BackgroundThe Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends routine HIV testing in all healthcare settings, but it is unclear how consistently physicians adopt the recommendation. Making the most of each interaction between black physicians and their patients is extremely important to address the HIV health disparities that disproportionately afflict the black community. The goal of this survey-based study was to evaluate the perceptions and practices of black, primary care physicians regarding HIV testing.MethodsA physician survey was administered at the 2010 National Medical Association Annual Convention, via online physician panels, and by email. Physician eligibility criteria: black race; practicing at least 1 year in the US; practice comprised of at least 60% adults and 20% black patients. Contingency tables and ordinary least squares regression were used for comparisons and statistical analyses. A Chi-square test compared percentages of physicians who gave a particular response and a t-test compared the means of values provided by physicians.ResultsPhysicians over-estimated HIV prevalence and believed that HIV is a crisis in the black community, yet reported that only 34% of patients were HIV tested in the past year. Physicians reported that 67% of those patients tested did so due to a physician recommendation. Physicians who were younger, female, obstetricians/gynecologists, and had a higher proportion of black, low-socioeconomic status, and Medicaid patients reported higher testing rates. Most testing was risk-based rather than routine, and three of the five most commonly reported barriers to testing were related to disease stigma and perceived value judgments. Physicians reported that in-office patient informational materials, increased media attention, additional education and training on HIV testing, government mandates requiring routine testing, and accurate pre-packed tests would most help them test more frequently for HIV.ConclusionsIn this sample of black, primary care physicians, HIV testing practices differed according to physician characteristics and practice demographics, and overall reported testing rates were low. More physician education and training around testing guidelines is needed to enable more routine testing, treatment, and long-term management of patients with HIV.

Non-medical, community-based workers play a critical role in supporting people living with (or at risk of acquiring) HIV along the care continuum. The biomedical nature of promising advances in HIV prevention, such as pre-exposure prophylaxis and treatment-as-prevention, requires frontline workers to be knowledgeable about HIV science and treatment. This study was developed to: measure knowledge of HIV science and treatment within the HIV non-medical workforce, evaluate workers' familiarity with and attitudes toward recent biomedical interventions, and identify factors that may affect HIV knowledge and attitudes. A 62-question, web-based survey was completed in English or Spanish between 2012 and 2014 by 3663 US-based employees, contractors, and volunteers working in AIDS service organizations, state/local health departments, and other community-based organizations in a non-medical capacity. Survey items captured the following: respondent demographics, HIV science and treatment knowledge, and familiarity with and attitudes toward biomedical interventions. An average of 61% of HIV knowledge questions were answered correctly. Higher knowledge scores were associated with higher education levels, work at organizations that serve people living with HIV/AIDS or who are at a high risk of acquiring HIV, and longer tenure in the field. Lower knowledge scores were associated with non-Hispanic Black or Black race/ethnicity and taking the survey in Spanish. Similarly, subgroup analyses showed that respondents who were non-Hispanic Black or Hispanic (versus non-Hispanic white), as well as those located in the South (versus other regions) scored significantly lower. These subpopulations were also less familiar with and had less positive attitudes toward newer biomedical prevention interventions. Respondents who took the survey in Spanish (versus English) had lower knowledge scores and higher familiarity with, but generally less positive attitudes toward, biomedical interventions. In summary, low knowledge scores suggest the need for additional capacity-building efforts and training for non-medical HIV workers, particularly those who provide services in the communities most affected by HIV.

The results of this analysis are highly suggestive of a relationship between Hospital Systems Load and patient harm.

Background: Most clinicians believe that hospitals are less safe on the weekends, but the research findings have been mixed. In addition, the investigations have largely examined the outcomes of patients admitted on weekends versus weekdays and not patient harm that occurred on weekends against patient harm that occurred during the week.

Objective: To compare the extent of patient harm that occurred on weekend days with the harm that occurred on weekdays.

Methods: Using daily incident report data for an entire year from two hospitals in California we measured the number of incidents each day, the average harm per incident, and the total daily harm from all incidents. Analyses were done separately for the two different hospitals and controlled for daily patient census. Harm per incident was assessed to determine whether reporting patterns on weekdays differed from weekends.

Results: There were fewer incidents per day and less total daily harm on weekend days than days during the workweek in both hospitals (p < .05). Patient to nurse ratios are held at the same level across all days and shifts. There did not appear to be a systematic tendency to under-report incidents on the weekends.

Conclusion: The data strongly suggest that there is less harm to patients due to healthcare error on the weekends than during the week. Further work is needed to determine whether these findings would apply in hospitals with varying staffing levels.