Christian Arbelaez

Counselor- versus provider-based HIV screening in the emergency department: results from the universal screening for HIV infection in the emergency room (USHER) randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE We compare rates of rapid HIV testing, test offer, and acceptance in an urban emergency department (ED) when conducted by dedicated HIV counselors versus current members of the ED staff. METHODS The Universal Screening for HIV Infection in the Emergency Room [USHER] trial is a prospective randomized controlled trial that implemented an HIV screening program in the ED of an urban tertiary medical center. ED patients were screened and consented for trial enrollment by an USHER research assistant. Eligible subjects were randomized to rapid HIV testing (oral OraQuick) offered by a dedicated counselor (counselor arm) or by an ED provider (provider arm). In the counselor arm, counselors-without other clinical responsibilities-assumed nearly all testing-related activities (consent, counseling, delivery of test results). In the provider arm, trained ED emergency service assistants (nursing assistants) consented and tested the participant in the context of other ED-related responsibilities. In this arm, ED house officers, physician assistants, or attending physicians provided HIV test results to trial participants. Outcome measures were rates of HIV testing and test offer among individuals consenting for study participation. Among individuals offered the test, test acceptance was also measured. RESULTS From February 2007 through July 2008, 8,187 eligible patients were approached in the ED, and 4,855 (59%) consented and were randomized to trial participation. The mean age was 37 years, 65% were women, and 42% were white. The overall testing rate favored the counselor arm (57% versus 27%; P<.001); 80% (1,959/2,446) of subjects in the counselor arm were offered an HIV test compared with 36% (861/2,409) in the provider arm (P<.001). HIV test acceptance was slightly higher in the provider arm (counselor arm 71% versus provider arm 75%; P = .025). CONCLUSION Routine rapid HIV testing in the ED was accomplished more frequently by dedicated HIV counselors than by ED staff in the course of routine clinical work. Without dedicated staff, HIV testing in this setting may not be truly routine.

Factors Associated with Refusal of Rapid HIV Testing in an Emergency Department

HIV screening studies in the emergency department (ED) have demonstrated rates of HIV test refusal ranging from 40–67%. This study aimed to determine the factors associated with refusal to undergo routine rapid HIV testing in an academic ED in Boston. HIV counselors offered routine testing to 1,959 patients; almost one-third of patients (29%) refused. Data from a self-administered survey were used to determine independent correlates of HIV testing refusal. In multivariate analysis, women and patients with annual household incomes of

Does Modality of Survey Administration Impact Data Quality: Audio Computer Assisted Self Interview (ACASI) Versus Self-Administered Pen and Paper?

50,000 or more were more likely to refuse testing, as were those who reported not engaging in HIV risk behaviors, those previously HIV tested and those who did not perceive a need for testing. Enrollment during morning hours was also associated with an increased risk of refusal. Increased educational efforts to convey the rationale and benefits of universal screening may improve testing uptake among these groups.

Patient Satisfaction With Rapid HIV Testing in the Emergency Department

Background In the context of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) on HIV testing in the emergency department (ED) setting, we evaluated preferences for survey modality and data quality arising from each modality. Methods Enrolled participants were offered the choice of answering a survey via audio computer assisted self-interview (ACASI) or pen and paper self-administered questionnaire (SAQ). We evaluated factors influencing choice of survey modality. We defined unusable data for a particular survey domain as answering fewer than 75% of the questions in the domain. We then compared ACASI and SAQ with respect to unusable data for domains that address sensitive topics. Results Of 758 enrolled ED patients, 218 (29%) chose ACASI, 343 chose SAQ (45%) and 197 (26%) opted not to complete either. Results of the log-binomial regression indicated that older (RR = 1.08 per decade) and less educated participants (RR = 1.25) were more likely to choose SAQ over ACASI. ACASI yielded substantially less unusable data than SAQ. Conclusions In the ED setting there may be a tradeoff between increased participation with SAQ versus better data quality with ACASI. Future studies of novel approaches to maximize the use of ACASI in the ED setting are needed.

Rapid HIV testing program implementation: lessons from the emergency department

OBJECTIVE Patient satisfaction with HIV screening is crucial for sustainable implementation of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) HIV testing recommendations. This investigation assesses patient satisfaction with rapid HIV testing in the emergency department (ED) of an urban tertiary academic medical center. METHODS After receiving HIV test results, participants in the Universal Screening for HIV Infection in the Emergency Room (USHER) randomized controlled trial were offered a patient satisfaction survey. Questions concerned overall satisfaction with ED visit, time spent on primary medical problem, time spent on HIV testing, and test providers ability to answer HIV-related questions. Responses were reported on a 4-point Likert scale, ranging from very dissatisfied to very satisfied (defined as optimal satisfaction). RESULTS Of 4,860 USHER participants, 2,025 completed testing and were offered the survey: 1,616 (79.8%) completed the survey. Overall, 1,478 (91.5%) were very satisfied. Satisfaction was less than optimal for 34.5% (10 of 29) of participants with reactive results and for 7.5% (115 of 1,542) with nonreactive results. The independent factors associated with less than optimal satisfaction were reactive test result, aged 60 years or older, black race, Hispanic/Latino ethnicity, and testing by ED provider instead of HIV counselor. CONCLUSION Most participants were very satisfied with the ED-based rapid HIV testing program. Identification of independent factors that correlate with patient satisfaction will help guide best practices as EDs implement CDC recommendations. It is critical to better understand whether patients with reactive results were negatively affected by their results or truly had concerns about the testing process.

Characterizing the limited use of point-of-care ultrasound in Colombian emergency medicine residencies

BackgroundThe US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidelines and the World Health Organization (WHO) both recommend HIV testing in health-care settings. However, neither organization provides prescriptive details regarding how these recommendations should be adapted into clinical practice in an emergency department.MethodsWe have implemented an HIV-testing program in the ED of a major academic medical center within the scope of the Universal Screening for HIV Infection in the Emergency Room (USHER) Trial—a randomized clinical trial evaluating the feasibility and cost-effectiveness of HIV screening in this setting.Results and conclusionDrawing on our collective experiences in establishing programs domestically and internationally, we offer a practical framework of lessons learned so that others poised to embark on such HIV testing programs may benefit from our experiences.

Resource Utilization and Cost-Effectiveness of Counselor- vs. Provider-Based Rapid Point-of-Care HIV Screening in the Emergency Department

BackgroundEmergency medicine (EM) is a growing specialty in Colombia with five residency programs in the country. EM leadership is interested in incorporating point-of-care (POC) ultrasound into a standardized national EM residency curriculum. This study is a nationwide survey of Colombian EM residents designed to explore the current state of POC ultrasound use within EM residencies and examine specific barriers preventing its expansion.MethodsWe conducted a mix-methodology study of all available current EM residents in the five EM residencies in Colombia. The quantitative survey assessed previous ultrasound experience, current use of various applications, desire for further training, and perceived barriers to expanded use. Focus group discussions (FGDs) were conducted with current EM residents to gather additional qualitative insight into their practice patterns and perceived barriers to clinician-performed ultrasound.ResultsSixty-nine EM residents completed the quantitative survey, a response rate of 85% of all current EM residents in Colombia; 52% of resident respondents had previously used ultrasound during their training. Of these, 58% indicated that they had performed <10 scans and 17% reported >40 scans. The most frequently used applications indicated by respondents were trauma, obstetrics, and procedures including vascular access. A quarter indicated they had previously received some ultrasound training, but almost all expressed an interest in learning more. Significant barriers included lack of trained teachers (indicated by 78% of respondents), absence of machines (57%), and limited time (41%). In FGDs, the barriers identified were inter-specialty conflicts over the control of ultrasonography, both institutionally and nationally, and program-specific curriculum decisions to include POC ultrasound.ConclusionWhile currently limited in their access, EM residents in Colombia have a strong interest in integrating POC ultrasound into their training. Current barriers to expanded use include traditional barriers such as a lack of equipment seen in many developing countries, as well as inter-specialty conflicts typical of developed countries. Further collaboration is underway to help overcome these obstacles and integrate POC ultrasound into Colombian EM residency training.

Estimation of the Prevalence of Undiagnosed and Diagnosed HIV in an Urban Emergency Department

Background Routine HIV screening in emergency department (ED) settings may require dedicated personnel. We evaluated the outcomes, costs and cost-effectiveness of HIV screening when offered by either a member of the ED staff or by an HIV counselor. Methods We employed a mathematical model to extend data obtained from a randomized clinical trial of provider- vs. counselor-based HIV screening in the ED. We compared the downstream survival, costs, and cost-effectiveness of three HIV screening modalities: 1) no screening program; 2) an ED provider-based program; and 3) an HIV counselor-based program. Trial arm-specific data were used for test offer and acceptance rates (provider offer 36%, acceptance 75%; counselor offer 80%, acceptance 71%). Undiagnosed HIV prevalence (0.4%) and linkage to care rates (80%) were assumed to be equal between the screening modalities. Personnel costs were derived from trial-based resource utilization data. We examined the generalizability of results by conducting sensitivity analyses on offer and acceptance rates, undetected HIV prevalence, and costs. Results Estimated HIV screening costs in the provider and counselor arms averaged

State of emergency medicine in Colombia

8.10 and

The Personal Statement for Residency Application: Review and Guidance

31.00 per result received. The Provider strategy (compared to no screening) had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of