TY - JOUR
T1 - Counselor-versus provider-based HIV screening in the emergency department
T2 - Results from the universal screening for HIV Infection in the Emergency Room (USHER) randomized controlled trial
AU - Walensky, Rochelle P.
AU - Reichmann, William M.
AU - Arbelaez, Christian
AU - Wright, Elizabeth
AU - Katz, Jeffrey N.
AU - Seage, George R.
AU - Safren, Steven A.
AU - Hare, Anna Q.
AU - Novais, Anna
AU - Losina, Elena
N1 - Funding Information:
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 ). This research was funded by the National Institute of Mental Health (R01 MH073445, R01 MH65869) and the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation, Clinical Scientist Development Award to Rochelle P. Walensky. No authors have conflicts of interest to disclose.
Funding Information:
Publication of this article was supported by Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA.
PY - 2011/7
Y1 - 2011/7
N2 - Objective: We compare rates of rapid HIV testing, test offer, and acceptance in an urban emergency department (ED) when conducted by dedicated HIV counselors versus current members of the ED staff. Methods: The Universal Screening for HIV Infection in the Emergency Room [USHER] trial is a prospective randomized controlled trial that implemented an HIV screening program in the ED of an urban tertiary medical center. ED patients were screened and consented for trial enrollment by an USHER research assistant. Eligible subjects were randomized to rapid HIV testing (oral OraQuick) offered by a dedicated counselor (counselor arm) or by an ED provider (provider arm). In the counselor arm, counselorswithout other clinical responsibilitiesassumed nearly all testing-related activities (consent, counseling, delivery of test results). In the provider arm, trained ED emergency service assistants (nursing assistants) consented and tested the participant in the context of other ED-related responsibilities. In this arm, ED house officers, physician assistants, or attending physicians provided HIV test results to trial participants. Outcome measures were rates of HIV testing and test offer among individuals consenting for study participation. Among individuals offered the test, test acceptance was also measured. Results: From February 2007 through July 2008, 8,187 eligible patients were approached in the ED, and 4,855 (59%) consented and were randomized to trial participation. The mean age was 37 years, 65% were women, and 42% were white. The overall testing rate favored the counselor arm (57% versus 27%; P<.001); 80% (1,959/2,446) of subjects in the counselor arm were offered an HIV test compared with 36% (861/2,409) in the provider arm (P<.001). HIV test acceptance was slightly higher in the provider arm (counselor arm 71% versus provider arm 75%; P=.025). Conclusion: Routine rapid HIV testing in the ED was accomplished more frequently by dedicated HIV counselors than by ED staff in the course of routine clinical work. Without dedicated staff, HIV testing in this setting may not be truly routine.
AB - Objective: We compare rates of rapid HIV testing, test offer, and acceptance in an urban emergency department (ED) when conducted by dedicated HIV counselors versus current members of the ED staff. Methods: The Universal Screening for HIV Infection in the Emergency Room [USHER] trial is a prospective randomized controlled trial that implemented an HIV screening program in the ED of an urban tertiary medical center. ED patients were screened and consented for trial enrollment by an USHER research assistant. Eligible subjects were randomized to rapid HIV testing (oral OraQuick) offered by a dedicated counselor (counselor arm) or by an ED provider (provider arm). In the counselor arm, counselorswithout other clinical responsibilitiesassumed nearly all testing-related activities (consent, counseling, delivery of test results). In the provider arm, trained ED emergency service assistants (nursing assistants) consented and tested the participant in the context of other ED-related responsibilities. In this arm, ED house officers, physician assistants, or attending physicians provided HIV test results to trial participants. Outcome measures were rates of HIV testing and test offer among individuals consenting for study participation. Among individuals offered the test, test acceptance was also measured. Results: From February 2007 through July 2008, 8,187 eligible patients were approached in the ED, and 4,855 (59%) consented and were randomized to trial participation. The mean age was 37 years, 65% were women, and 42% were white. The overall testing rate favored the counselor arm (57% versus 27%; P<.001); 80% (1,959/2,446) of subjects in the counselor arm were offered an HIV test compared with 36% (861/2,409) in the provider arm (P<.001). HIV test acceptance was slightly higher in the provider arm (counselor arm 71% versus provider arm 75%; P=.025). Conclusion: Routine rapid HIV testing in the ED was accomplished more frequently by dedicated HIV counselors than by ED staff in the course of routine clinical work. Without dedicated staff, HIV testing in this setting may not be truly routine.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79959446334&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79959446334&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2011.03.023
DO - 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2011.03.023
M3 - Article
C2 - 21684391
AN - SCOPUS:79959446334
VL - 58
SP - S126-S132
JO - Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians
JF - Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians
SN - 0196-0644
IS - 1 SUPPL.
ER -