A Comparison of Patient and Staff Attitudes About Emergency Department–Based HIV Testing in 2 Urban Hospitals

Effect of testing experience and profession on provider acceptability of rapid HIV testing after implementation in public sexual health clinics in Sydney

“…Although many studies have assessed acceptability of RHT in a variety of settings and patient groups, and among providers at various stages of implementation [12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28], few studies have assessed differences in acceptability between professions [29,30]. To our knowledge, no published studies have examined if the number of tests performed and experience of false test results impact on provider acceptability.…”

“…Where doctors had a greater role to play in delivering RHT, they requested extra support staff to assist with counselling and referrals and were less willing to offer RHT than nurses [12,30]. Staff may find RHT less acceptable where they believe that RHT is not appropriate to their role or setting [27,28].…”

“…Where doctors had a greater role to play in delivering RHT, they requested extra support staff to assist with counselling and referrals and were less willing to offer RHT than nurses [12,30]. Staff may find RHT less acceptable where they believe that RHT is not appropriate to their role or setting [27,28].This service provider acceptability analysis is part of the largest study of RHT yet conducted in an Australian clinical setting. RHT is well established in many countries, but most analyses of the acceptability of RHT focus on the patient or consumer perspective.…”

“…In contrast, RHT involves finger-prick blood or oral fluid specimen collection with results provided during the same visit, which may make testing more convenient. Barriers to implementing RHT reported among service providers include: lack of time [12,13]; lack of confidence in their own competency and skills and fear of delivering positive results [14,15]; concern regarding reliability and false positive results [16,17]; and perceiving RHT as too difficult for nonexperts [18].Although many studies have assessed acceptability of RHT in a variety of settings and patient groups, and among providers at various stages of implementation [12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28], few studies have assessed differences in acceptability between professions [29,30]. To our knowledge, no published studies have examined if the number of tests performed and experience of false test results impact on provider acceptability.…”

The role of nurses in HIV screening in health care facilities: A systematic review

“…Twenty-three studies (76.7%) evaluated either test offering rates or self-reported HIV test offering, patient acceptance rates, or testing delivery rates ( 100% a 14 studies in EDs: Arbelaez et al, 2012;Casalino et al, 2012;Chen et al, 2011;d'Almeida et al, 2013;Hack et al, 2013;Haukoos et al, 2013;Hecht et al, 2011;Leblanc et al, 2012;Mumma and Suffoletto, 2011;Rayment et al, 2012;Thornton et al, 2012;Walensky et al, 2011;White et al, 2009). b 14 studies in outpatient clinics and primary care settings: Carey et al, 2008;Clerk et al, 2013;Cunningham et al, 2009;Handy et al, 2006;Herbert et al, 2012;Kinsler et al, 2013;Knapp et al, 2011;McNaghten et al, 2014;Munday et al, 2005;Rayment et al, 2012;Thornton et al, 2012) c 4 studies in antenatal and women's health care settings: Cohan et al, 2008;Kropp et al, 2006 these studies, 13 (56%) compared the results of nursedriven HIV testing to other testing approaches (Table 3).…”