Screening for sexually transmitted diseases in short-term correctional institutions: summary of evidence reviewed for the 2010 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Sexually Transmitted Diseases Treatment Guidelines.

Young persons entering US jails and youth detention facilities have high rates of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs). The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention added STD screening guidelines specific to correctional settings to the 2010 STD Treatment Guidelines. This article summarizes published evidence from 1990 to 2009 used to develop the recommendations. The literature supports routine screening of adolescents and young women (aged ≤35 years, or on the basis of local institutional prevalence data) for chlamydia and gonorrhea because of high prevalence and the subsequent risk of adverse reproductive outcomes. Chlamydia positivity among young women (aged <20 years) in juvenile detention facilities and adult facilities is more than 14%. Men in correctional settings are also at high risk for chlamydia and gonorrhea. Among boys in juvenile detention facilities, chlamydia positivity is estimated at 6.6%; among young men in adult facilities, positivity is 16.6%. Screening men (to reduce sequelae among women) should be considered based on local epidemiology and resource availability. Syphilis screening is not strongly supported in published literature because of low prevalence and is not routinely recommended; however, some screening may be warranted based on local prevalence. Although there is a great diversity in the organization of correctional facilities, implementation of screening recommendations is possible owing to improvements in test technology (urine specimens) and through integration of a standard screening protocol. Based on the high burden of disease and substantial opportunities to reach a high-risk population, correctional facilities are important venues to target efforts to control STDs.

Oral sampling and human papillomavirus genotyping in HIV-infected patients.

BACKGROUND: Oral human papillomavirus (HPV) is associated with several health complications especially in combination with HIV infections. Screening may be useful, but methodologies and results have varied widely in previous studies. We conducted a pilot study in an HIV-positive population to evaluate HPV detection in four different oral sample types. METHODS: Upon enrollment, an oral-rinse (OR) sample was collected in 10 ml saline. Additional samples of the buccal mucosa, tonsils, and oral lesion if present were collected with cytology brushes. DNA was extracted using LC-MagNAPure, and the Linear Array HPV genotyping Assay (Roche) was used for HPV genotyping. RESULTS: In samples from 100 HIV-positive participants, HPV was detected in 39 (%) of the oral rinses, 13 (%) mucosal and 11 (12.9%) tonsil brushings. Of seven lesion brushings collected, four were HPV positive. All participants with HPV detected in mucosal, tonsil, or lesion brushings were also positive in the OR sample. Among the rinse samples, 27 different genotypes were detected with HPV84 (n = 6), HPV55 (n = 5), and HPV83 (n = 5) being the most common. Multiple infections were detected in 17 samples (range 2-9, mean 1.9 types). As potential cofactors, only receptive oral sex was significantly associated with HPV (P = 0.018, odds ratio 2.9, 95% CI 1.2-6.9). CONCLUSION: Sampling is a significant factor for oral prevalence studies. Oral rinse provides the best representation for HPV in the oral cavity. To evaluate associated cofactors other than receptive oral sex, larger studies with case-control design are necessary.

Pairing HIV-positive prisoners with volunteer life coaches to maintain health-promoting behavior upon release: a mixed-methods needs analysis and pilot study.

Drawing on individuals who volunteer in US prisons to mentor HIV-infected inmates returning to the community may promote successful transitions. Evaluations published in the scientific literature of such community linkage programs are scant. Our quantitative and qualitative methods needs analysis and pilot study entailed interviewing convenience samples of 24 HIV-positive persons recently released from Georgia correctional facilities and 12 potential volunteer mentors. Both releasees and potential mentors were open to the establishment of a mentoring program. Releasees wanted nonjudgmental mentors. Releasees and volunteers had statistically significant differences in marital status, education, current employment, and possession of a driver's license but not in degree of religious involvement and attitudes toward condom use. A volunteer-staffed program, perhaps more aptly named "life coaching" than mentoring, to help HIV-infected persons to transition from prison to the community may be feasible. Success will require adequately trained volunteers and a straightforward program.