Evaluation of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Recommendations for Hepatitis C Virus Testing in an Urban Emergency Department.

BACKGROUND: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommends 1-time hepatitis C virus (HCV) testing in the 1945-1965 birth cohort, in addition to targeted risk-based testing. Emergency departments (EDs) are key venues for HCV testing because of the population served and success in HIV screening. We determined the burden of undocumented HCV infection in our ED, providing guidance for implementation of ED-based HCV testing. METHODS: An 8-week seroprevalence study was conducted in an urban ED in 2013. All patients with excess blood collected for clinical purposes were included. Demographic and clinical information including documented HCV infection was obtained from electronic medical records. HCV antibody testing was performed on excess samples. RESULTS: Of 4713 patients, 652 (13.8%) were HCV antibody positive. Of these, 204 (31.3%) had undocumented HCV infection. Among patients with undocumented infections, 99 (48.5%) would have been diagnosed based on birth cohort testing, and an additional 54 (26.5%) would be identified by risk-based testing. If our ED adhered to the CDC guidelines, 51 (25.0%) patients with undocumented HCV would not have been tested. Given an estimated 7727 unique ED patients with HCV infection in a 1-year period, birth cohort plus risk-based testing would identify 1815 undocumented infections, and universal testing would identify additional 526 HCV-infected persons. CONCLUSIONS: Birth cohort-based testing would augment identification of undocumented HCV infections in this ED 2-fold, relative to risk-based testing only. However, our data demonstrate that one-quarter of infections would remain undiagnosed if current CDC birth cohort recommendations were employed, suggesting that in high-risk urban ED settings a practice of universal 1-time testing might be more effective.

Improvements in the continuum of HIV care in an inner-city emergency department.

OBJECTIVE: The Johns Hopkins Hospital Emergency Department has served as a window on the HIV epidemic for 25 years, and as a pioneer in emergency department-based screening/linkage-to-care (LTC) programs. We document changes in the burden of HIV and HIV care metrics to the evolving HIV epidemic in inner-city Baltimore. DESIGN/METHODS: We analyzed seven serosurveys conducted on 18 ,144 adult Johns Hopkins Hospital Emergency Department patients between 1987 and 2013 as well as our HIV-screening/LTC program (2007, 2013) for trends in HIV prevalence, cross-sectional annual incidence estimates, undiagnosed HIV, LTC, antiretrovirals treatment, and viral suppression. RESULTS: HIV prevalence in 1987 was 5.2%, peaked at more than 11% from 1992 to 2003 and declined to 5.6% in 2013. Seroprevalence was highest for black men (initial 8.0%, peak 20.0%, last 9.9%) and lowest for white women. Among HIV-positive individuals, proportion of undiagnosed infection was 77% in 1987, 28% in 1992, and 12% by 2013 (P < 0.001). Cross-sectional annual HIV incidence estimates declined from 2.28% in 2001 to 0.16% in 2013. Thirty-day LTC improved from 32% (2007) to 72% (2013). In 2013, 80% of HIV-positive individuals had antiretrovirals ARVs detected in sera, markedly increased from 2007 (27%) (P < 0.001). Proportion of HIV-positive individuals with viral suppression (<400 copies/ml) increased from 23% (2001) to 59% (2013) (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Emergency department-based HIV testing has evolved from describing the local epidemic to a strategic interventional role, serving as a model for early HIV detection and LTC. Our contribution to community-based HIV-screening and LTC program parallels declines in undiagnosed HIV infection and incidence, and increases in antiretroviral use with associated viral suppression in the community.

Evaluation of hidden HIV infections in an urban ED with a rapid HIV screening program.

BACKGROUND: To investigate the prevalence of undiagnosed HIV infections in an emergency department (ED) with an established screening program. METHODS: Evaluation of the prevalence and risk factors for HIV from an 8-week (June 24, 2007-August 18, 2007) identity-unlinked HIV serosurvey, conducted at the same time as an ongoing opt-in rapid oral-fluid HIV screening program. Testing facilitators offering 24/7 bedside rapid testing to patients aged 18 to 64 years, with concordant collection of excess sera collected as part of routine clinical procedures. Known HIV positivity was determined by (1) medical record review or self-report from the screening program and/or (2) presence of antiretrovirals in serum specimens. RESULTS: Among 3207 patients, 1165 (36.3%) patients were offered an HIV test. Among those offered, 567 (48.7%) consented to testing. Concordance identity-unlinked study revealed that the prevalence of undiagnosed infections was as follows: 2.3% in all patients, 1.0% in those offered testing vs 3.0% in those not offered testing (P < .001); and 1.3% in those who declined testing compared with 0.4% in those who were tested (P = .077). Higher median viral loads were observed in those not offered testing (14255 copies/mL; interquartile range, 1147-64354) vs those offered testing (1865 copies/mL; interquartile range, undetectable-21786), but the difference was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: High undiagnosed HIV prevalence was observed in ED patients who were not offered HIV testing and those who declined testing, compared with those who were tested. This indicates that even with an intensive facilitator-based rapid HIV screening model, significant missed opportunities remain with regard to identifying undiagnosed infections in the ED.

Improved performance of enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays and the effect of human immunodeficiency virus coinfection on the serologic detection of herpes simplex virus type 2 in Rakai, Uganda.

Ugandan subjects (820) were tested by Focus HerpeSelect enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), Kalon herpes simplex virus type 2 ELISA, and BioKit rapid test, and the results were compared to those of Western blotting. Higher-than-standard-index cutoff values gave optimal sensitivity and specificity. Kalon ELISA was the optimal assay when an index value of 1.5 was used (sensitivity, 91.7%; specificity, 92.4%).