Exposure-based Interventions for the management of individuals with high levels of needle fear across the lifespan: a clinical practice guideline and call for further research.

Needle fear typically begins in childhood and represents an important health-related issue across the lifespan. Individuals who are highly fearful of needles frequently avoid health care. Although guidance exists for managing needle pain and fear during procedures, the most highly fearful may refuse or abstain from such procedures. The purpose of a clinical practice guideline (CPG) is to provide actionable instruction on the management of a particular health concern; this guidance emerges from a systematic process. Using evidence from a rigorous systematic review interpreted by an expert panel, this CPG provides recommendations on exposure-based interventions for high levels of needle fear in children and adults. The AGREE-II, GRADE, and Cochrane methodologies were used. Exposure-based interventions were included. The included evidence was very low quality on average. Strong recommendations include the following. In vivo (live/in person) exposure-based therapy is recommended (vs. no treatment) for children seven years and older and adults with high levels of needle fear. Non-in vivo (imaginal, computer-based) exposure (vs. no treatment) is recommended for individuals (over seven years of age) who are unwilling to undergo in vivo exposure. Although there were no included trials which examined children < 7 years, exposure-based interventions are discussed as good clinical practice. Implementation considerations are discussed and clinical tools are provided. Utilization of these recommended practices may lead to improved health outcomes due to better health care compliance. Research on the understanding and treatment of high levels of needle fear is urgently needed; specific recommendations are provided.

Health care costs of persons with newly diagnosed hepatitis C virus: a population-based, observational study.

The objective of this paper was to conduct an analysis of the health services costs for persons who have been diagnosed with hepatitis C, from the time of diagnosis. Data were based on 1230 persons diagnosed with hepatitis C in 1998 in the Capital Health region of Alberta. Identifiers and dates of diagnosis were sent to Alberta Health and Wellness where records were linked to those of physician visits and billings, as well as hospital (inpatient and outpatient) visit records. Costs were assigned to all visits, and data were analysed for one pre- and two post-diagnosis years. Total cost per person increased from $2630 (Canadian) to $3514 between the pre- and first post-diagnosis year. They then returned to $2694 in the second post-diagnosis year. Liver-related costs were a low portion of the total in all periods, though they increased following diagnosis. Mental-health related costs were the largest component. Observational data present a more balanced picture of the costs of persons with hepatitis C, though most current estimates are not based on such data. Our results indicate that, when analysed within the picture of the entire person, liver-related costs (which have been the focus of most studies to date) are the tip of the iceberg.

Potential factors that may affect acceptance of routine prenatal HIV testing.

BACKGROUND: Despite increasing advocacy for an "opt-out" strategy in routine prenatal HIV screening programs in Canada, no published studies have examined factors that may affect acceptance of prenatal HIV testing. METHODS: We included all pregnant women in Alberta who received prenatal care (N = 38,712) and their caregivers (N = 2,007) between January 1 and November 30, 2000. Factors associated with non-acceptance of HIV testing in both pregnant women and their caregivers were assessed using multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: Overall, 1.5% of women declined HIV testing. First Nations women were about twice as likely to decline the test (adjusted odds ratio [OR(adj)] 1.91, 95% CI [1.42-2.58]) compared to non-First Nations women (p < 0.001). The proportion also increased with age (chi2 trend p < 0.001) in the general population. In First Nations women, however, most (3.2%) declined in the 20-24 year age group. No significant effect was seen for a socio-economic status marker or for the place of residence. The caregivers of women who declined HIV testing were more likely to be female (OR(adj) 1.56 [1.28-1.89]), midwives (OR(adj) 140.65 [58.61-337.49]), other non-obstetrical medical specialties (OR(adj) 4.92 [1.94-12.47]), and general practitioners (OR(adj) 3.44 [1.87-6.33]). CONCLUSION: In an "opt-out" routine prenatal HIV screening program, the characteristics of both the pregnant women and their caregivers may contribute to the non-acceptance of HIV testing. A higher likelihood of declining HIV testing among First Nations pregnant women and other pregnant women under the care of midwives and female physicians warrants further study.