Limited impact of awareness-raising campaigns on hepatitis C testing practices among general practitioners.

The global hepatitis strategy calls for increased effort to diagnose those infected, with a target of 90% diagnosed by 2030. Scotland's Action Plan on Hepatitis C included awareness-raising campaigns, undertaken during 2008-2011, to promote testing by general practitioners. We examined hepatitis C virus (HCV) testing practice among general practitioners before and following these campaigns. Scottish general practitioners were surveyed, using Dillman's method, in 2007 and 2013; response rates were 69% and 60%, respectively. Most respondents offer testing when presented with a risk history (86% in 2007, 88% in 2013) but only one-fifth actively sought out risk factors (19% in 2007, 21% in 2013). Testing was reportedly always/almost always/usually offered to people who inject drugs (84% in 2007, 87% in 2013). Significant improvements in the offer of testing were reported in patients with abnormal LFTs (41% in 2007, 65% in 2013, P<.001) and who had received medical/dental treatment in high prevalence countries (14% in 2007, 24% in 2013, P=.001). In 2013, 25% of respondents had undertaken HCV-related continued professional development. This group was significantly more likely to actively seek out risk factors (P=.009) but only significantly more likely to offer a test to patients who had received medical/dental treatment in high prevalence countries (P=.001). Our findings suggest that government-led awareness raising campaigns have limited impact on general practitioners' testing practices. If the majority of the HCV-infected population are to be diagnosed, practitioner-based or physician-centred interventions should be considered alongside educational initiatives targeted at professionals.

British Association for Sexual Health and HIV Scottish investigation 2010-2011: reasons for non-attendance in individuals lost to follow-up for HIV care for more than 12 months in Scotland.

As of 31 March 2011, 6696 HIV diagnoses had ever been reported in Scotland; of these, 1791 individuals had died, 3339 were attending specialist services, but the remainder had defaulted from specialist care; an investigation into their reasons for non-attendance, and the efforts of services to re-engage, was undertaken by British Association for Sexual Health and HIV Scottish branch using a web-based survey questionnaire. Twelve of the 13 Scottish HIV services returned information for 424 of 579 eligible cases; 112 of these 424 individuals were identified as genuine non-attendees. Findings indicate that the epidemiology of these non-attendees is similar to that of the whole Scottish HIV cohort. Three-quarters of individuals failed to attend a booked appointment following their last known attendance and very few attempts to contact non-attending individuals were successful. This survey has refocused attention on those lost to follow-up, while quality of the national data-set has improved, providing a clearer epidemiological picture of people living with HIV in Scotland.

Identifying former injecting drug users infected with hepatitis C: an evaluation of a general practice-based case-finding intervention.

BACKGROUND: In Scotland, a general practice-based case-finding initiative, to diagnose and refer hepatitis C virus (HCV) chronically infected former injecting drug users (IDUs), was evaluated. METHODS: Testing was offered in eight Glasgow general practices in areas of high deprivation and high HCV and IDU prevalence to attendees aged 30-54 years with a history of IDU. Test uptake and diagnosis rates were compared with those in eight demographically similar control practices. RESULTS: Of 422 eligible intervention practice attendees, 218 (52%) were offered an HCV test and, of these, 121 (56%) accepted. Poor venous access in 13 individuals prevented testing. Of 105 tested, 70% (74/105) were antibody positive of which 58% (43/74) were RNA positive by PCR. Of 43 chronically infected individuals identified in intervention practices, 22 (51%) had attended specialist care within 30 months of the study, while 9 (21%) had defaulted. In control practices, 8 (22%) of 36 individuals tested were antibody positive. Test uptake and case yield were approximately 3 and 10 times higher in intervention compared with control practices, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Targeted case-finding in primary care demonstrated higher test uptake and diagnosis rates; however, to optimize diagnosis and referral of chronically infected individuals, alternative means of testing (e.g. dried blood spots) and retention in specialist care (e.g. outreach services) must be explored.

Potential for reported needlestick injury prevention among healthcare workers through safety device usage and improvement of guideline adherence: expert panel assessment.

A prospective survey was conducted over six months in order to estimate the proportion of reported occupational needlestick injuries sustained by National Health Service (NHS) Scotland staff that could have been prevented through either safety device introduction, improved guideline adherence, guideline revision or a combination of these. This survey involved the administration of a standard proforma to healthcare workers followed by an expert panel assessment. All acute and primary care NHS Scotland trusts, the Scottish Ambulance Service and the Scottish National Blood Transfusion Service were included. Proforma and expert panel assessment data were available for 64% of injuries (952/1497) reported by healthcare staff. These injuries were all percutaneous. The expert panel concluded that: 56% of all injuries and 80% of venepuncture/injection administration injuries would probably/definitely have been prevented through safety device usage, 52% of all injuries and 56% of venepuncture/injection administration injuries would probably/definitely have been prevented through guideline adherence and 72% of all injuries and 88% of venepuncture/injection administration injuries would probably/definitely have been prevented through either intervention. Multi-factorial analysis indicated that injuries sustained through venepuncture/injection administration were significantly more likely to be prevented through safety device usage [adjusted odds ratio (OR) 5.09, 95% confidence intervals (CI) 3.11-8.31 and adjusted OR 2.70, 95% CI 1.64-4.45, respectively], and significantly less likely to be prevented through guideline adherence (adjusted OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.11-0.60 and adjusted OR 0.31, 95% CI 0.12-0.78, respectively). Injuries sustained after completing procedures were significantly more likely to be prevented through safety device usage and guideline adherence. The study's findings support the need for improvements to staff's adherence to needlestick injury guidelines and appropriate implementation of safety devices for venepuncture and injection administration.