Purpose To explore primary care providers' HIV prevention practices for older adults. Primary care providers' perceptions and awareness were explored to understand factors that affect their provision of HIV prevention materials and HIV screening for older adults. Design and Method Data were collected through 24 semistructured interviews with primary care providers (i.e., physicians, physician assistants, and nurse practitioners) who see patients older than 50 years. Results Results reveal facilitators and barriers of HIV prevention for older adults among primary care providers and understanding of providers' HIV prevention practices and behaviors. Individual, patient, institutional, and societal factors influenced HIV prevention practices among participants, for example, provider training and work experience, lack of time, discomfort in discussing HIV/AIDS with older adults, stigma, and ageism were contributing factors. Furthermore, factors specific to primary and secondary HIV prevention were identified, for instance, the presence of sexually transmitted infections influenced providers' secondary prevention practices. Implications HIV disease, while preventable, is increasing among older adults. These findings inform future research and interventions aimed at increasing HIV prevention practices in primary care settings for patients older than 50.

Objectives: To assess measurement properties of the HIV Disability Questionnaire (HDQ) among adults with HIV in the United States. Methods: We administered the HDQ, World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule II (WHODAS 2.0), and a demographic questionnaire. For internal consistency reliability, we calculated Cronbach α and Kuder-Richardson-20 (KR-20) statistics for disability and episodic scores, respectively (≥0.80 acceptable). For test–retest reliability, we calculated intraclass correlation coefficients (>0.8 acceptable). For construct validity, we tested 15 a priori hypotheses assessing correlations between HDQ and WHODAS 2.0 scores. Results: Of the 128 participants, the majority were males (68%), median age 51 years, taking antiretroviral therapy (96%). Cronbach α ranged from 0.88 (social inclusion) to 0.93 (uncertainty). The KR-20 ranged from 0.86 (cognitive) to 0.96 (uncertainty). Intraclass correlation coefficients ranged from 0.88 (physical, cognitive, social inclusion) to 0.92 (mental–emotional). Of the 15 hypotheses, 13 (87%) were confirmed. Conclusions: The HDQ demonstrates internal consistency reliability, test–retest reliability, and construct validity when administered to a sample of adults with HIV in the United States.

Persons living with HIV (PLHIV) may experience disability. We compared disability among PLHIV in the United States and South Africa and investigated associations with health and demographic characteristics. Secondary analysis of cross-sectional data using medical records and questionnaires including the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHO-DAS) 2.0 12-item version (range: 0-36, with higher scores indicative of more severe disability). Between-country differences for the presence of disability were assessed with logistic regression and differences in severity using multiple regression. Eighty-six percent of US participants reported disability, compared to 51.3% in South Africa. The mean WHO-DAS score was higher in the United States (12.09 ± 6.96) compared to South Africa (8.3 ± 6.27). Participants with muscle pain, depression, or more years since HIV diagnosis were more likely to report disability. Being female or depressed was associated with more severity. Being adherent to anti-retroviral therapy (ART) and employed were associated with less severity. Because muscle pain and depression were predictive factors for disability, treatment of those problems may help mitigate disability in PLHIV.

Background: Routine HIV screening rates are suboptimal. Objectives: This systematic review identified barriers to/facilitators of routine HIV testing, categorized them using the socioecological model (SEM), and provided recommendations for interventions to increase screening. Data Sources: Included articles were indexed in PubMed, EBSCO CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library between 2006 and October 2018. Eligibility Criteria: Included studies were published in English or Spanish and directly assessed providers’ barriers/facilitators to routine screening. Data Extraction: We used a standardized Excel template to extract barriers/facilitators and identify levels in the SEM. Data Synthesis: Intrapersonal factors predominated as barriers, while facilitators were directed at the institutional level. Limitations: Policy barriers are not universal across countries. Meta-analysis was not possible. We could not quantify frequency of any given barrier/facilitator. Conclusions: Increasing reimbursement and adding screening as a quality measure may incentivize HIV testing; however, many interventions would require little resource investment.