Infectious disease/editorialAcute HIV Infection and Implications of Fourth-Generation HIV Screening in Emergency Departments
References (44)
- et al.
2009 US emergency department HIV testing practices
Ann Emerg Med
(2011) - et al.
HIV testing in emergency departments in the United States: a national survey
Ann Emerg Med
(2011) - et al.
HIV testing in US EDs, 1993-2004
Am J Emerg Med
(2009) - et al.
Identification of acute HIV infection using fourth generation testing in an opt-out emergency department screening program
Ann Emerg Med
(2014) - et al.
Implementing an HIV and sexually transmitted disease screening program in an emergency department
Ann Emerg Med
(2007) - et al.
Results of a rapid HIV screening and diagnostic testing program in an urban emergency department
Ann Emerg Med
(2009) - et al.
HIV screening in an urban emergency department: comparison of screening using an opt-in versus an opt-out approach
Ann Emerg Med
(2011) - et al.
The use of a computer reminder system in an emergency department universal HIV screening program
Ann Emerg Med
(2011) - et al.
Comparison of enhanced targeted rapid HIV screening using the Denver HIV risk score to nontargeted rapid HIV screening in the emergency department
Ann Emerg Med
(2013) - et al.
Rapid HIV testing in a southeastern emergency department serving a semiurban-semirural adolescent and adult population
Ann Emerg Med
(2011)
Using nonrapid HIV technology for routine, opt-out HIV screening in a high-volume urban emergency department
Ann Emerg Med
Use of the Abbott Architect HIV antigen/antibody assay in a low incidence population
J Clin Virol
Identification of early HIV infections using the fourth generation Abbott ARCHITECT HIV Ag/Ab Combo chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay (CIA) in San Diego County
J Clin Virol
Estimating sexual transmission of HIV from persons aware and unaware that they are infected with the virus in the USA
AIDS
Sexual transmission during the incubation period of primary HIV infection
JAMA
Brief but efficient: acute HIV infection and the sexual transmission of HIV
J Infect Dis
Prevention of HIV-1 infection with early antiretroviral therapy
N Engl J Med
Revised recommendations for HIV testing of adults, adolescents, and pregnant women in health-care settings
MMWR Recomm Rep
Opt-out testing for human immunodeficiency virus in the United States: progress and challenges
JAMA
Screening for HIV: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement
Ann Intern Med
Cited by (23)
Missed HIV diagnoses when screening only emergency department patients who have blood samples obtained for other clinical purposes
2021, American Journal of Emergency MedicineEstimated proportion of an urban academic emergency department patient population eligible for HIV preexposure prophylaxis
2021, American Journal of Emergency MedicineCitation Excerpt :Emergency departments (EDs) are an ideal setting to identify patients who are at risk for HIV because of high patient volume and access to vulnerable populations [9,10]. EDs have long been prioritized for HIV screening and linking those identified to care and needed services [10-15]. However, routine ED-based HIV screening programs do not systematically or intensively pursue HIV prevention intervention for at-risk patients who are found to be HIV negative.
Identifying ED patients with previous abnormal HIV or hepatitis C test results who may require additional services
2020, American Journal of Emergency MedicineCitation Excerpt :Routine screening in medical settings has been recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) since 2006 [3]. The screening process typically involves 1) an initial (i.e. rapid) test for antibodies (HIV and HCV) and antigens (HIV only), 2) antibody differentiation immunoassay (for HIV only if rapid test is positive to specifically detect HIV-1 and HIV-2), and 3) a follow-up confirmatory RNA test if rapid results are positive (HCV) or if antibody differentiation results are negative or indeterminate (HIV) [4,5]. Once a patient has been confirmed positive, a diagnosis is made and positive individuals are linked to medical care [6].
Patients’ response to an emergency department-based HIV testing program and perception of their friends’ attitudes on HIV testing among patients seeking care at an urban emergency department in Baltimore, Maryland, USA
2020, Journal of Infection and Public HealthCitation Excerpt :In the last decade, the number of HIV testing programs in U.S. Emergency Departments (EDs) has increased [1]. EDs are now key venues for HIV diagnosis and linkage to care [2,3]. An understanding of patients’ attitudes on ED-based HIV testing and social factors affecting patient attitudes are important for designing and improving testing programs.
The Evolving Landscape of HIV Screening in the Emergency Department
2018, Annals of Emergency MedicineAcute HIV Discovered During Routine HIV Screening With HIV Antigen-Antibody Combination Tests in 9 US Emergency Departments
2018, Annals of Emergency MedicineCitation Excerpt :In 2014, a report of an HIV antigen-antibody screening program in a large Arizona ED demonstrated that nearly one quarter of all new HIV diagnoses were acute HIV infection.8 Since then, several EDs have reported significant, albeit lower, proportions of acute HIV infection diagnoses, ranging from 6.5% to 17.6% among patients with newly identified HIV infection.4-7 The high proportion of acute HIV infection among HIV infections identified in EDs with nontargeted HIV antigen-antibody screening programs suggests these patients may be seeking care for symptoms of their acute viral infection.
Supervising editor: Gregory J. Moran, MD
Funding and support: By Annals policy, all authors are required to disclose any and all commercial, financial, and other relationships in any way related to the subject of this article as per ICMJE conflict of interest guidelines (see www.icmje.org). The authors have stated that no such relationships exist and provided the following details: Drs. Haukoos, Lyons, White, and Rothman are supported, in part, by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) (R01AI106057). Drs. Haukoos, Lyons, and Rothman are supported, in part, by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (R01HS021749). Dr. Hsieh is supported, in part, by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (K01AI100681). Drs. White, Hsieh, and Rothman are supported, in part, by the Gilead Sciences HIV Focus Program.
A podcast for this article is available at www.annemergmed.com.