Opportunities for improved indicator-based HIV testing in the hospital setting: a structural equation model analysis.

Indicator condition (IC)-guided HIV testing, i.e., testing when diagnosing a condition associated with HIV, is a feasible and cost-effective testing strategy to identify undiagnosed individuals. Assessing determinants for IC-guided testing may identify opportunities for improvement. A survey study based on the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) was conducted among 163 hospital physicians from five specialties in Amsterdam, the Netherlands. Structural equation models were used to determine the association between the TPB domains (i.e., attitude, belief, norms, self-efficacy and behavioural control) and (1) the intention to test as a mediator for HIV testing behaviour (intentional model) and (2) actual HIV testing behaviour (direct model). Both models accounted for the effect of guideline recommendations. Behaviour scored lower than intention on a five-point scale (mean score of 2.8, SD = 1.6 versus 3.8, SD = 1.1; p<0.0001). The direct model had a better fit than the intentional model based on fit statistics. Discrepancies between the determinants most important for intention versus those for behaviour led to the following recommendations: interventions to improve IC-guided testing in hospitals should primarily focus on implementation of guideline recommendations, followed by improving physicians' attitude towards IC-guided HIV testing and self-efficacy, as these were the most important correlates of actual HIV testing behaviour.

Understanding the effect of an educational intervention to optimize HIV testing strategies in primary care in Amsterdam - results of a mixed-methods study.

BACKGROUND: In the Netherlands, general practitioners (GPs) play a key role in provider-initiated HIV testing, but opportunities for timely diagnosis are regularly missed. We implemented an educational intervention to improve HIV testing by GPs from 2015 to 2020, and observed a 7% increase in testing in an evaluation using laboratory data. The objective for the current study was to gain a deeper understanding of whether and how practices and perceptions of GPs' HIV/sexually transmitted infection (STI) testing behaviour changed following the intervention. METHODS: We performed a mixed-methods study using questionnaires and semi-structured interviews to assess self-reported changes in HIV/STI testing by participating GPs. Questionnaires were completed by participants at the end of the final educational sessions from 2017 through 2020, and participating GPs were interviewed from January through March 2020. Questionnaire data were analysed descriptively, and open question responses were categorised thematically. Interview data were analysed following thematic analysis methods. RESULTS: In total, 101/103 participants completed questionnaires. Of 65 participants that were included in analyses on the self-reported effect of the programme, forty-seven (72%) reported it had changed their HIV/STI testing, including improved STI consultations, adherence to the STI consultation guideline, more proactive HIV testing, and more extragenital STI testing. Patients' risk factors, patients' requests and costs were most important in selecting STI tests ordered. Eight participants were interviewed and 15 themes on improved testing were identified, including improved HIV risk-assessment, more proactive testing for HIV/STI, more focus on HIV indicator conditions and extragenital STI testing, and tools to address HIV during consultations. However, several persistent barriers for optimal HIV/STI testing by GPs were identified, including HIV-related stigma and low perceived risk. CONCLUSIONS: Most GPs reported improved HIV/STI knowledge, attitude and testing, but there was a discrepancy between reported changes in HIV testing and observed increases using laboratory data. Our findings highlight challenges in implementation of effective interventions, and in their evaluation. Lessons learned from this intervention may inform follow-up initiatives to keep GPs actively engaged in HIV testing and care, on our way to zero new HIV infections.

Improving provider-initiated testing for HIV and other STI in the primary care setting in Amsterdam, the Netherlands: Results from a multifaceted, educational intervention programme.

BACKGROUND: In the Netherlands, general practitioners (GPs) play a key role in HIV testing. However, the proportion of people diagnosed with late-stage HIV remains high, and opportunities for earlier diagnosis are being missed. We implemented an educational intervention to improve HIV and STI testing in primary care in Amsterdam, the Netherlands. METHODS: GPs were invited to participate in an educational program between 2015 and 2020, which included repeat sessions using audit and feedback and quality improvement plans. Data on HIV, chlamydia and gonorrhoea testing by GPs were collected from 2011 through 2020. The primary outcome was HIV testing frequency, which was compared between GPs before and after participation using Poisson regression. Secondary outcomes were chlamydia and gonorrhoea testing frequencies, and positive test proportions. Additional analyses stratified by patient sex and age were done. FINDINGS: GPs after participation performed 7% more HIV tests compared to GPs before participation (adjusted relative ratio [aRR] 1.07, 95%CI 1.04-1.09); there was no change in the proportion HIV positive tests (aRR 0.87, 95%CI 0.63-1.19). HIV testing increased most among patients who were female and ≤19 or 50-64 years old. After participation, HIV testing continued to increase (aRR 1.02 per quarter, 95%CI 1.01-1.02). Chlamydia testing by GPs after participation increased by 6% (aRR 1.06, 95%CI 1.05-1.08), while gonorrhoea testing decreased by 2% (aRR 0.98, 95%CI 0.97-0.99). We observed increases specifically in extragenital chlamydia and gonorrhoea testing. CONCLUSIONS: The intervention was associated with a modest increase in HIV testing among GPs after participation, while the proportion positive HIV tests remained stable. Our results suggest that the intervention yielded a sustained effect.

Mapping hematologists' HIV testing behavior among lymphoma patients-A mixed-methods study.

BACKGROUND: HIV testing among patients with malignant lymphoma (PWML) is variably implemented. We evaluated HIV testing among PWML, and mapped factors influencing hematologists' testing behavior. MATERIALS: We conducted a mixed-methods study assessing HIV testing among PWML, factors influencing HIV testing and opportunities for improvement in five hospitals in the region of Amsterdam, the Netherlands. The proportion of PWML tested for HIV within 3 months before or after lymphoma diagnosis and percentage positive were assessed from January 2015 through June 2020. Questionnaires on intention, behavior and psychosocial determinants for HIV testing were conducted among hematologists. Through twelve semi-structured interviews among hematologists and authors of hematology guidelines, we further explored influencing factors and opportunities for improvement. FINDINGS: Overall, 1,612 PWML were included for analysis, including 976 patients newly diagnosed and 636 patients who were referred or with progressive/relapsed lymphoma. Seventy percent (678/976) of patients newly diagnosed and 54% (343/636) of patients with known lymphoma were tested for HIV. Overall, 7/1,021 (0.7%) PWML tested HIV positive, exceeding the 0.1% cost-effectiveness threshold. Questionnaires were completed by 40/77 invited hematologists, and 85% reported intention to test PWML for HIV. In the interviews, hematologists reported varying HIV testing strategies, including testing all PWML or only when lymphoma treatment is required. Recommendations for improved HIV testing included guideline adaptations, providing electronic reminders and monitoring and increasing awareness. CONCLUSIONS: Missed opportunities for HIV testing among PWML occurred and HIV test strategies varied among hematologists. Efforts to improve HIV testing among PWML should include a combination of approaches.

Improving indicator-condition guided testing for HIV in the hospital setting (PROTEST 2·0): A multicenter, interrupted time-series analysis.

Background: Indicator-condition (IC) guided HIV testing is a feasible and cost-effective strategy to identify undiagnosed people living with HIV (PLHIV), but remains insufficiently implemented. We aimed to promote IC-guided HIV testing in seven ICs. Methods: Relevant departments in five hospitals of the Amsterdam region participated. HIV testing among adult patients without known HIV infection but with an IC was assessed using electronic health records during pre-intervention (January 2015-June 2020) and intervention (July 2020-June 2021) periods. The multifaceted intervention included audit and feedback. The primary endpoint was HIV testing ≤3 months before or after IC diagnosis and the effect of the intervention was evaluated using segmented Poisson regression. Findings: Data from 7986 patients were included, of whom 6730 (84·3%) were diagnosed with an IC in the pre-intervention period and 1256 (15·7%) in the intervention period. The proportion HIV tested ≤3 months before or after IC diagnosis increased from 36.8% to 47.0% (adjusted risk ratio [RR]= 1.16, 95% CI=1.03-1.30, p=0.02). For individual ICs, we observed significant increases in HIV testing among patients with cervical cancer or intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 (adjusted RR=3.62, 95% CI=1.93-6.79) and peripheral neuropathy (adjusted RR=2.27 95% CI=1.48-3.49), but not the other ICs. Eighteen of 3068 tested patients were HIV positive (0.6%). Interpretation: Overall IC-guided testing improved after the intervention, but not for all ICs. Variations in effect by IC may have been due to variations in implemented developments, but the effect of separate elements could not be assessed. Funding: HIV Transmission Elimination Amsterdam (H-TEAM) initiative, Aidsfonds (grant number: P-42702).

Who is providing HIV diagnostic testing? Comparing HIV testing by general practitioners and sexual health centres in five regions in the Netherlands, 2011-2018.

OBJECTIVES: General practitioners (GPs) and sexual health centres (SHCs) are the main providers of HIV testing and diagnose two-thirds of HIV infections in the Netherlands. We compared regional HIV testing and positivity by GPs versus SHCs to gain insight into strategies to improve HIV testing, to enable timely detection of HIV infections. METHODS: Laboratory data (2011-2018) on HIV testing by GPs and SHCs in five Dutch regions with varying levels of urbanisation were evaluated. Regional HIV testing rates per 10 000 residents ≥15 years (mean over period and annual) were compared between providers using negative binomial generalised additive models and additionally stratified by sex and age (15-29 years, 30-44 years, 45-59 years, ≥60 years). χ2 tests were used to compare positivity percentage between the two groups of providers. RESULTS: In the study period, 505 167 HIV tests (GP 36%, SHC 64%) were performed. The highest HIV testing rates were observed in highly urbanised regions, with large regional variations. The HIV testing rates ranged from 28 to 178 per 10 000 residents by GPs and from 30 to 378 per 10 000 by SHCs. Testing rates by GPs were lower than by SHCs in three regions and comparable in two. In all regions, men were tested less by GPs than by SHCs; for women, this varied by region. Among those aged 15-29 years old, GPs' testing rates were lower than SHCs', while this was reversed in older age categories in four out of five regions. The overall mean HIV positivity was 0.4%. In contrast to other regions, positivity in Amsterdam was significantly higher among individuals tested by GPs than by SHCs. CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective observational study shows that besides SHCs, who perform opt-out testing for key groups, GPs play a prominent role in HIV testing, especially in non-key populations, such as women and older individuals. Large regional variation exists, requiring region-specific interventions to improve GPs' HIV testing practices.

Promoting HIV indicator condition-guided testing in hospital settings (PROTEST 2.0): study protocol for a multicentre interventional study.

BACKGROUND: Late presentation remains a key barrier towards controlling the HIV epidemic. Indicator conditions (ICs) are those that are AIDS-defining, associated with a prevalence of undiagnosed HIV > 0.1%, or whose clinical management would be impeded if an HIV infection were undiagnosed. IC-guided HIV testing is an effective strategy in identifying undiagnosed HIV, but opportunities for earlier HIV diagnosis through IC-guided testing are being missed. We present a protocol for an interventional study to improve awareness of IC-guided testing and increase HIV testing in patients presenting with ICs in a hospital setting. METHODS: We designed a multicentre interventional study to be implemented at five hospitals in the region of Amsterdam, the Netherlands. Seven ICs were selected for which HIV test ratios (proportion of patients with an IC tested for HIV) will be measured: tuberculosis, cervical/vulvar cancer or high-grade cervical/vulvar dysplasia, malignant lymphoma, hepatitis B and C, and peripheral neuropathy. Prior to the intervention, a baseline assessment of HIV test ratios across ICs will be performed in eligible patients (IC diagnosed January 2015 through May 2020, ≥18 years, not known HIV positive) and an assessment of barriers and facilitators for HIV testing amongst relevant specialties will be conducted using qualitative (interviews) and quantitative methods (questionnaires). The intervention phase will consist of an educational intervention, including presentation of baseline results as competitive graphical audit and feedback combined with discussion on implementation and opportunities for improvement. The effect of the intervention will be assessed by comparing HIV test ratios of the pre-intervention and post-intervention periods. The primary endpoint is the HIV test ratio within ±3 months of IC diagnosis. Secondary endpoints are the HIV test ratio within ±6 months of diagnosis, ratio ever tested for HIV, HIV positivity percentage, proportion of late presenters and proportion with known HIV status prior to initiating treatment for their IC. DISCUSSION: This protocol presents a strategy aimed at increasing awareness of the benefits of IC-guided testing and increasing HIV testing in patients presenting with ICs in hospital settings to identify undiagnosed HIV in Amsterdam, the Netherlands. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Dutch trial registry: NL7521 . Registered 14 February 2019.

Rationale, design and initial results of an educational intervention to improve provider-initiated HIV testing in primary care.

OBJECTIVES: In the Netherlands, general practitioners (GPs) perform two-thirds of sexually transmitted infection (STI) consultations and diagnose one-third of HIV infections. GPs are, therefore, a key group to target to improve provider-initiated HIV testing. We describe the design and implementation of an educational intervention to improve HIV testing by Amsterdam GPs and explore trends in GPs' testing behaviour. METHODS: Interactive sessions on HIV and STI using graphical audit and feedback started in 2015. Participating GPs developed improvement plans that were evaluated in follow-up sessions. Laboratory data on STI testing by Amsterdam GPs from 2011 to 2017 were collected for graphical audit and feedback and effect evaluation. The primary outcome was the HIV testing rate: number of HIV tests per 10 000 person-years (PY). Secondary endpoints were chlamydia and gonorrhoea testing rates and HIV positivity ratios. RESULTS: Since 2015, 41% of GPs participated. HIV testing rate declined from 2011 to 2014 (from 175 to 116 per 10 000 PY), more in women than men (176 to 101 versus 173 to 132), and stabilized from 2015 to 2017. The HIV positivity ratio declined from 0.8% in 2011 to 0.5% in 2017. From 2011 to 2017, chlamydia and gonorrhoea testing rates declined in women (from 618 to 477 per 10 000 PY) but remained stable in men (from 270 to 278). CONCLUSIONS: The stabilization of the downward trend in HIV testing coincided with this educational intervention. Follow-up data are needed to formally assess the intervention's impact on GP testing behaviour whilst considering contextual factors and secular trends.

[Towards zero new HIV infections in the Netherlands: proactive testing in case of indicator conditions]. / Nederland naar nul nieuwe hiv-infecties.

To reach the UNAIDS target of zero new HIV infections in the Netherlands, timely diagnosis of HIV is essential to enable starting antiretroviral treatment which prevents AIDS and onward transmission. To attain this, optimal HIV testing strategies in both primary care and the hospital setting are needed. Testing for HIV in the presence of indicator conditions associated with HIV is part of an evidence-based strategy towards ending the HIV epidemic and is recommended in (inter)national guidelines. Currently, physician initiated indicator condition-guided testing for HIV in Dutch healthcare settings can be improved. Several barriers for implementation exist including unfamiliarity with indicator condition-guided testing among healthcare providers despite that general practitioners and medical specialists commonly encounter patients with indicator conditions. Proactive testing for HIV in patients presenting with indicator conditions is destigmatizing and cost-effective, decreases morbidity and contributes to the elimination of HIV in the Netherlands.

Barriers and facilitators and the need for a clinical guideline for microbiological diagnostic testing in the hospital: a qualitative and quantitative study.

The appropriate use of microbiological investigations is an important cornerstone of antibiotic stewardship programmes, but receives relatively limited attention. This study aimed to identify influencing factors in performing microbiological diagnostic tests and to assess the need for a clinical guideline. We performed a qualitative (focus group) and quantitative (online questionnaire survey) study among medical specialists and residents to identify physicians' considerations in performing microbiological diagnostic tests and to assess the need for a diagnostic guideline. The questionnaire consisted of 14 statements, divided into three categories: knowledge, influencing factors and presence of guidelines. The questionnaire was sent to physicians of the departments of internal medicine, intensive care, paediatrics and pulmonology in five hospitals in the Netherlands. Sub-analyses for medical specialists versus residents and for paediatric versus non-paediatric departments were performed. We included 187 completed questionnaires in our analyses. The physicians reported having adequate knowledge on methods, time-to-result and accuracy, but inadequate knowledge on costs of the tests. Patients' clinical condition, comorbidity, local guidelines and accuracy of tests were appraised as the four most important influencing factors to perform tests. Over 70% (132/187) of physicians reported being interested in a guideline for microbiological diagnostic testing. Fifteen physicians (8.0%) provided additional comments. This study identifies the influencing factors to microbiological testing and shows the demand for a clinical guideline among physicians. IMPORTANCE: Microbiological diagnostic tests are an important cornerstone within antibiotic stewardship programmes [1-5]. These programmes aim to ameliorate the appropriate use of antibiotics and thus improve clinical outcomes of infectious diseases, whilst reducing the emergence of antimicrobial resistance [6]. However, inappropriate microbiological testing is a widely recognised problem [7-12], and influencing factors to testing have not been studied in the past. Our research shows the demand for a clinical guideline among physicians, and it identifies their influencing factors to testing. These results can be used to create a clinical guideline for microbiological diagnostic testing, thus supporting antibiotic stewardship programmes and reducing antimicrobial resistance.