Adolescents and Young Adults: The Pediatrician’s Role in HIV Testing and Pre- and Postexposure HIV Prophylaxis

Most sexually active youth in the United States do not believe that they are at risk for contracting HIV and have never been tested. Creating safe environments that promote confidentiality and respect, obtaining an accurate sexual and reproductive health assessment, and providing nonstigmatizing risk counseling are key components of any youth encounters. Pediatricians can play a key role in preventing and controlling HIV infection by promoting risk-reduction counseling and offering routine HIV testing and prophylaxis to adolescent and young adult (youth) patients. In light of persistently high numbers of people living with HIV in the United States and documented missed opportunities for HIV testing, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the US Preventive Services Task Force recommend universal and routine HIV screening among US populations, including youth. Recent advances in HIV diagnostics, treatment, and prevention help support this recommendation. This clinical report reviews epidemiological data and recommends that routine HIV screening be offered to all youth 15 years or older, at least once, in health care settings. After initial screening, youth at increased risk, including those who are sexually active, should be rescreened at least annually, and potentially as frequently as every 3 to 6 months if at high risk (male youth reporting male sexual contact, active injection drug users, transgender youth; youth having sexual partners who are HIV-infected, of both genders, or injection drug users; youth exchanging sex for drugs or money; or youth who have had a diagnosis of or have requested testing for other sexually transmitted infections). Youth at substantial risk for HIV acquisition should be routinely offered HIV preexposure prophylaxis, and HIV postexposure prophylaxis is also indicated after high-risk exposures. This clinical report also addresses consent, confidentiality, and coverage issues that pediatricians face in promoting routine HIV testing and HIV prophylaxis for their patients.

845. Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Routine HIV Screening in an Emergency Department

Background The Emergency Department (ED) at Memorial Hermann Hospital (MHH) - Texas Medical Center (TMC), Houston, Texas has a long established screening program targeted at detection of HIV infections. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on this screening program is unknown. Methods The Routine HIV screening program includes opt-out testing of all adults 18 years and older with Glasgow score > 9. HIV 4th generation Ag/Ab screening, with reflex to Gennius confirmatory tests are used. Pre-pandemic (March 2019 to February 2020) to Pandemic period (March 2020 to February 2021) intervals were compared. Results 72,929 patients visited MHH_ED during the pre-pandemic period and 57,128 in the pandemic period, a 22% decline. The number of patients tested for HIV pre-pandemic was 9433 and 6718 pandemic, a 29% decline. When the pandemic year was parsed into first and last 6 months interval and compared to similar intervals in the year pre pandemic, 39% followed by 16% declines in HIV testing were found. In total, 354 patients were HIV positives, 209, (59%) in the pre-pandemic and 145 (41%) in the pandemic period.The reduction in new HIV infections found was directly proportional to the decline in patients visiting the MHH-ED where the percent of patients HIV positive was constant across intervals (2.21% vs 2.26%). Demographic and outcome characteristics were constant across the compared intervals. Conclusion The COVID -19 pandemic reduced detection of new HIV infections by screening in direct proportion to the reduction in MHH-ED patient visits. The impact of COVID-19 pandemic decreased with duration of the pandemic. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

Investigating the predictors of routine HIV screening behaviors in nurses based on theory of reasoned action

Introduction: Adequate awareness and a positive attitude of nurses about HIV/AIDS can lead to better care and the provision of accurate information to the general public. Misconceptions about HIV/AIDS infection can affect the attitudes of healthcare staff and inappropriately affect the quality of care. Aim: The present study aimed to investigate the factors predicting the routine HIV screening behaviors in nurses based on the theory of reasoned action. Material and methods: This descriptive-cross-sectional study was conducted on 131 nurses working in Vali-e-Asr hospital in Fasa, Iran. The samples were selected by simple random method. Three 75-item standard questionnaires were also used to collect data, including 15 questions on attitudes, 30 questions on the nurses’ knowledge, and 30 questions on the nurses’ performance. Results and discussion: In total, 30 male (22.9%) and 101 (77.1%) female nurses entered in the study. Also, 65.6% of participants were 18–29 years and 48.9% (64) were working in emergency department. The mean attitude and knowledge were calculated to be 20.69 ± 3.17 points and 20.98 ± 4.78 points, respectively. Also, the mean of performance, behavioral control, intention, and subjective norms were calculated to be 84.63 ± 8.06 points, 24.56 ± 2.29 points, 63.93 ± 6.68 points, and 30.53 ± 3.27 points, respectively. The results of the present study indicated a significant relationship between the work experience with their attitude (P = 0.03) and knowledge (P = 0.001) as well as between the age and performance (P = 0.002). Conclusions: In the present study, the mean score of attitude, knowledge and performance was found to be moderate; thus the educational intervention seems necessary.

Effect of CDC 2006 Revised HIV Testing Recommendations for Adults, Adolescents, Pregnant Women, and Newborns on State Laws, 2018

In 2006, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention updated its recommendations for HIV testing of 4 population groups in health care settings: adults, adolescents, pregnant women, and newborns. Important components of the revised recommendations included opt-out routine HIV screening; eliminating prevention counseling for opt-out routine HIV screening; repeat HIV testing in the third trimester for all women at high risk for acquiring HIV and for women receiving health care in facilities and/or jurisdictions with high HIV burden; testing during labor and delivery for women with undocumented HIV status; and testing the newborn when the mother’s HIV status is unknown. To assess the integration of these testing recommendations into state laws and to inform future recommendations, we researched and assessed statutes and regulations that addressed HIV testing in the 4 population groups in all 50 states and the District of Columbia in 2018. We then classified the laws, based on their consistency with the recommendations for each of the 4 population groups. Of 31 states and the District of Columbia that had relevant laws, all addressed at least 1 component of the recommendations. Although no state had laws that incorporated all the recommendations for all the population groups, 5 states (Delaware, Illinois, Louisiana, Maryland, and New Hampshire) had incorporated all the recommendations for adults and adolescents, and 4 states (Connecticut, Nevada, North Carolina, and West Virginia) had incorporated all the recommendations for pregnant women and newborns.

Missed Opportunities for HIV Screening of New Enrollees in California's Low Income Health Program

The objective of this study was to measure HIV screening rates and variables associated with screening among new enrollees in California's Low Income Health Program (LIHP). A logit model was used to estimate associations between HIV screening and enrollment, claims, and encounter data for enrollees. HIV prevalence among new LIHP enrollees was 1.2%xd. Among 42,550 new LIHP enrollees with no prior HIV diagnosis, only 27% received screening within 12 months of their first medical evaluation. A total of 350 new HIV diagnoses were identified (incidence rate of 0.8%), exceeding the 0.1% level at which the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommends routine HIV screening. California reduced screening barriers by removing required written informed consent and pretest counseling; the Affordable Care Act (ACA) eliminated cost-sharing and enhanced access. Removing financial and administrative barriers to HIV screening is necessary, but may be insufficient to reach CDC's recommended screening targets.

Clinician Barriers and Facilitators to Routine HIV Testing: A Systematic Review of the Literature

Background: Routine HIV screening rates are suboptimal. Objectives: This systematic review identified barriers to/facilitators of routine HIV testing, categorized them using the socioecological model (SEM), and provided recommendations for interventions to increase screening. Data Sources: Included articles were indexed in PubMed, EBSCO CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library between 2006 and October 2018. Eligibility Criteria: Included studies were published in English or Spanish and directly assessed providers’ barriers/facilitators to routine screening. Data Extraction: We used a standardized Excel template to extract barriers/facilitators and identify levels in the SEM. Data Synthesis: Intrapersonal factors predominated as barriers, while facilitators were directed at the institutional level. Limitations: Policy barriers are not universal across countries. Meta-analysis was not possible. We could not quantify frequency of any given barrier/facilitator. Conclusions: Increasing reimbursement and adding screening as a quality measure may incentivize HIV testing; however, many interventions would require little resource investment.