Cargando…

Routine testing for blood-borne viruses in prisons: a systematic review

Background: People in prison have a higher burden of blood-borne virus (BBV) infection than the general population, and prisons present an opportunity to test for BBVs in high-risk, underserved groups. Changes to the BBV testing policies in English prisons have recently been piloted. This review wil...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Rumble, Caroline, Pevalin, David J., O’Moore, Éamonn
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4668329/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26219884
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckv133
_version_ 1782403970690449408
author Rumble, Caroline
Pevalin, David J.
O’Moore, Éamonn
author_facet Rumble, Caroline
Pevalin, David J.
O’Moore, Éamonn
author_sort Rumble, Caroline
collection PubMed
description Background: People in prison have a higher burden of blood-borne virus (BBV) infection than the general population, and prisons present an opportunity to test for BBVs in high-risk, underserved groups. Changes to the BBV testing policies in English prisons have recently been piloted. This review will enable existing evidence to inform policy revisions. We describe components of routine HIV, hepatitis B and C virus testing policies in prisons and quantify testing acceptance, coverage, result notification and diagnosis. Methods: We searched five databases for studies of both opt-in (testing offered to all and the individual chooses to have the test or not) and opt-out (the individual is informed the test will be performed unless they actively refuse) prison BBV testing policies. Results: Forty-four studies published between 1989 and 2013 met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 82% were conducted in the USA, 91% included HIV testing and most tested at the time of incarceration. HIV testing acceptance rates ranged from 22 to 98% and testing coverage from 3 to 90%. Mixed results were found for equity in uptake. Six studies reported reasons for declining a test including recent testing and fear. Conclusions: While the quality of evidence is mixed, this review suggests that reasonable rates of uptake can be achieved with opt-in and, even better, with opt-out HIV testing policies. Little evidence was found relating to hepatitis testing. Policies need to specify exclusion criteria and consider consent processes, type of test and timing of the testing offer to balance acceptability, competence and availability of individuals.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4668329
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-46683292015-12-04 Routine testing for blood-borne viruses in prisons: a systematic review Rumble, Caroline Pevalin, David J. O’Moore, Éamonn Eur J Public Health Infectious Diseases Background: People in prison have a higher burden of blood-borne virus (BBV) infection than the general population, and prisons present an opportunity to test for BBVs in high-risk, underserved groups. Changes to the BBV testing policies in English prisons have recently been piloted. This review will enable existing evidence to inform policy revisions. We describe components of routine HIV, hepatitis B and C virus testing policies in prisons and quantify testing acceptance, coverage, result notification and diagnosis. Methods: We searched five databases for studies of both opt-in (testing offered to all and the individual chooses to have the test or not) and opt-out (the individual is informed the test will be performed unless they actively refuse) prison BBV testing policies. Results: Forty-four studies published between 1989 and 2013 met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 82% were conducted in the USA, 91% included HIV testing and most tested at the time of incarceration. HIV testing acceptance rates ranged from 22 to 98% and testing coverage from 3 to 90%. Mixed results were found for equity in uptake. Six studies reported reasons for declining a test including recent testing and fear. Conclusions: While the quality of evidence is mixed, this review suggests that reasonable rates of uptake can be achieved with opt-in and, even better, with opt-out HIV testing policies. Little evidence was found relating to hepatitis testing. Policies need to specify exclusion criteria and consider consent processes, type of test and timing of the testing offer to balance acceptability, competence and availability of individuals. Oxford University Press 2015-12 2015-07-28 /pmc/articles/PMC4668329/ /pubmed/26219884 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckv133 Text en © The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Public Health Association. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial reproduction and distribution of the work, in any medium, provided the original work is not altered or transformed in any way, and that the work properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com
spellingShingle Infectious Diseases
Rumble, Caroline
Pevalin, David J.
O’Moore, Éamonn
Routine testing for blood-borne viruses in prisons: a systematic review
title Routine testing for blood-borne viruses in prisons: a systematic review
title_full Routine testing for blood-borne viruses in prisons: a systematic review
title_fullStr Routine testing for blood-borne viruses in prisons: a systematic review
title_full_unstemmed Routine testing for blood-borne viruses in prisons: a systematic review
title_short Routine testing for blood-borne viruses in prisons: a systematic review
title_sort routine testing for blood-borne viruses in prisons: a systematic review
topic Infectious Diseases
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4668329/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26219884
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckv133
work_keys_str_mv AT rumblecaroline routinetestingforbloodbornevirusesinprisonsasystematicreview
AT pevalindavidj routinetestingforbloodbornevirusesinprisonsasystematicreview
AT omooreeamonn routinetestingforbloodbornevirusesinprisonsasystematicreview