Lubelchek Ronald J, Finnegan Katelynne J, Hotton Anna L, Hazen Ronald, Murphy Patricia, Prachand Nikhil G, Benbow Nanette
*Ruth M. Rothstein CORE Center, Chicago, IL; †Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Internal Medicine, John H. Stroger, Jr. Hospital of Cook County, Chicago, IL; ‡Chicago Developmental Center for AIDS Research, Chicago, IL; and §Division of STI/HIV, Chicago Department of Public Health, Chicago, IL.
J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2015 May 1;69 Suppl 1(0 1):S25-30. doi: 10.1097/QAI.0000000000000574.
Improved retention-in-care may enhance health outcomes for people living with HIV/AIDS (PLWHA). Although laboratory surveillance data may be used to gauge retention, no previous reports have compared laboratory surveillance vs. clinic visit-based measures of retention-in-care. We compared laboratory surveillance vs. clinic visit-based approaches for identifying retention status for PLWHA.
We examined 2011 patient visit data from the Ruth M. Rothstein CORE Center, Cook County's HIV clinic. We defined retained patients as those with visits every 6 months over 2 years and matched patients classified through visit data against HIV surveillance laboratories reported to the Chicago Department of Health. We determined the sensitivity, specificity, and receiver operator characteristics of varying laboratory surveillance vs. clinic visit measures of retention.
Of patients classified through clinic visit data, 91% of 1714 in-care vs. 22% of 200 out-of-care patients met our most stringent surveillance-based retention definition-having ≥2 viral load/CD4s performed 90 days apart reported by the same laboratory in 2011. Of surveillance laboratory-based definitions for retention, having ≥2 HIV viral load and/or CD4 values at least 3 months apart reported from the same facility possessed the best receiver operator parameters and the receiver operator characteristics' curve comparing several laboratory surveillance vs. clinic visit-based retention measures that had an area under the curve of 0.95.
Our findings demonstrate that surveillance laboratory data can be used to assess retention-in-care for PLWHA. These data suggest that bi-directional data sharing between public health entities and care providers could advance re-engagement efforts.
改善治疗留存率可能会提高艾滋病毒/艾滋病感染者(PLWHA)的健康状况。尽管实验室监测数据可用于评估留存率,但此前尚无报告比较实验室监测与基于门诊就诊的治疗留存率测量方法。我们比较了实验室监测与基于门诊就诊的方法来确定PLWHA的留存状态。
我们研究了库克县艾滋病毒诊所鲁思·M·罗斯坦核心中心2011年的患者就诊数据。我们将留存患者定义为在两年内每6个月就诊一次的患者,并将通过就诊数据分类的患者与向芝加哥卫生部报告的艾滋病毒监测实验室进行匹配。我们确定了不同实验室监测与门诊就诊留存率测量方法的敏感性、特异性和受试者工作特征。
通过门诊就诊数据分类的患者中,1714名在接受治疗的患者中有91%,而200名未接受治疗的患者中有22%符合我们最严格的基于监测的留存定义——2011年由同一实验室报告的间隔90天进行≥2次病毒载量/CD4检测。在基于监测实验室的留存定义中,同一机构报告的间隔至少3个月的≥2次艾滋病毒病毒载量和/或CD4值具有最佳的受试者工作参数,并且比较几种实验室监测与基于门诊就诊的留存率测量方法的受试者工作特征曲线的曲线下面积为0.95。
我们的研究结果表明,监测实验室数据可用于评估PLWHA的治疗留存率。这些数据表明,公共卫生实体与医疗服务提供者之间的双向数据共享可以推进重新参与治疗的工作。