DEPIVIH 2: Use of three HIV testing methods in French primary care settings - ELISA laboratory screening versus two rapid point-of-care HIV tests.

OBJECTIVE: The primary endpoint was to evaluate the use of HIV testing methods by French primary care providers: Elisa laboratory screening, instant result HIV diagnostic test and rapid result HIV diagnostic test. The secondary endpoints were the population screening rate of unknown HIV status consulting during the study period, reasons for screening and for choosing the specific screening method, the investigators' satisfaction with the rapid diagnostic test (RDT) and problems encountered. PATIENTS AND METHODS: National prospective interventional study with French family physicians (FP) from December 2013 to December 2014. FPs enrolled all consenting adults consulting for an HIV screening test during a 6-month period: the choice was an Elisa laboratory test or one of the two RDTs. RESULTS: During the study period, 43 FPs included 981 patients. HIV screening was performed for the first time for 31.6% of patients; 767 (78.2%) Elisa laboratory test prescriptions and 214 (21.8%) RDTs were performed, leading to a screening rate of 1.3%. For 120 (15.7%) of the Elisa laboratory tests, the result was not reported and six RDTs were not valid. Nine patients were diagnosed as HIV-infected (0.9%): five with Elisa laboratory test and four with RDT. Almost 90% of FPs were willing to keep on using RDTs in their daily practice. CONCLUSION: In general practice, RDTs may be an important additional tool to traditional HIV screening. They could account for one in five tests prescribed in this context.

Feasibility and acceptability of rapid HIV test screening (DEPIVIH) by French family physicians.

BACKGROUND: In France, around 50,000 people were unaware of their HIV positivity at the end of 2008. The latest guidelines recommend routine screening of all adults. Family physicians have been identified as key persons for this new policy. Rapid HIV tests (RHT) have been proposed as an alternative to conventional blood tests. OBJECTIVES: The authors assessed the feasibility and acceptability of RHT test based screening in French community practice. METHOD: We made a prospective interventional study of the BioMerieux VIKIA(®) HIV 1/2 RHT among French family physicians. Data on the RHT was posted in the physician's waiting room. RESULTS: Sixty-two French physicians, mostly family practitioners, included 383 patients with a mean age of 36.2 years, from June to October 2010. Twenty-two percent (83) of these patients had never been tested for HIV. The RHT was proposed and 382 tests were accepted and performed (acceptability rate of 99.7%). Sixty-five percent of the tests were made on the patient's request. The tested population represented 1.5% of consulting patients during the study period (feasibility rate). Patients were quite satisfied but physicians less so. Test steps and capillary blood sampling were the main source of difficulty mentioned. At the end of the study, 59% of physicians were ready to continue using RHT in their daily practice. CONCLUSION: Routine RHT screening in community practice is feasible and well accepted by patients. It was the first screening test for 22% of our patients. Its feasibility was limited by capillary blood sampling technique and time constraints during consultation.

Assessment of cetirizine, an antihistamine, to prevent cutaneous reactions to nevirapine therapy: results of the viramune-zyrtec double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

We conducted a 12-week, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of cetirizine to assess the ability of antihistamines to prevent nevirapine-associated rash in patients infected with human immunodeficiency virus type 1. Patients initiating treatment with nevirapine were randomized to receive either cetirizine, 10 mg q.d. (104 patients), or placebo (96 patients) during the first 6 weeks of therapy. Rash occurred in 22 (11%) of 200 patients; 10 (9.6%) were in the cetirizine group and 12 (12.5%) were in the placebo group (odds ratio [OR], 0.75; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.31-1.81; P=.5). Five of 22 rashes were cases of hypersensitivity syndrome. The rate of nevirapine discontinuation due to rash was similar in the 2 groups (7.7% and 6.25% in the cetirizine and placebo groups, respectively; P=.4). Multivariate analysis showed no treatment-group effect but indicated that age >40 years (OR, 3.83; 95% CI, 1.4-10.46; P=.008) was associated with an increased risk of rash. Cetirizine has no preventive effect on nevirapine-associated rash.