Related Experiment Videos
Predictors of failure to return for HIV test result and counseling by test site type
Insights
Failure to return for HIV test results is common, with 16.4% of clients not returning. Testing site type significantly impacts this, with sexually transmitted disease clinics showing the highest rates of clients not returning for HIV test results.
Area of Science:
- Public Health
- Epidemiology
- Infectious Disease Prevention
Background:
- Failure to return (FTR) for HIV test results and counseling poses a significant challenge to public health efforts.
- Understanding predictors of FTR is crucial for improving HIV testing program effectiveness.
Purpose of the Study:
- To identify primary predictors of FTR for HIV test results.
- To analyze FTR predictors based on different HIV testing site types.
Main Methods:
- Retrospective analysis of 366,280 clients tested for HIV antibodies over 18 months in California.
- Data collected during pretest risk assessment sessions at publicly funded testing sites.
Main Results:
- Overall FTR rate was 16.4%.
- Site type was the most significant predictor of FTR.
- Clients at sexually transmitted disease clinics were four times more likely to FTR; mobile testing clients were over three times more likely to FTR compared to alternative test site clients.
- Independent predictors of FTR varied significantly across different testing site types.
Conclusions:
- Site-specific counseling strategies are needed to reduce FTR rates.
- Future research should consider the impact of rapid HIV testing and home testing on FTR.
- Tailoring interventions based on testing site characteristics is essential for improving HIV testing program outcomes.
Abstract:
The objective of this study was to determine the primary predictors of failure to return (FTR) for HIV test results and counseling by test site type from among those variables collected during the pretest, risk assessment session. The study sample consisted of 366,280 clients tested for HIV antibodies over an 18-month period at publicly funded testing sites throughout California. The FTR rate for the entire sample was 16.4%. The most significant predictor of FTR was the site type at which resting took place, with those testing at sexually transmitted disease clinics four times, and mobile testing clients over three times, more likely to fail to return than alternative test site clients. Independent predictors of FTR differed dramatically across the types of testing sites examined. Implications of these results for devising site-specific counseling strategies to reduce FTR are examined and possible effects on FTR of more rapid testing procedures and home testing are considered. Suggestions for future research are outlined.