mailing trial, 8992 patients (intervention, n = 2993; control, n = 5999) were included in the analysis. The intervention was eight times as likely to identify anti-HCV+ patients compared with controls (aRR, 8.0; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.8-23.0; adjusted probabilities: intervention, 0.27%; control, 0.03%). In the BPA trial, data from 14,475 patients (BC, n = 8928; control, n = 5,547) were analyzed. The intervention was 2.6 times as likely to identify anti-HCV+ patients versus controls (aRR, 2.6; 95% CI, 1.1-6.4; adjusted probabilities: intervention, 0.29%; control, 0.11%). In the patient-solicitation trial, 8873 patients (BC, n = 4307; control, n = 4566) were analyzed. The intervention was five times as likely to identify anti-HCV+ patients compared with controls (aRR, 5.3; 95% CI, 2.3-12.3; adjusted probabilities: intervention, 0.68%; control, 0.11%). Conclusion: BC testing was effective in identifying previously undiagnosed HCV infections in primary care settings. (Hepatology 2018;67:524-533).

The Importance of Addressing Depression and Diabetes Distress in Adults with Type 2 Diabetes.

People with type 2 diabetes often experience two common mental health conditions: depression and diabetes distress. Both increase a patient's risk for mortality, poor disease management, diabetes-related complications, and poor quality of life. The American Diabetes Association and the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommend routine evaluations for these conditions in adults for optimal disease management and prevention of life-threatening complications. However, barriers exist within primary care and specialty settings that make screening for depression and diabetes distress challenging. Depression and diabetes distress influence diabetes self-care and diabetes control and barriers in clinical care practice that can hinder detection and management of psychosocial issues in diabetes care. This paper highlights opportunities to increase mental health screenings and provides strategies to help providers address depression and diabetes distress in patients with type 2 diabetes.

The Diabetes Prevention Impact Tool Kit: An Online Tool Kit to Assess the Cost-Effectiveness of Preventing Type 2 Diabetes.

The National Diabetes Prevention Program lifestyle change program demonstrated health benefits and potential for health care cost-savings. For many states, employers, and insurers, there is a strong business case for paying for type 2 diabetes prevention, which will likely result in medical and nonmedical cost-savings as well as improved quality of life after a few years. Using an iterative feedback process with multiple stakeholders, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention developed the Diabetes Prevention Impact Tool kit, https://nccd.cdc.gov/toolkit/diabetesimpact, which forecasts the cost impact the lifestyle change program can have for states, employers, and health insurers. We conducted key informant interviews and a qualitative analysis to evaluate the tool kit. We found that end users recognized its utility for decision making. They valued the detail of the tool kit's underlying calculations and appreciated the option of either using the default settings or revising assumptions based on their own data. The Diabetes Prevention Impact Tool kit can be a helpful tool for organizations that wish to forecast the economic costs and benefits of implementing or covering the National Diabetes Prevention Program lifestyle change program.

Uptake of hepatitis C screening, characteristics of patients tested, and intervention costs in the BEST-C study.

From December 2012 to March 2014, three randomized trials, each implementing a unique intervention in primary care settings (repeated mailing, an electronic health record best practice alert [BPA], and patient solicitation), evaluated hepatitis C virus (HCV) antibody testing, diagnosis, and costs for each of the interventions compared with standard-of-care testing. Multilevel multivariable models were used to estimate the adjusted risk ratio (aRR) for receiving an HCV antibody test, and costs were estimated using activity-based costing. The goal of this study was to estimate the effects of interventions conducted as part of the Birth-Cohort Evaluation to Advance Screening and Testing for Hepatitis C study on HCV testing and costs among persons of the 1945-1965 birth cohort (BC). Intervention resulted in substantially higher HCV testing rates compared with standard-of-care testing (26.9% versus 1.4% for repeated mailing, 30.9% versus 3.6% for BPA, and 63.5% versus 2.0% for patient solicitation) and significantly higher aRR for testing after controlling for sex, birth year, race, insurance type, and median household income (19.2 [95% confidence interval (CI), 9.7-38.2] for repeated mailing, 13.2 [95% CI, 3.6-48.6] for BPA, and 32.9 [95% CI, 19.3-56.1] for patient solicitation). The BPA intervention had the lowest incremental cost per completed test ($24 with fixed startup costs, $3 without) and also the lowest incremental cost per new case identified after omitting fixed startup costs ($1691). CONCLUSION: HCV testing interventions resulted in an increase in BC testing compared with standard-of-care testing but also increased costs. The effect size and incremental costs of BPA intervention (excluding startup costs) support more widespread adoption compared with the other interventions. (Hepatology 2017;65:44-53).

Medical Expenditures Associated With Diabetes Among Adult Medicaid Enrollees in Eight States.

INTRODUCTION: Little information is available on state-specific financial burdens of diabetes in the Medicaid population, yet such information is essential for state Medicaid programs to plan diabetes care and evaluate the benefits of diabetes prevention. We estimated medical expenditures associated with diabetes among adult Medicaid enrollees in 8 states. METHODS: We analyzed the latest available 2012 CMS Medicaid claims data for 1,193,811 adult enrollees aged 19-64 years in 8 states: Alabama, California, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Iowa, New York, and Oklahoma. For each state, we stratified the study population by Medicaid eligibility criteria: disability and nondisability. For each group, we estimated per capita annual medical expenditures on outpatient care, inpatient care, and prescription drugs by using a 2-part model, adjusted for age, sex, race/ethnicity, and comorbidities. We calculated the expenditures associated with diabetes as the difference in predicted expenditures for enrollees with and without diabetes. Analyses were done in 2017. RESULTS: For disability-based enrollees, the estimated total per capita annual diabetes expenditures ranged from $6,183 in Alabama to $15,319 in New York (all P < .001). For nondisability-based enrollees, the corresponding estimates ranged from $4,985 in Alabama to $15,366 in New York (all P < .001). The proportion of individual components varied by state and eligibility criteria. CONCLUSION: Medical expenditures associated with diabetes among adults on Medicaid were substantial and varied across studied states. Our estimates can be used by the 8 state Medicaid programs to prepare health care resources needed for diabetes care and assess the financial benefits of diabetes prevention programs.

An Electronic Health Record-based Intervention to Promote Hepatitis C Virus Testing Among Adults Born Between 1945 and 1965: A Cluster-randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommends one-time hepatitis C virus (HCV) antibody testing for "Birth Cohort" adults born during 1945-1965. OBJECTIVE: To examine the impact of an electronic health record (EHR)-embedded best practice alert (BPA) for HCV testing among Birth Cohort adults. DESIGN: Cluster-randomized trial was conducted from April 29, 2013 to March 29, 2014. SUBJECTS AND SETTING: Ten community and hospital-based primary care practices. Participants were attending physicians and medical residents during 25,620 study-eligible visits. INTERVENTION: Physicians in all practices received a brief introduction to the CDC testing recommendations. At visits for eligible patients at intervention sites, physicians received a BPA through the EHR to order HCV testing or medical assistants were prompted to post a testing order for the physician. Physicians in control sites did not receive the BPA. MAIN OUTCOMES: HCV testing; the incidence of HCV antibody positive tests was a secondary outcome. RESULTS: Testing rates were greater among Birth Cohort patients in intervention sites (20.2% vs. 1.8%, P<0.0001) and the odds of testing were greater in intervention sites after controlling for imbalances of patient and visit characteristics between comparison groups [odds ratio (OR), 9.0; 95% confidence interval, 7.6-10.7). The adjusted OR of identifying HCV antibody positive patients was also greater in intervention sites (OR, 2.1; 95% confidence interval, 1.3-11.2). CONCLUSIONS: An EHR-embedded BPA markedly increased HCV testing among Birth Cohort patients, but the majority of eligible patients did not receive testing indicating a need for more effective methods to promote uptake.

Clinical-Community Partnerships to Identify Patients With Food Insecurity and Address Food Needs.

INTRODUCTION: More than 42 million people in the United States are food insecure. Although some health care entities are addressing food insecurity among patients because of associations with disease risk and management, little is known about the components of these initiatives. METHODS: The Systematic Screening and Assessment Method was used to conduct a landscape assessment of US health care entity-based programs that screen patients for food insecurity and connect them with food resources. A network of food insecurity researchers, experts, and practitioners identified 57 programs, 22 of which met the inclusion criteria of being health care entities that 1) screen patients for food insecurity, 2) link patients to food resources, and 3) target patients including adults aged 50 years or older (a focus of this assessment). Data on key features of each program were abstracted from documentation and telephone interviews. RESULTS: Most programs (n = 13) focus on patients with chronic disease, and most (n = 12) partner with food banks. Common interventions include referrals to or a list of food resources (n = 19), case managers who navigate patients to resources (n = 15), assistance with federal benefit applications (n = 14), patient education and skill building (n = 13), and distribution of fruit and vegetable vouchers redeemable at farmers markets (n = 8). Most programs (n = 14) routinely screen all patients. CONCLUSION: The programs reviewed use various strategies to screen patients, including older adults, for food insecurity and to connect them to food resources. Research is needed on program effectiveness in improving patient outcomes. Such evidence can be used to inform the investments of potential stakeholders, including health care entities, community organizations, and insurers.

Implementation of Birth-Cohort Testing for Hepatitis C Virus.

Hepatitis C virus infection affects approximately 2.2 to 3.2 million Americans. In 2012, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommended a one-time antibody test of all persons belonging to the 1945-1965 birth cohort. Efforts to implement this recommendation in clinical settings are in their infancy; this case study report therefore seeks to share the experiences of three sites that implemented interventions to increase birth-cohort testing through participation in the Birth-cohort Evaluation to Advance Screening and Testing for Hepatitis C. At each site, project managers completed standardized questionnaires about their implementation experiences, and a qualitative analysis was conducted of the responses. The testing interventions used in-person recruitment, mail recruitment, and an electronic health record prompt. Sites reported that early efforts to obtain stakeholder buy-in were critical to effectively implement and sustain interventions and that the intervention required additional staffing resources beyond those being used for risk-based testing. In each case, administrative barriers were more extensive than anticipated. For the electronic health record-based intervention, technological support was critical in achieving study goals. Despite these barriers, interventions in all sites were successful in increasing rates of testing and case identification, although future studies will need to evaluate the relative costs and benefits of each intervention.

No Differences in Achieving Hepatitis C Virus Care Milestones Between Patients Identified by Birth Cohort or Risk-Based Screening.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: National hepatitis C virus (HCV) screening guidelines recommended 1-time testing of persons born between 1945 and 1965. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study to compare care milestones achieved by HCV-infected patients identified by birth cohort versus risk-based screens. RESULTS: We determined the proportions of patients newly identified with HCV infection who met care milestones (viral load, referral to and evaluation by a specialist, offer of treatment, initiation of treatment, and sustained viral response) and the time it took to reach them. We found no differences in HCV care milestones for patients identified via birth cohort testing versus risk-based screening. Overall, only 43% of HCV antibody-positive patients were referred to care, and less than 4% started treatment. The time to each care milestone was lengthy and varied greatly; treatment was initiated in a median of 308 days. CONCLUSIONS: Although birth cohort testing will likely increase identification of patients with HCV infection, it does not seem to increase the number of patients that meet management milestones. New methods are needed to increase access to care and establish efficient models of health care delivery.

The cost-effectiveness, health benefits, and financial costs of new antiviral treatments for hepatitis C virus.

BACKGROUND: New hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatments deliver higher cure rates with fewer contraindications, increasing demand for treatment and healthcare costs. The cost-effectiveness of new treatments is unknown. METHODS: We conducted a microsimulation of guideline testing followed by alternative treatment regimens for HCV among the US population aged 20 and older to estimate cases identified, treated, sustained viral response, deaths, medical costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of different treatment options expressed as discounted lifetime costs and benefits from the healthcare perspective. RESULTS: Compared to treatment with pegylated interferon and ribavirin (PR), and a protease inhibitor for HCV genotype (G) 1 and PR alone for G2/3, treatment with PR and Sofosbuvir (PRS) for G1/4 and treatment with Sofosbuvir and ribavirin (SR) for G2/3 increased QALYs by 555 226, reduced deaths by 80 682, and increased costs by $26.2 billion at an ICER of $47 304 per QALY gained. As compared to PRS/SR, treating with an all oral regimen of Sofosbuvir and Simeprevir (SS) for G1/4 and SR for G2/3, increased QALYs by 1 110 451 and reduced deaths by an additional 164 540 at an incremental cost of $80.1 billion and an ICER of $72 169. In sensitivity analysis, where treatment with SS effectiveness was set to the list price of Viekira Pak and then Harvoni, treatment cost $24 921 and $25 405 per QALY gained as compared to PRS/SR. CONCLUSIONS: New treatments are cost-effectiveness per person treated, but pent-up demand for treatment may create challenges for financing.

Hepatitis C virus antibody positivity and predictors among previously undiagnosed adult primary care outpatients: cross-sectional analysis of a multisite retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Hepatitis C virus (HCV) testing guidance issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in 1998 recommends HCV antibody (anti-HCV) testing for persons with specified risk factors. The purpose of this study was to determine the prevalence and predictors of anti-HCV positivity among primary care outpatients and estimate the proportion of unidentified anti-HCV-positive (anti-HCV+) persons using risk-based testing. METHODS: We analyzed electronic medical record data from a 4-site retrospective study. Patients were aged ≥18 years, utilized ≥1 outpatient primary care service(s) between 2005 and 2010, and had no documented evidence of prior HCV diagnosis. Among persons tested for anti-HCV, we fit a multilevel logistic regression model to identify patient-level independent predictors of anti-HCV positivity. We estimated the proportion of unidentified anti-HCV+ persons by using multiple imputation to assign anti-HCV results to untested patients. RESULTS: We observed 209 076 patients for a median of 5 months (interquartile range, 1-23 months). Among 17 464 (8.4%) patients who were tested for anti-HCV, 6.4% (n=1115) were positive. We identified history of injection drug use (adjusted odds ratio [95% confidence interval], 6.3 [5.2-7.6]), 1945-1965 birth cohort (4.4 [3.8-5.1]), and elevated alanine aminotransferase levels (4.8 [4.2-5.6]) as independently associated with anti-HCV positivity. We estimated that 81.5% (n=4890/6005) of anti-HCV+ patients were unidentified using risk-based testing. CONCLUSIONS: In these outpatient primary care settings, risk-based testing may have missed 4 of 5 newly enrolled patients who are anti-HCV+. Without knowing their status, unidentified anti-HCV+ persons cannot receive further clinical evaluation or antiviral treatment, and are unlikely to benefit from secondary prevention recommendations to limit disease progression and mortality.

A Birth-cohort testing intervention identified hepatitis c virus infection among patients with few identified risks: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: International guidelines and U.S. guidelines prior to 2012 only recommended testing for hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection among patients at risk, but adherence to guidelines is poor, and the majority of those infected remain undiagnosed. A strategy to perform one-time testing of all patients born during 1945-1965, birth cohort testing, may diagnose HCV infection among patients whose risk remains unknown. We sought to determine if a birth-cohort testing intervention for HCV antibody positivity helped identify patients with fewer documented risk factors or medical indications than a pre-intervention, risk-based testing strategy. METHODS: We used a cross-sectional design with retrospective electronic medical record review to examine patients identified with HCV antibody positivity (Ab+) during a pre-intervention (risk-based) phase, the standard of care at the time, vs. a birth-cohort testing intervention phase. We compared demographic and clinical characteristics and HCV risk-associated factors among patients whose HCV Ab + was identified during the pre-intervention (risk-based testing) vs. post birth-cohort intervention phases. Study subjects were patients identified as HCV-Ab + in the baseline (risk-based) and birth-cohort testing phases of the Hepatitis C Assessment and Testing (HepCAT) Project. RESULTS: Compared to the risk-based phase, patients newly diagnosed with HCV Ab + after the birth-cohort intervention were significantly less likely to have a history of any substance abuse (30.5% vs. 49.5%, p = 0.02), elevated alanine transaminase levels of > 40 U/L (22.0% vs. 46.7%, p = 0.002), or the composite any risk-associated factor (55.9% vs. 79.0%, p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Birth-cohort testing is an useful strategy for identifying previously undiagnosed HCV Ab + because it does not require providers ask risk-based questions, or patients to disclose risk behaviors, and appears to identify HCV Ab + in patients who would not have been identified using a risk-based testing strategy.

Targeted hepatitis C antibody testing interventions: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Testing for hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection may reduce the risk of liver-related morbidity, by facilitating earlier access to treatment and care. This review investigated the effectiveness of targeted testing interventions on HCV case detection, treatment uptake, and prevention of liver-related morbidity. A literature search identified studies published up to 2013 that compared a targeted HCV testing intervention (targeting individuals or groups at increased risk of HCV) with no targeted intervention, and results were synthesised using meta-analysis. Exposure to a targeted testing intervention, compared to no targeted intervention, was associated with increased cases detected [number of studies (n) = 14; pooled relative risk (RR) 1.7, 95% CI 1.3, 2.2] and patients commencing therapy (n = 4; RR 3.3, 95% CI 1.1, 10.0). Practitioner-based interventions increased test uptake and cases detected (n = 12; RR 3.5, 95% CI 2.5, 4.8; and n = 10; RR 2.2, 95% CI 1.4, 3.5, respectively), whereas media/information-based interventions were less effective (n = 4; RR 1.5, 95% CI 0.7, 3.0; and n = 4; RR 1.3, 95% CI 1.0, 1.6, respectively). This meta-analysis provides for the first time a quantitative assessment of targeted HCV testing interventions, demonstrating that these strategies were effective in diagnosing cases and increasing treatment uptake. Strategies involving practitioner-based interventions yielded the most favourable outcomes. It is recommended that testing should be targeted at and offered to individuals who are part of a population with high HCV prevalence, or who have a history of HCV risk behaviour.

Hepatitis C virus testing perspectives among primary care physicians in four large primary care settings.

BACKGROUND: In 1998, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) published Recommendations for Prevention and Control of Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Infection and HCV-Related Chronic Disease, recommending HCV testing for populations most likely to be infected with HCV. However, the implementation of risk-based screening has not been widely adopted in health care settings, and 45% to 85% of infected U.S. adults remain unidentified. OBJECTIVES: To develop a better understanding of why CDC's 1998 recommendations have had limited success in identifying persons with HCV infection and provide information about how CDC's 2012 Recommendations for the Identification of Chronic Hepatitis C Virus Infection Among Persons Born During 1945-1965 may be implemented more effectively. DESIGN: Qualitative data were collected and analyzed from a multidisciplinary team as part of the Birth Cohort Evaluation to Advance Screening and Testing for Hepatitis C project. RESPONDENTS: Nineteen providers were asked open-ended questions to identify current perspectives, practices, facilitators, and barriers to HCV screening and testing. Providers were affiliated with Henry Ford Hospital, Mount Sinai Hospital, the University of Alabama, and the University of Texas Health Science Center. RESULTS: Respondents reported the complexity of the 1998 recommendations, and numerous indicated risk factors were major barriers to effective implementation. Other hindrances to hepatitis C testing included physician discomfort in asking questions about socially undesirable behaviors and physician uncertainty about patient insurance coverage. CONCLUSION: Implementation of the CDC's 2012 recommendations could be more successful than the 1998 recommendations due to their relative simplicity; however, effective strategies need to be used for dissemination and implementation for full success.

Previous exposure to HCV among persons born during 1945-1965: prevalence and predictors, United States, 1999-2008.

OBJECTIVES: We examined HCV exposure prevalence and predictors among persons in the United States born during 1945-1965. METHODS: With data from the 1999-2008 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, we calculated the proportion of persons born during 1945-1965 who tested positive for HCV antibody (anti-HCV) and analyzed the prevalence by sociodemographic and behavioral risk factors. RESULTS: Anti-HCV prevalence in the 1945-1965 birth cohort was 3.2% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.8%, 3.8%), substantially higher than among other adults (0.9%). Within the cohort, anti-HCV prevalence was higher among non-Hispanic Blacks (6.4%; 95% CI = 5.3%, 7.7%), persons with injection drug use histories (56.8%; 95% CI = 48.4%, 64.8%), and persons with elevated alanine aminotransferase levels (12.7%; 95% CI = 10.7%, 15.1%). Injection drug use (adjusted odds ratio = 98.4; 95% CI = 58.8, 164.5) was the strongest anti-HCV prevalence predictor. Among anti-HCV-positive persons, 57.8% reported having 2 or more alcoholic drinks daily. CONCLUSIONS: With the high prevalence of HCV among persons born during 1945-1965, the increasing morbidity and mortality associated with HCV, and reductions in liver cancer and HCV-related mortality when HCV is eradicated, it is critically important to identify persons with HCV and link them to appropriate care.

Eradication of hepatitis C virus infection and the development of hepatocellular carcinoma: a meta-analysis of observational studies.

BACKGROUND: Hepatitis C virus (HCV) is a leading cause of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). In the United States, this form of cancer occurs in approximately 15 000 persons annually. A systematic review of the evidence is needed to assess the benefits of treatment of HCV-infected persons on development of HCC. PURPOSE: To systematically review observational studies to determine the association between response to HCV therapy and development of HCC among persons at any stage of fibrosis and those with advanced liver disease. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and the Database of Abstracts of Reviews and Effectiveness from inception through February 2012. STUDY SELECTION: English-language observational studies that compared therapy-derived sustained virologic response (SVR) with no response to therapy among HCV-infected persons, targeted an adult population, and had an average follow-up of at least 2 years. DATA EXTRACTION: Two investigators independently extracted data into uniform relative risk measures. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework was used to determine the quality of the evidence. DATA SYNTHESIS: Thirty studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria, and 18 provided adjusted effect estimates that were used to calculate pooled relative risks. Among HCV-infected persons, SVR was associated with reduced risk for HCC (relative risk for all persons, 0.24 [95% CI, 0.18 to 0.31], moderate-quality evidence; advanced liver disease hazard ratio, 0.23 [CI, 0.16 to 0.35], moderate-quality evidence). LIMITATION: In the meta-analyses, some variables could not be controlled for because of the observational design of the included studies. CONCLUSION: Sustained virologic response after treatment among HCV-infected persons at any stage of fibrosis is associated with reduced HCC. The evidence was determined to be of moderate quality.

"To share or not to share?" Serosorting by hepatitis C status in the sharing of drug injection equipment among NHBS-IDU2 participants.

BACKGROUND: Persons who inject drugs (PWID) are at high risk for acquiring hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates there are 17 000 new infections per year, mainly among PWID. This study examines injection equipment serosorting-considering HCV serostatus when deciding whether and with whom to share injection equipment. OBJECTIVE: To examine whether injection equipment serosorting is occurring among PWID in selected cities. METHODS: Using data from the National HIV Behavioral Surveillance System-Injection Drug Users (NHBS-IDU2, 2009), we developed multivariate logistic regression models to examine the extent to which participants' self-reported HCV status is associated with their injection equipment serosorting behavior and knowledge of last injecting partner's HCV status. RESULTS: Participants who knew their HCV status were more likely to know the HCV status of their last injecting partner, compared to those who did not know their status (HCV+: adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 4.1, 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.4-4.9; HCV-: aOR 2.5, 95% CI, 2.0-3.0). Participants who reported being HCV+, relative to those of unknown HCV status, were 5 times more likely to share injection equipment with a partner of HCV-positive status (aOR 4.8, 95% CI, 3.9-6.0). CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis suggests PWID are more likely to share injection equipment with persons of concordant HCV status.