Abstract Background The 2006 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) HIV testing guidelines recommend screening for HIV infection in all healthcare settings, including the emergency department (ED). In urban areas with a high background prevalence of HIV, the ED has become an increasingly important site for identifying HIV infection. However, this public health policy has been operationalized using different models. We sought to describe the development and implementation of HIV testing programs in three EDs, assess factors shaping the adoption and evolution of specific program elements, and identify barriers and facilitators to testing. Methods We performed a qualitative evaluation using in-depth interviews with fifteen 'key informants' involved in the development and implementation of HIV testing in three urban EDs serving sizable racial/ethnic minority and socioeconomically disadvantaged populations. Testing program HIV prevalence ranged from 0.4% to 3.0%. Results Three testing models were identified, reflecting differences in the use of existing ED staff to offer and perform the test and disclose results. Factors influencing the adoption of a particular model included: whether program developers were ED providers, HIV providers, or both; whether programs took a targeted or non-targeted approach to patient selection; and the extent to which linkage to care was viewed as the responsibility of the ED. A common barrier was discomfort among ED providers about disclosing a positive HIV test result. Common facilitators were a commitment to underserved populations, the perception that testing was an opportunity to re-engage previously HIV-infected patients in care, and the support and resources offered by the medical setting for HIV-infected patients. Conclusions ED HIV testing is occurring under a range of models that emerge from local realities and are tailored to institutional strengths to optimize implementation and overcome provider barriers.

Existing HIV care cascade metrics fail to capture whether viremia is equally distributed in a population or concentrated within groups. We applied the Lorenz curve, which has been used to describe disparities in the distribution of income and other resources, to the distribution of viremia in a safety-net HIV clinic in 2012. Among 1855 established clinic patients, 1% of the population held 50% of the virus and 10% of the population held 94% of virus.

Housing instability negatively impacts outcomes in people [living] with human immunodeficiency virus (PLHIV), yet the effect of diverse living arrangements has not previously been evaluated. Using 6 dwelling types to measure housing status, we found a strong inverse association between housing instability and viral suppression across a spectrum of unstable housing arrangements.

Purpose

The patient-provider relationship is a central factor that can promote or hinder long-term engagement in care among people living with chronic illnesses. In this paper, we explore characteristics of the patient-provider relationship that facilitated or hindered engagement in care among patients receiving care at HIV specialty clinics.

Patients and methods

We conducted 6 focus group discussions with a total of 43 well-retained and less well-retained HIV+ patients in San Francisco, Seattle, and Birmingham, to elicit a wide range of perspectives on engagement in HIV care. Borrowing from the field of psychotherapy, we examined patient-provider relationship characteristics through the lens of the therapeutic alliance, and with regard to their therapeutic efficacy and impact on patient engagement.

Results

The majority of participants emphasized how a strong patient-provider relationship defined by trust, intimacy, and collaboration promoted engagement, while a weak patient-provider relationship impeded engagement.

Conclusion

We discuss practical strategies and therapeutic techniques that may be helpful to providers in building strong patient-provider relationship and contend that a strong patient-provider relationship is crucial for patients to feel cared for during clinical encounters, which can promote long-term and sustained engagement in HIV care.

Purpose

Women involved in the carceral system (CS) experience several conditions that increase their risk for HIV (e.g. high rates of substance use, psychiatric disorders, histories of victimization). The purpose of this study is to explore perspectives on potential strategies to connect women in the CS to pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) services.

Design/methodology/approach

This study conducted in-depth interviews with 27 women involved in the CS eligible for PrEP. Using vignettes, interviews explored attitudes, barriers and facilitators toward PrEP screening, referral and linkage facilitated via a CS stakeholder, an mHealth application or providing PrEP service referrals during detention via a navigator.

Findings

Most women were, on average, 41.3 years, from racial and ethnic minority groups (56% black/African American; 19% Latinx). Inductive thematic analysis revealed CS involved women expressed mostly positive attitudes toward CS-based PrEP implementation. Younger women were more accepting of and interested in mHealth interventions. Implementation facilitators included leveraging relationships with trusted allies (e.g. "peers") and existing systems collaborations. Recommended implementation strategies included providing HIV and PrEP-specific education and training for system stakeholders and addressing issues related to privacy, system mistrust and stigma.

Originality/value

Results provide a critical foundation for the implementation of interventions to improve PrEP access for women involved in the CS and have important implications for implementation strategies for all adults involved in the CS. Improving access to PrEP among this population may also support progress toward addressing national disparities in PrEP uptake, where women, black and Latinx populations have substantial unmet need.

Although pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is a key tool in HIV prevention efforts, little is known about PrEP as a prevention strategy for criminal justice-involved (CJI) women. The purpose of this study was to examine multilevel factors shaping PrEP awareness and acceptability among CJI women. Between January 2017 and December 2017, we conducted 52 interviews with CJI women at high risk for HIV and stakeholders from the criminal justice (CJ) and public health (PH) systems. Interviews explored awareness of PrEP and the multilevel factors shaping PrEP acceptability. Data were analyzed using inductive thematic analysis and executive summaries. Atlas.ti facilitated analyses. The majority of CJI women (n = 27) were, on average, 41.3 years, from racial and ethnic minority groups (56% Black/African-American; 19% Latinx) and reported engaging in recent high-risk behavior (nearly 60% engaged in transactional sex, 22% reported ≥ 4 sexual partners, and 37% reported injection drug use). Of system stakeholders (n = 25), 52% represented the CJ sector. Although CJI women were generally unaware of PrEP, attitudes toward PrEP were enthusiastic. Barriers to PrEP acceptability included medication side effects (individual level); distrust in HIV prevention mechanisms (community level); lack of local HIV prevention efforts among high-risk women (public policy/HIV epidemic stage level). Factors promoting PrEP included perceived HIV risk (individual level); PrEP being an HIV prevention method that women can control without partner negotiation (social and sexual network level); and availability of public health insurance (community level). Despite low awareness of PrEP, CJI women expressed positive attitudes toward PrEP. To improve PrEP access for CJI women, implementation efforts should address barriers and leverage facilitators across multiple levels to be maximally effective.

ABSTRACT Background Despite high rates of patient satisfaction with emergency department (ED) HIV testing, acceptance varies widely. It is thought that patients who decline may be at higher risk for HIV infection, thus we sought to better understand patient acceptance and refusal of ED HIV testing. Methods In-depth interviews with fifty ED patients (28 accepters and 22 decliners of HIV testing) in three ED HIV testing programs that serve vulnerable urban populations in northern California. Results Many factors influenced the decision to accept ED HIV testing, including curiosity, reassurance of negative status, convenience, and opportunity. Similarly, a number of factors influenced the decision to decline HIV testing, including having been tested recently, the perception of being at low risk for HIV infection due to monogamy, abstinence or condom use, and wanting to focus on the medical reason for the ED visit. Both accepters and decliners viewed ED HIV testing favorably and nearly all participants felt comfortable with the testing experience, including the absence of counseling. While many participants who declined an ED HIV test had logical reasons, some participants also made clear that they would prefer not to know their HIV status rather than face psychosocial consequences such as loss of trust in a relationship or disclosure of status in hospital or public health records. Conclusions Testing for HIV in the ED as for any other health problem reduces barriers to testing for some but not all patients. Patients who decline ED HIV testing may have rational reasons, but there are some patients who avoid HIV testing because of psychosocial ramifications. While ED HIV testing is generally acceptable, more targeted approaches to testing are necessary for this subgroup.

While poverty is an established barrier to achieving success at each step of the HIV care continuum, less is known about specific aspects of poverty and how they overlap with behavior in exceptionally low-income individuals who live in well-resourced areas. We considered unsuppressed viral load over 3 years among women living with HIV in San Francisco who used homeless shelters, low-income hotels and free meal programs. One-hundred twenty study participants were followed; 60% had > 1 unsuppressed viral load and 19% were unsuppressed at every visit. Across six-month intervals, the odds of unsuppressed viral load were 11% higher for every 10 nights spent sleeping on the street [Adjusted Odds Ratio (AOR) 1.11, 95% CI 1.02-1.20]; 16% higher for every 10 nights spent sleeping in a shelter (AOR/10 nights 1.16, 95% CI 1.06-1.27); 4% higher for every 10 nights spent sleeping in a single-room occupancy hotel (AOR/10 nights 1.04, 95% CI 1.02-1.07); and over threefold higher among women who experienced any recent incarceration (AOR 3.56, 95% CI 1.84-6.86). Violence and recent use of outpatient health care did not significantly predict viral suppression in adjusted analysis. While strategies to promote retention in care are important for vulnerable persons living with HIV, they are insufficient to ensure sustained viral suppression in low-income women experiencing homelessness and incarceration. Results presented here in combination with prior research linking incarceration to homelessness among women indicate that tailored interventions, which not only consider but prioritize affordable housing, are critical to achieving sustained viral suppression in low-income women living with HIV.

Background

A recent clinical trial demonstrated that a daily dose tenofovir disoproxil fumarate and emtricitabrine (TDF-FTC) can reduce HIV acquisition among men who have sex with men (MSM) and transgender (TG) women by 44%, and up to 90% if taken daily. We explored how medical and service providers understand research results and plan to develop clinical protocols to prescribe, support and monitor adherence for patients on PrEP in the United States.

Methods

Using referrals from our community collaborators and snowball sampling, we recruited 22 healthcare providers in San Francisco, Oakland, and Los Angeles for in-depth interviews from May-December 2011. The providers included primary care physicians seeing high numbers of MSM and TG women, HIV specialists, community health clinic providers, and public health officials. We analyzed interviews thematically to produce recommendations for setting policy around implementing PrEP. Interview topics included: assessing clinician impressions of PrEP and CDC guidance, considerations of cost, office capacity, dosing schedules, and following patients over time.

Results

Little or no demand for PrEP from patients was reported at the time of the interviews. Providers did not agree on the most appropriate patients for PrEP and believed that current models of care, which do not involve routine frequent office visits, were not well suited for prescribing PrEP. Providers detailed the need to build capacity and were concerned about monitoring side effects and adherence. PrEP was seen as potentially having impact on the epidemic but providers also noted that community education campaigns needed to be tailored to effectively reach specific vulnerable populations.

Conclusions

While PrEP may be a novel and clinically compelling prevention intervention for MSM and TG women, it raises a number of important implementation challenges that would need to be addressed. Nonetheless, most providers expressed optimism that they eventually could prescribe and monitor PrEP in their practice.