RESUMEN
Background. Substantial changes in access and delivery of primary HIV care occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic. To assess how care access changed during the COVID-19 pandemic, we estimated ED use among PWH in care 2017-2021 in the southeastern US. Methods. For each calendar year, among PWH in care in the UNC CFAR HIV Clinical Cohort (defined as having a clinic visit in the current or prior year), we estimated the percent of patients with >= 1 ED visit in a given year, overall and by age, gender, race/ethnicity, HIV viral load (VL), and CD4 count. We estimated risk ratios (RRs) comparing patient characteristics and years 2020-2021 vs. 2017-2019, using Poisson regression with generalized estimating equations to account for repeated measures. Results. Among 2129 PWH in care 2017-2021 (N=1700-1800 in each year), 57% identified as Black, 31% White, 8% Hispanic, 26% women, with median age of 47 years (IQR 35-55). During the study period, there were 3645 ED visits over 8813 person-years, a rate of 41.4 ED visits-per 100 person-years(95% CI 36.8-46.5) per 100 person-years. The 845 PWHwith at least one ED visit during the study period contributed amedian of 2 visits each (IQR1-5). The unadjusted probability of having>=1 EDvisit in a given year was higher among women vs. men (RR=1.14, 95% CI 0.99-1.32), Black vs. White PWH (1.31, 1.13-1.52), with VL >= 40 copies/mL (1.40, 1.20-1.64), and with CD4 < 200 (1.66, 1.32-2.09) or 200-349 (1.50, 1.25-1.79) vs. >= 500 cells/muL;age was not associated with ED use. Comparedwith 2017-2019, the annual probability of having>=1 EDvisit was lower in 2020-2021, with RRs of 0.83 (95% CI 0.76-0.90) in unadjusted analyses and 0.80 (95%CI 0.71-0.90) after adjusting for demographics, VL, and CD4. There was also a significant unadjusted decrease for 2020-2021 vs. 2017-2019 among women, men, PWH who were Black, White, < 40 or 50-59 years old, and with CD4 >500 (Fig. B-F, all P< 0.05). Conclusion. Among PWH in HIV care, ED use was higher among women, Black PWH, and PWH with poorly controlled HIV. ED use decreased 2020-2021 in most groups, indicating that PWH during the COVID-19 pandemic may be delaying seeking care for acute conditions, or accessing care in other ways. Work is ongoing to characterize reasons for ED visits across calendar years and examine the impact of reduced ED utilization among PWH.
RESUMEN
Background: It is not known if people with HIV (PWH) in the United States (US) have different access to SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR (COVID-19) testing, or positivity proportions (among those tested), than people without HIV (PWOH). We describe COVID-19 testing and positivity proportions in 6 large geographically and demographically diverse cohorts of PWH and PWOH. Methods: The Corona-Infectious-Virus Epidemiology Team (CIVET) is comprised of five COVID-19 clinical cohorts within a health system (Kaiser Permanente Northern California, Oakland, CA;Kaiser Permanente Mid-Atlantic States, Rockville, MD;University of North Carolina Health, Chapel Hill, NC;Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN;Veterans Aging Cohort Study) and one established classical HIV cohort (MACS/WIHS Combined Cohort Study). Each participating cohort is restricted to individuals who were alive and “in-cohort” in 2020 (definitions of which were operationalized to fit the structure of each cohort). We calculated the percentage of patients in-cohort who were COVID-19 tested, and the proportion COVID-19 positive monthly, by HIV status, from March 1 to August 31, 2020. We report findings from the classical cohort separately because results are based on self-reported information. Results: In the 5 clinical cohorts, PWH ranged from N=2,515 to 31,040, and N=77,019 to 3,710,360 PWOH. Over the 6 month study period, the percentage of PWH who were tested for COVID-19 (13.5%-21.2%) was slightly higher than PWOH (10.8%-14.3%) in each of the cohorts (p-values in each cohort <0.001). However, among those tested, the percentage of patients with positive COVID-19 tests was similar regardless of HIV status (Figure). In the classical cohort that contributed self-reported testing and positive information (PWH N=2,222;PWOH N=1,417), the proportion tested was similar by HIV status (PWH 38.1% vs. PWOH 37.4%), but PWH had a greater positivity proportion (9.0%) compared with PWOH (5.3%, p-value=0.012). Conclusion: Although PWH had higher testing rates compared with PWOH, we did not find evidence of increased positivity among those tested in 5 clinical cohorts with large diverse populations across the US. We will continue to monitor testing, positivity, and COVID-19 related health outcomes in PWH and PWOH using our multiple data sources and leveraging the expertise of established longitudinal cohort studies in the CIVETS collaboration.