Evaluating the Evidence for More Frequent Than Annual HIV Screening of Gay, Bisexual, and Other Men Who Have Sex With Men in the United States: Results From a Systematic Review and CDC Expert Consultation.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommended in 2006 that sexually active gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (MSM) be screened for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) at least annually. A workgroup comprising CDC and external experts conducted a systematic review of the literature, including benefits, harms, acceptability, and feasibility of annual versus more frequent screening among MSM, to determine whether evidence was sufficient to change the current recommendation. Four consultations with managers of public and nonprofit HIV testing programs, clinics, and mathematical modeling experts were conducted to provide input on the programmatic and scientific evidence. Mathematical models predicted that more frequent than annual screening of MSM could prevent some new HIV infections and would be more cost-effective than annual screening, but this evidence was considered insufficient due to study design. Evidence supports CDC's current recommendation that sexually active MSM be screened at least annually. However, some MSM might benefit from more frequent screening. Future research should evaluate which MSM subpopulations would benefit most from more frequent HIV screening.

Recommendations for HIV Screening of Gay, Bisexual, and Other Men Who Have Sex with Men - United States, 2017.

CDC's 2006 recommendations for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) testing state that all persons aged 13-64 years should be screened for HIV at least once, and that persons at higher risk for HIV infection, including sexually active gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (MSM), should be rescreened at least annually (1). Authors of reports published since 2006, including CDC (2), suggested that MSM, a group that is at highest risk for HIV infection, might benefit from being screened more frequently than once each year. In 2013, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) found insufficient evidence to specify an HIV rescreening interval but recommended annual screening for MSM as a reasonable approach (3). However, some HIV providers have begun to offer more frequent screening, such as once every 3 or 6 months, to some MSM. A CDC work group conducted a systematic literature review and held four expert consultations to review programmatic experience to determine whether there was sufficient evidence to change the 2006 CDC recommendation (i.e., at least annual HIV screening of MSM in clinical settings). The CDC work group concluded that the evidence remains insufficient to recommend screening more frequently than at least once each year. CDC continues to recommend that clinicians screen asymptomatic sexually active MSM at least annually. Each clinician can consider the benefits of offering more frequent screening (e.g., once every 3 or 6 months) to individual MSM at increased risk for acquiring HIV infection, weighing their patients' individual risk factors, local HIV epidemiology, and local testing policies.

Public health interventions for asthma: an umbrella review, 1990-2010.

CONTEXT: Asthma is a chronic respiratory disease increasingly prevalent in the U.S., particularly among children and certain minority groups. This umbrella review sought to assess and summarize existing systematic reviews of asthma-related interventions that might be carried out or supported by state or community asthma control programs, and to identify gaps in knowledge. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Eleven databases were searched through September 2010, using terms related to four concepts: asthma, review, intervention, and NOT medication. Reviews of the effectiveness of medications, medical procedures, complementary and alternative medicine, psychological interventions, family therapy, and nutrients or nutritional supplements were excluded. Two coders screened each record and extracted data from the included reviews. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Data analysis was conducted from May to December 2010. Of 42 included reviews, 19 assessed the effectiveness of education and/or self-management, nine the reduction of indoor triggers, nine interventions to improve the provision of health care, and five examined other interventions. Several reviews found consistent evidence of effectiveness for self-management education, and one review determined that comprehensive home-based interventions including the reduction of multiple indoor asthma triggers are effective for children. Other reviews found limited or insufficient evidence because of study limitations. CONCLUSIONS: State or community asthma control programs should prioritize (1) implementing interventions for which the present review found evidence of effectiveness and (2) evaluating promising interventions that have not yet been adequately assessed.

Economic value of home-based, multi-trigger, multicomponent interventions with an environmental focus for reducing asthma morbidity a community guide systematic review.

CONTEXT: A recent systematic review of home-based, multi-trigger, multicomponent interventions with an environmental focus showed their effectiveness in reducing asthma morbidity among children and adolescents. These interventions included home visits by trained personnel to assess the level of and reduce adverse effects of indoor environmental pollutants, and educate households with an asthma client to reduce exposure to asthma triggers. The purpose of the present review is to identify economic values of these interventions and present ranges for the main economic outcomes (e.g., program costs, benefit-cost ratios, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios). EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Using methods previously developed for Guide to Community Preventive Services economic reviews, a systematic review was conducted to evaluate the economic efficiency of home-based, multi-trigger, multicomponent interventions with an environmental focus to improve asthma-related morbidity outcomes. A total of 1551 studies were identified in the search period (1950 to June 2008), and 13 studies were included in this review. Program costs are reported for all included studies; cost-benefit results for three; and cost-effectiveness results for another three. Information on program cost was provided with varying degrees of completeness: six of the studies did not provide a list of components included in their program cost description (limited cost information), three studies provided a list of program cost components but not a cost per component (partial cost information), and four studies provided both a list of program cost components and costs per component (satisfactory cost information). EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Program costs per participant per year ranged from $231-$14,858 (in 2007 U.S.$). The major factors affecting program cost, in addition to completeness, were the level of intensity of environmental remediation (minor, moderate, or major), type of educational component (environmental education or self-management), the professional status of the home visitor, and the frequency of visits by the home visitor. Benefit-cost ratios ranged from 5.3-14.0, implying that for every dollar spent on the intervention, the monetary value of the resulting benefits, such as averted medical costs or averted productivity losses, was $5.30-$14.00 (in 2007 U.S.$). The range in incremental cost-effectiveness ratios was $12-$57 (in 2007 U.S.$) per asthma symptom-free day, which means that these interventions achieved each additional symptom-free day for net costs varying from $12-$57. CONCLUSIONS: The benefits from home-based, multi-trigger, multicomponent interventions with an environmental focus can match or even exceed their program costs. Based on cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness studies, the results of this review show that these programs provide a good value for dollars spent on the interventions.

Effectiveness of home-based, multi-trigger, multicomponent interventions with an environmental focus for reducing asthma morbidity: a community guide systematic review.

CONTEXT: Asthma exacerbations are commonly triggered by exposure to allergens and irritants within the home. The purpose of this review was to evaluate evidence that interventions that target reducing these triggers through home visits may be beneficial in improving asthma outcomes. The interventions involve home visits by trained personnel to conduct two or more components that address asthma triggers in the home. Intervention components focus on reducing exposures to a range of asthma triggers (allergens and irritants) through environmental assessment, education, and remediation. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Using methods previously developed for the Guide to Community Preventive Services, a systematic review was conducted to evaluate the evidence on effectiveness of home-based, multi-trigger, multicomponent interventions with an environmental focus to improve asthma-related morbidity outcomes. The literature search identified over 10,800 citations. Of these, 23 studies met intervention and quality criteria for inclusion in the final analysis. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: In the 20 studies targeting children and adolescents, the number of days with asthma symptoms (symptom-days) was reduced by 0.8 days per 2 weeks, which is equivalent to 21.0 symptom-days per year (range of values: reduction of 0.6 to 2.3 days per year); school days missed were reduced by 12.3 days per year (range of values: reduction of 3.4 to 31.2 days per year); and the number of asthma acute care visits were reduced by 0.57 visits per year (interquartile interval: reduction of 0.33 to 1.71 visits per year). Only three studies reported outcomes among adults with asthma, finding inconsistent results. CONCLUSIONS: Home-based, multi-trigger, multicomponent interventions with an environmental focus are effective in improving overall quality of life and productivity in children and adolescents with asthma. The effectiveness of these interventions in adults is inconclusive due to the small number of studies and inconsistent results. Additional studies are needed to (1) evaluate the effectiveness of these interventions in adults and (2) determine the individual contributions of the various intervention components.

Office-based motivational interviewing to prevent childhood obesity: a feasibility study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether pediatricians and dietitians can implement an office-based obesity prevention program using motivational interviewing as the primary intervention. DESIGN: Nonrandomized clinical trial. Fifteen pediatricians belonging to Pediatric Research in Office Settings, a national practice-based research network, and 5 registered dietitians were assigned to 1 of 3 groups: (1) control; (2) minimal intervention (pediatrician only); or (3) intensive intervention (pediatrician and registered dietitian). SETTING: Primary care pediatric offices. PARTICIPANTS: Ninety-one children presenting for well-child care visits met eligibility criteria of being aged 3 to 7 years and having a body mass index (calculated as the weight in kilograms divided by the height in meters squared) at the 85th percentile or greater but lower than the 95th percentile for the age or having a normal weight and a parent with a body mass index of 30 or greater. INTERVENTIONS: Pediatricians and registered dietitians in the intervention groups received motivational interviewing training. Parents of children in the minimal intervention group received 1 motivational interviewing session from the physician, and parents of children in the intensive intervention group received 2 motivational interviewing sessions each from the pediatrician and the registered dietitian. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Change in the body mass index-for-age percentile. RESULTS: At 6 months' follow-up, there was a decrease of 0.6, 1.9, and 2.6 body mass index percentiles in the control, minimal, and intensive groups, respectively. The differences in body mass index percentile change between the 3 groups were nonsignificant (P=.85). The patient dropout rates were 2 (10%), 13 (32%), and 15 (50%) for the control, minimal, and intensive groups, respectively. Fifteen (94%) of the parents reported that the intervention helped them think about changing their family's eating habits. CONCLUSIONS: Motivational interviewing by pediatricians and dietitians is a promising office-based strategy for preventing childhood obesity. However, additional studies are needed to demonstrate the efficacy of this intervention in practice settings.