Cohan Deborah, Gomez Elvira, Greenberg Mara, Washington Sierra, Charlebois Edwin D
Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, & Reproductive Sciences, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, United States of America.
PLoS One. 2009;4(4):e5166. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0005166. Epub 2009 Apr 15.
In the US, an unacceptably high percentage of pregnant women do not undergo prenatal HIV testing. Previous studies have found increased uptake of prenatal HIV testing with abbreviated pre-test counseling, however little is known about patient decision making, testing satisfaction and knowledge in this setting.
METHODOLOGY/FINDINGS: A randomized-controlled, non-inferiority trial was conducted from October 2006 through February 2008 at San Francisco General Hospital (SFGH), the public teaching hospital of the City and County of San Francisco. A total of 278 English- and Spanish-speaking pregnant women were randomized to receive either abbreviated or standard nurse-performed HIV test counseling at the initial prenatal visit. Patient decision making experience was compared between abbreviated versus standard HIV counseling strategies among a sample of low-income, urban, ethnically diverse prenatal patients. The primary outcome was the decisional conflict score (DCS) using O'Connor low-literacy scale and secondary outcomes included satisfaction with test decision, basic HIV knowledge and HIV testing uptake. We conducted an intention-to-treat analysis of 278 women--134 (48.2%) in the abbreviated arm (AA) and 144 (51.8%) in the standard arm (SA). There was no significant difference in the proportion of women with low decisional conflict (71.6% in AA vs. 76.4% in SA, p = .37), and the observed mean difference between the groups of 3.88 (95% CI: -0.65, 8.41) did not exceed the non-inferiority margin. HIV testing uptake was very high (97. 8%) and did not differ significantly between the 2 groups (99.3% in AA vs. 96.5% in SA, p = .12). Likewise, there was no difference in satisfaction with testing decision (97.8% in AA vs. 99.3% in SA, p = .36). However, women in AA had significantly lower mean HIV knowledge scores (78.4%) compared to women in SA (83.7%, p<0.01).
CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: This study suggests that streamlining the pre-test counseling process, while associated with slightly lower knowledge, does not compromise patient decision making or satisfaction regarding HIV testing.
ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00503308.
在美国,未接受产前HIV检测的孕妇比例高得令人无法接受。以往研究发现,采用简化的检测前咨询可提高产前HIV检测的接受率,但对于这种情况下患者的决策过程、检测满意度和知识了解情况却知之甚少。
方法/研究结果:2006年10月至2008年2月期间,在旧金山市县的公立教学医院旧金山总医院(SFGH)开展了一项随机对照非劣效性试验。共有278名讲英语和西班牙语的孕妇被随机分组,在首次产前检查时接受简化或标准的护士执行的HIV检测咨询。在低收入、城市、种族多样的产前患者样本中,比较了简化与标准HIV咨询策略之间患者的决策体验。主要结局是使用奥康纳低识字量表得出的决策冲突评分(DCS),次要结局包括对检测决策的满意度、基本HIV知识和HIV检测接受率。我们对278名女性进行了意向性分析——简化组(AA)有134名(48.2%),标准组(SA)有144名(51.8%)。决策冲突较低的女性比例无显著差异(AA组为71.6%,SA组为76.4%,p = 0.37),两组之间观察到的平均差异为3.88(95%CI:-0.65,8.41),未超过非劣效性界限。HIV检测接受率非常高(97.8%),两组之间无显著差异(AA组为99.3%,SA组为96.5%,p = 0.12)。同样,对检测决策的满意度也无差异(AA组为97.8%,SA组为99.3%,p = 0.36)。然而,AA组女性的平均HIV知识得分(78.4%)显著低于SA组女性(83.7%,p<0.01)。
结论/意义:本研究表明,简化检测前咨询流程虽然会使知识水平略低,但不会影响患者在HIV检测方面的决策或满意度。
ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00503308。