Search

Introduction: The incidence of sexually transmitted infections (STI) increased in the United States between 2017-2021. There is limited data describing STI co-testing practices and the prevalence of STI co-infections in emergency departments (ED). In this study, we aimed to describe the prevalence of co-testing and co-infection of HIV, hepatitis C virus (HCV), syphilis, gonorrhea, and chlamydia, in a large, academic ED. Methods: This was a single-center, retrospective cross-sectional study of ED patients tested for HIV, HCV, syphilis, gonorrhea or chlamydia between November 27, 2018-May 26, 2019. In 2018, the study institution implemented an ED-based infectious diseases screening program in which any patient being tested for gonorrhea/chlamydia was eligible for opt-out syphilis screening, and any patient 18-64 years who was having blood drawn for any clinical purpose was eligible for opt-out HIV andHCV screening. We analyzed data from all ED patients ≥13 years who had undergone STI testing. The outcomes of interest included prevalence of STI testing/co-testing and the prevalence of STI infection/co-infection. We describe data with simple descriptive statistics. Results: During the study period there were 30,767 ED encounters for patients ≥13 years (mean age: 43 ± 14 years, 52% female), and 7,866 (26%) were tested for at least one of HIV, HCV, syphilis, gonorrhea, or chlamydia. We observed the following testing frequencies (and prevalence of infection): HCV, 7,539 (5.0%); HIV, 7,359 (0.9%); gonorrhea, 574 (6.1%); chlamydia, 574 (9.8%); and syphilis, 420 (10.5%). Infectious etiologies with universal testing protocols (HIV and HCV) made up the majority of STI testing. In patients with syphilis, co-infection with chlamydia (21%, 9/44) and HIV (9%, 4/44) was high. In patients with gonorrhea, co-infection with chlamydia (23%, 8/35) and syphilis (9%, 3/35) was high, and in patients with chlamydia, co-infection with syphilis (16%, 9/56) and gonorrhea (14%, 8/56) was high. Patients with HCV had low co-infection proportions (<2%). Conclusion: Prevalence of STI co-testing was low among patients with clinical suspicion for STIs; however, co-infection prevalence was high in several co-infection pairings. Future efforts are needed to improve STI co-testing rates among high-risk individuals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: New evidence suggests that emergency department (ED)-based infectious diseases screening programs have utility. We aimed to compare clinic-based and ED-based hepatitis C virus (HCV) screening programs within a single health system, to identify key differences in HCV antibody (Ab) positivity and chronic HCV, as well as population demographics. Methods: In the clinic-based program, adults in the birth cohort (born 1945-1965) were screened for HCV. In the ED-based program, non-targeted HCV screening of all adults was conducted. We included patients screened between June 2019--June 2020. Patients were screened for anti-HCV Ab, and positive results were followed by HCV viral load (VL) testing. Our primary outcomes were seroprevalence of HCV Ab and HCV VL. Results: There were 1,296 and 12,778 patients screened for HCV in the clinics and the ED, respectively. In the clinic setting, 13 patients (1%) screened positive for HCV Ab and nine (69%) completed VL testing, which was positive in one patient (11%). In the ED, 1,053 patients (8%) screened positive for HCV Ab and 847 (80%) underwent reflex VL testing, which was positive in 381 patients (45%). In an ED birth cohort sub-analysis, Hepatitis C virus Ab seroprevalence was 15% (675/4521). Conclusion: In this study of patients in a single healthcare system, ED-based HCV screening was higher yield than clinic-based screening. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The prevalence of syphilis is increasing in the United States. The emergency department (ED) is an important setting to screen and treat underserved populations. To tailor testing protocols to the local population, we aimed to identify risk factors for syphilis positivity in ED patients.Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of ED patients who were screened for syphilis between November 2018 and August 2020. Patients were screened for Treponema pallidum antibody using a multiplex flow immunoassay, and positive results were confirmed by rapid plasma reagin or T. pallidum particle agglutination. Risk factors for new syphilis diagnoses were identified using multiple logistic regression.Results: We screened 1974 patients for syphilis (mean age, 37 ± 16 years; 56% female). We identified 201 patients with new infections without previous treatment. Independent risk factors for a new diagnosis of syphilis included housing status (undomiciled, 23% [60 of 256]; domiciled, 9% [133 of 1559]; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.9 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.2-3.0]), history of HIV (positive, 44% [28 of 63]; negative, 9% [173 of 1893]; aOR, 5.8 [95% CI, 3.0-11.2]), tobacco use (positive, 15% [117 of 797]; negative, 4% [29 of 665]; aOR, 2.4 [95% CI, 1.5-3.9]), and illicit drug use (positive, 14% [112 of 812]; negative, 8% [52 of 678]; aOR, 2.2 [95% CI, 1.0-2.5]).Conclusions: Undomiciled housing status, history of HIV, history of tobacco use, and history of illicit drug use were independently associated with a new diagnosis of syphilis in the ED. Broadening targeted syphilis screening algorithms beyond sexually transmitted disease-related complaints could help identify new syphilis cases for treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: In 2019 the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) released draft guidelines recommending universal hepatitis C virus (HCV) screening for individuals aged 18-79. We aimed to assess the efficacy of an emergency department-based HCV screening program, by comparing screening practices before and after its implementation. Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort analysis of two temporally matched, 11-month study periods, corresponding to before and after the implementation of a best practice advisory (BPA). Patients were screened for anti-HCV antibody (Ab), and positive results were followed by HCV viral load (VL) testing. The primary implementation outcome was ED testing volume (number of tests performed/month). The primary screening outcomes were the seroprevalence of anti-HCV Ab and HCV VL. We describe data with simple descriptive statistics. Results: The median age of patients was similar between periods (pre: 50 years [interquartile range [IQR] 34-62], post: 47 years [IQR 33-59]). Patients screened were more likely to be males in the pre-BPA period (Male, pre: 60%, post: 49%). During the pre-BPA study period, a total of 69,604 patients were seen in the ED, and 218 unique patients were screened for HCV (mean 19.8 tests/month). During the post-BPA study period, a total of 68,225 patients were seen in the ED, and 14,981 unique patients were screened for HCV (mean 1361.9 tests/month). Anti-HCV Ab seroprevalence was 23% (51/218) and 9% (1340/14,981) in the pre-BPA and post-BPA periods, respectively. In the pre-BPA period, six patients with a positive anti-HCV Ab level had follow-up VL testing (detectable in three). In the post-BPA period, reflex VL testing was performed in most patients (91%, 1225/1,340), and there were 563 patients with detectable VLs, indicating active infection. Conclusion: Our study shows that using a universal BPA-driven screening protocol can dramatically increase the number of patients screened for HCV and increase the number of new HCV diagnoses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]