Screening for human immunodeficiency virus: a survey of British clinical pharmacology units

1. A survey of screening practices used to detect infection with the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), covering the 12 months from June 1990 to May 1991, was carried out in 74 clinical pharmacology units performing phase I and II studies. Forty-five units were identified from the Technomark commercial register, and 29 units were identified from the clinical academic membership of the British Pharmacological Society. 2. An overall response rate of 92% was obtained: 41 replies from commercial units; 27 replies from academic units. Seventeen commercial units and 26 academic units reported involvement with healthy volunteer studies; these were the 43 questionnaires analysed. 3. The majority of clinical pharmacology units did not believe that it was necessary to perform HIV screening by HIV antibody testing. Six commercial units (35%) and three academic units (12%) did perform HIV antibody testing in healthy volunteers. 4. Reasons frequently given for testing were protection of clinical and laboratory staff, and the advantages to the volunteer of prophylaxis and treatment at an early stage of HIV infection. Reasons for not testing included the perceived low risk of a positive test, a lack of benefit from treatment, and the adverse implications in relation to health insurance. Advice from an Ethics Review Committee was not generally a reason for testing. 5. In future, screening patterns may change, depending on prevalence of HIV positivity in the community, the benefits of diagnosis and treatment, and the perceived or real disadvantages of having an HIV antibody test. For the present, we believe that indirect methods, such as an HIV risks questionnaire, are more appropriate than direct antibody testing.