4.7 Article

HIV Testing Among Adolescents With Acute Sexually Transmitted Infections

期刊

PEDIATRICS
卷 145, 期 4, 页码 -

出版社

AMER ACAD PEDIATRICS
DOI: 10.1542/peds.2019-2265

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institute of Mental Health [F32 MH111341]
  2. Children's Hospital of Philadelphia Research Institute K-Readiness Award
  3. National Institutes of Health (NIH)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Rates of sexually transmitted infections (STIs) have increased over the decade. Guidelines recommend HIV testing with incident STIs. Prevalence and factors associated with HIV testing in acute STIs are unknown in adolescents. Our objective was to determine the prevalence of completed HIV testing among adolescents with incident STIs and identify patient and health care factors associated with HIV testing. METHODS: Retrospective study of STI episodes (gonorrhea, Chlamydia, trichomoniasis, or syphilis) of adolescents between 13 and 24 years old from July 2014 to December 2017 in 2 urban primary care clinics. We performed mixed effects logistic regression modeling to identify patient and health care factors associated with HIV testing within 90 days of STI diagnosis. RESULTS: The 1313 participants contributed 1816 acute STI episodes. Mean age at STI diagnosis was 17.2 years (SD = 1.7), 75% of episodes occurred in females, and 97% occurred in African Americans. Only half (55%) of acute STI episodes had a completed HIV test. In the adjusted model, female sex, previous STIs, uninsured status, and confidential sexual health encounters were associated with decreased odds of HIV testing. Patients enrolled in primary care at the clinics, compared with those receiving sexual health care alone, and those with multipathogen STI diagnoses were more likely to have HIV testing. CONCLUSIONS: HIV testing rates among adolescents with acute STIs are suboptimal. Patient and health care factors were found to be associated with receipt of testing and should be considered in clinical practice.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据