Hepatitis B Virus Screening and Vaccination in Patients With HIV: A Survey of Clinicians' Current Practices.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Hastie E
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8494107 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Jun
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Hepatitis B Virus Screening and Vaccination in Patients With HIV: A Survey of Clinicians' Current Practices.
Hastie Elizabeth E Wooten Darcy D
Open forum infectious diseases 20210526 6
This survey study evaluates how clinicians approach hepatitis B virus (HBV) vaccination and monitoring in patients with HIV. Providers have clinical practices that vary greatly from one another and from current guidelines, especially for patients who do not seroconvert after initial HBV vaccination and for patients with isolated hepatitis B core antibody. ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:PurposeThrough a survey-based approach, we sought to investigate regional differences in gender-affirming hormone therapy (GAHT) prescribing practices, as well as HIV screening and prevention practices among clinicians providing care to transgender individuals.MethodsOur survey was disseminated between December 2019 and January 2021 to clinicians who prescribe GAHT within New England (United States). Between-group differences in GAHT prescribing and HIV screening/prevention practices were evaluated by practice setting and subspecialty.ResultsOf the 20 survey respondents, 55% practiced in health care settings affiliated with an academic institution, 45% practiced in a community-based health care setting, and 30% were Endocrinologists. Clinicians in community-based health care settings reported more frequently prescribing oral 17β-estradiol (p=0.02) and spironolactone (p=0.007) for feminizing GAHT compared with clinicians in health care settings affiliated with an academic institution, who reported more frequently prescribing leuprolide (p=0.03). For masculinizing GAHT, clinicians from health care settings affiliated with an academic institution reported more frequently prescribing topical testosterone (p=0.03). There were no significant between-group differences in reported barriers to initiation or reasons for stopping GAHT. While non-Endocrinologists reported "often" or "always" offering HIV screening, most Endocrinologists reported "rarely" or "never" offering HIV screening and "rarely" or "never" offering pre-exposure or postexposure prophylaxis to their transgender patients.ConclusionsRegional GAHT prescribing practices varied by setting. Additional research is needed to better understand whether these differences translate to differences in GAHT efficacy and side-effects. Further, HIV screening/prevention practices varied by subspecialty. Integrated GAHT and HIV screening/prevention across subspecialties could help reduce the disproportionate burden of HIV faced by the transgender community.
| S-EPMC9942173 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeHepatitis B virus (HBV) reactivation is a potentially fatal complication of chemotherapy that can be largely prevented with medication, provided that asymptomatic HBV carriers are identified. We explored the knowledge, beliefs, and practices of Canadian oncologists/hematologists regarding HBV screening before chemotherapy.MethodsA novel questionnaire was mailed to all practicing hematologists/oncologists, where publicly accessible online physician registries facilitated identification of these specialists (71% of the Canadian physician population).ResultsOf 504 potentially eligible practitioners, 311 (62%) responded, of whom 246 indicated that they administered chemotherapy and were thus included in final analyses. Respondents tended to underestimate the risk of HBV reactivation, and recognition of the major risk factor for HBV carriage (ie, birth in an endemic area) was low. Forty percent of respondents reported rarely or never testing for HBV before chemotherapy, and 36% reported screening only those patients with HBV risk factors. In multivariate analysis, having a predominantly hematologic practice, practitioner experience with HBV reactivation, ability to correctly estimate the risk of HBV reactivation, fewer years in practice, and female sex were independently associated with an increased likelihood of screening for HBV.ConclusionCanadian oncologists and hematologists tend to underestimate the risk of HBV reactivation and report relatively low HBV screening rates. Among those practitioners who do screen, the favored strategy is selective screening of patients with HBV risk factors. However, oncologists'/hematologists' knowledge regarding risk factors for HBV carriage seems to be low, potentially undermining the success of a selective screening strategy.
| S-EPMC3500474 | biostudies-literature
Project description:As a result of shared routes of transmission, coinfection with hepatitis C virus (HCV) is common in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected patients. The prevalence of HIV/HCV coinfection is particularly high among persons who have used injection drugs; however, more recently, sexual transmission of HCV has been recognized among HIV-infected men who have sex with men (MSM). Over the past decade, the effectiveness of HIV treatment improved substantially, leading to a substantial reduction in HIV/AIDS-related deaths; in this context, liver disease due to HCV infection has emerged as major concern for co-infected patients. Over the same period, treatment of HCV remained stagnant, with pegylated interferon alfa (PegIFN) plus ribavirin (RBV; PegIFN/RBV) entrenched as the standard treatment for HCV infection for co-infected patients, who have the greatest risk for liver disease. However, the effectiveness of HCV treatment in this population has been disappointing because of low rates of treatment initiation and success. In 2011, novel HCV NS3/4A PIs (PIs), telaprevir and boceprevir, were approved for use in combination with PegIFN/RBV for the treatment of HCV genotype 1 infection; at the time of approval, important questions regarding the efficacy, safety, and potential for drug interactions with telaprevir and boceprevir had not been answered. More recently, data from drug-interaction studies and 2 small, phase II clinical trials indicate that these HCV treatment regimens may lead to higher rates of HCV eradication in HIV/HCV-coinfected patients, with manageable toxicity and pharmacologic interactions with antiretroviral drugs. As such, these HCV PI-based regimens have emerged as the standard for the treatment of HCV genotype 1 infection in carefully selected HIV-infected patients.
| S-EPMC3565592 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Eliminating hepatitis C as a public health threat requires an improved understanding of how to increase testing uptake. We piloted point-of-care testing (POCT) for a current HCV infection in an inner-city Emergency Department (ED) and assessed the influence on uptake of offering concomitant screening for HIV. Over four months, all adults attending ED with minor injuries were first invited to complete an anonymous questionnaire then invited to test in alternating cycles offering HCV POCT or HCV+HIV POCT. Viral RNA was detected in finger-prick blood by GeneXpert. 814/859 (94.8%) questionnaires were returned and 324/814 (39.8%) tests were accepted, comprising 211 HCV tests and 113 HCV+HIV tests. Offering concomitant HIV screening reduced uptake after adjusting for age and previous HCV testing (odds ratio 0.51; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.38-0.68; p < 0.001). HCV prevalence was 1/324 (0.31%; 95% CI 0.05-1.73); no participant tested positive for HIV. 167/297 (56.2%) POCT participants lived in the most deprived neighbourhoods in England. HCV RNA testing using finger-prick blood was technically feasible. Uptake was moderate and the offer of concomitant HIV screening showed a detrimental impact on acceptability in this low prevalence population. The findings should be confirmed in a variety of other community settings.
| S-EPMC6193009 | biostudies-literature
Project description:INTRODUCTION:Despite the proven effectiveness of immunization in preventing morbidity and mortality, adult vaccines remain underutilized. The objective of this study was to describe clinicians' and pharmacists' self-reported implementation of the Standards for Adult Immunization Practice ("the Standards"; i.e., routine assessment, recommendation, and administration/referral for needed vaccines, and documentation of administered vaccines, including in immunization information systems). METHODS:Two Internet panel surveys (one among clinicians and one among pharmacists) were conducted during February-March 2017 and asked respondents about their practice's implementation of the Standards. T-tests assessed associations between clinician medical specialty, vaccine type, and each component of the Standards (March-August 2017). RESULTS:Implementation of the Standards varied substantially by vaccine and provider type. For example, >80.0% of providers, including obstetrician/gynecologists and subspecialists, assessed for and recommended influenza vaccine. However, 24.3% of obstetrician/gynecologists and 48.9% of subspecialists did not stock influenza vaccine for administration. Although zoster vaccine was recommended by >89.0% of primary care providers, <58.0% stocked the vaccine; by contrast, 91.6% of pharmacists stocked zoster vaccine. Vaccine needs assessments, recommendations, and stocking/referrals also varied by provider type for pneumococcal; tetanus, diphtheria, acellular pertussis; tetanus diphtheria; human papillomavirus; and hepatitis B vaccines. CONCLUSIONS:This report highlights gaps in access to vaccines recommended for adults across the spectrum of provider specialties. Greater implementation of the Standards by all providers could improve adult vaccination rates in the U.S. by reducing missed opportunities to recommend vaccinations and either vaccinate or refer patients to vaccine providers.
| S-EPMC6166242 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceUniversal screening of patients with newly diagnosed cancer for hepatitis B virus (HBV), hepatitis C virus (HCV), and HIV is not routine in oncology practice, and experts disagree about whether universal screening should be performed.ObjectiveTo estimate the prevalence of HBV, HCV, and HIV infection among persons with newly diagnosed cancer.Design, setting, and participantsMulticenter prospective cohort study of patients with newly diagnosed cancer (ie, identified within 120 days of cancer diagnosis) at 9 academic and 9 community oncology institutions affiliated with SWOG (formerly the Southwest Oncology Group) Cancer Research Network, a member of the National Clinical Trials Network, with enrollment from August 29, 2013, through February 15, 2017. The data analysis was conducted using data available through August 17, 2017.Main outcomes and measuresThe accrual goal was 3000 patients and the primary end point was the presence of HBV infection (previous or chronic), HCV infection, or HIV infection at enrollment. Patients with previous knowledge of infection as well as patients with unknown viral viral status were evaluated.ResultsOf 3092 registered patients, 3051 were eligible and evaluable. Median (range) age was 60.6 (18.2-93.7) years, 1842 (60.4%) were female, 553 (18.1%) were black, and 558 (18.3%) were Hispanic ethnicity. Screened patients had similar clinical and demographic characteristics compared with those registered. The observed infection rate for previous HBV infection was 6.5% (95% CI, 5.6%-7.4%; n = 197 of 3050 patients); chronic HBV, 0.6% (95% CI, 0.4%-1.0%; n = 19 of 3050 patients); HCV, 2.4% (95% CI, 1.9%-3.0%; n = 71 of 2990 patients); and HIV, 1.1% (95% CI, 0.8%-1.6%; n = 34 of 3045). Among those with viral infections, 8 patients with chronic HBV (42.1%; 95% CI, 20.3%-66.5%), 22 patients with HCV (31.0%; 95% CI, 20.5%-43.1%), and 2 patients with HIV (5.9%; 95% CI, 0.7%-19.7%) were newly diagnosed through the study. Among patients with infections, 4 patients with chronic HBV (21.1%; 95% CI, 6.1%-45.6%), 23 patients with HCV (32.4%; 95% CI, 21.8%-44.5%), and 7 patients with HIV (20.6%; 95% CI, 8.7%-37.9%) had no identifiable risk factors.Conclusions and relevanceResults of this study found that a substantial proportion of patients with newly diagnosed cancer and concurrent HBV or HCV are unaware of their viral infection at the time of cancer diagnosis, and many had no identifiable risk factors for infection. Screening patients with cancer to identify HBV and HCV infection before starting treatment may be warranted to prevent viral reactivation and adverse clinical outcomes. The low rate of undiagnosed HIV infection may not support universal screening of newly diagnosed cancer patients.
| S-EPMC6459217 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8071612 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC3826346 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8026541 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This study aimed to evaluate the attitudes and practices of US healthcare professionals (HCPs) regarding the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) vaccination recommendations on HepA and HepB for adult patients at risk of contracting these infections or experiencing complications of hepatitis disease. This cross-sectional, web-based survey of 400 US HCPs, which included nurse practitioners and family medicine, internal medicine, infectious disease, emergency department, and gastroenterology physicians, assessed HCPs' attitudes and practices regarding the ACIP recommendations for adult patients at risk for hepatitis disease. HCP participants were identified via a survey research panel. A recruitment quota of 400 HCPs was set, including 50 NPs, 100 FMs, 100 IMs, 50 GIs, 50 EDs, and 50 IDs. The most frequently reported reasons for not recommending either HepA or HepB vaccines were "I think the risk of HepA infection is low in this patient population" and "I am uncertain about what the guidelines say about vaccinating this population." The most reported factors considered when determining eligibility for either vaccine were medical history and the patient's willingness/motivation to be vaccinated. Most reported it was extremely or moderately important to prevent hepatitis disease by vaccinating adult patients at risk, and most also reported recommending a HepA vaccine or HepB vaccine to patients at risk. Although most HCPs reported recommending HepA and HepB vaccines to patients at risk, these findings contrast with the low reported vaccination rates among these populations, and improved awareness of the ACIP recommendations among HCPs is needed.
| S-EPMC9746442 | biostudies-literature