Evaluation of a new testing policy for human immunodeficiency virus to improve screening rates

Citation
Em. Stringer et al., Evaluation of a new testing policy for human immunodeficiency virus to improve screening rates, OBSTET GYN, 98(6), 2001, pp. 1104-1108
Citations number
9
Categorie Soggetti
Reproductive Medicine","da verificare
Journal title
OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY
ISSN journal
00297844 → ACNP
Volume
98
Issue
6
Year of publication
2001
Pages
1104 - 1108
Database
ISI
SICI code
0029-7844(200112)98:6<1104:EOANTP>2.0.ZU;2-V
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of a change in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) testing policy on HIV testing rates in an urban maternity clinic pop ulation. METHODS: Since 1995, our institution has provided pretest counseling and vo luntary HIV testing to all pregnant women. After the 1999 Institute of Medi cine recommendation of HIV testing with patient notification as a routine c omponent of prenatal care, we conducted a prospective study to determine wh ether this policy would increase our HIV screening rates. The intervention incorporated HIV testing into the routine battery of tests drawn at antenat al care. Not to be tested required active refusal. The intervention group w as comprised of all women receiving an initial antenatal visit in one of ou r eight maternity clinics between August 1, 1999, and July 30, 2000. The co ntrol group was comprised of all women presenting for prenatal care in the same clinics during the year before the intervention. RESULTS: The 3415 women in the intervention group and 3778 controls were si milar with respect to most demographic and risk factors. After the interven tion, HIV testing increased from 75% to 88% (P <.001). Among all women in b oth years of the study, women who were in the intervention group, less than 20 years of age, or who had a history of substance abuse, were more likely not to refuse testing. CONCLUSION: After implementation of a policy of routine HIV testing with ac tive patient refusal, HIV testing rates increased among pregnant women in o ur large, urban obstetric clinic population. (Obstet Gynecol 2001;98: 1104- 8. (C) 2001 by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.).