Annals
Established in 1927 by the American College of Physicians
:
Advanced search
 

Abstract/Editors' Note | Full Text | PDF

FIGURES/TABLES SUMMARY PAGE

PowerPoint slides are available for most Figures at Annals.org

Screening for HIV: A Review of the Evidence for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force



View larger version (17K):

[in a new window]
 
Figure. Screening for HIV—analytic framework for screening asymptomatic adolescents and adults. Key Question (KQ) 1: Does screening for HIV infection in asymptomatic adolescents and adults reduce premature death and disability or spread of disease? KQ 2: Can clinical or demographic characteristics (including specific settings) identify subgroups of asymptomatic adolescents and adults at increased risk for HIV compared to the general population? KQ 3: What are the test characteristics of HIV antibody test strategies? KQ 4: What are the harms (including labeling and anxiety) associated with screening? Is screening acceptable to patients? KQ 5: How many newly diagnosed HIV-positive patients meet criteria for antiretroviral treatment or prophylaxis against opportunistic infections? How many patients who meet criteria for interventions receive them? KQ 6: What are the harms associated with the work-up for HIV infection? KQ 7: a) How effective are interventions (antiretroviral treatment, counseling on risky behaviors, immunizations, routine monitoring and follow-up, more frequent Papanicolaou testing, or prophylaxis against opportunistic infections) in improving clinical outcomes (mortality, functional status, quality of life, symptoms, opportunistic infections, or transmission rates)? b) In asymptomatic patients with HIV infection, does immediate antiretroviral treatment result in improvements in clinical outcomes compared to delayed treatment until the patient is symptomatic? c) How well do interventions reduce the rate of viremia, improve CD4 counts, or reduce risky behaviors? KQ 8: What are the harms associated with antiretroviral therapy? KQ 9: Have improvements in intermediate outcomes (CD4 counts, viremia, risky behaviors) been shown to reduce premature death and disability or spread of disease? KQ 10: What is the cost-effectiveness of screening for HIV infection? *Excluding pregnant women, patients undergoing dialysis, and patients receiving transplants. A separate report (13) reviews KQs 6, 7c, 9, and portions of 7a (immunizations, routine monitoring and follow-up, and more frequent Papanicolaou testing).

 

View this table:

[in a new window]
 
Table 1. Asymptomatic Adolescents and Adults at High Risk for HIV Infection

 

View this table:

[in a new window]
 
Table 2. Effectiveness of Primary Prophylaxis against Pneumocystis carinii Pneumonia and Cerebral Toxoplasmosis in HIV-Infected Patients

 

View this table:

[in a new window]
 
Table 3. Effectiveness of Primary Prophylaxis against Disseminated Mycobacterium avium intracellulare Infection in HIV-Positive Patients

 

View this table:

[in a new window]
 
Table 4. Studies Evaluating When To Initiate Antiretroviral Therapy in HIV-Infected Patients

 

View this table:

[in a new window]
 
Table 5. Outcomes of Counseling and One-Time Screening for HIV Infection after 3 Years in 3 Hypothetical Cohorts of 10 000 Asymptomatic Adolescents and Adults

 

View this table:

[in a new window]
 
Table 6. Summary of Findings of the Systematic Evidence Review

 

View this table:

[in a new window]
 
Appendix Table. Base-Case Assumptions for Outcomes Tables (Table 5) of Counseling and One-Time Screening for HIV Infection{webonly}

 





 Home | Current Issue | Past Issues | In the Clinic | ACP Journal Club | CME | Collections | Audio/Video | Mobile | Subscribe | Tools | Help | ACP Online 

Copyright © 2005 by the American College of Physicians.