NR-503 Week 2 Discussion: Epidemiological Methods – Rapid HIV Screening (GRADED A)

Document Content and Description Below

NR-503 Week 2 Discussion: Epidemiological Methods – Rapid HIV Screening (GRADED A) • Describe the diagnostic or screening tool selected, its purpose, and what age group it targets. • ... Has it been specifically tested in this age group? • Next, discuss the predictive ability of the test. For instance, how do you know the test is reliable and valid? What are the reliability and validity values? What are the predictive values? Is it sensitive to measure what it has been developed to measure, for instance, HIV, or depression in older adults, or Lyme disease? Would you integrate this tool into your advanced practice based on the information you have read about the test, why or why not? The Rapid HIV Screening tool can be used with either blood or oral fluid specimens, it can provide results in 5 to 40 minutes and targets adolescents and adults aged 15 to 65 years, younger adolescents, adults at increased risk for infection and pregnant women (AHRQ, 2014). The purpose of the test is to screen for HIV in high risk groups, however, initial positive results require confirmation with alternative methods. HIV rapid screening tests (RSTs) have been used on pregnant women during labor and delivery, patients with AIDS-related symptoms in ED, and for evaluating the risk for HIV infection in cases of viral exposure of health care workers or sexual exposure between partners (Thomas et al., 2018). Additionally, RSTs have also been utilized for community-based testing increasing the frequency of testing in high-risk populations and available for individuals who would like to take the test outside of the clinic and in the privacy of their home, increasing the frequency of testing in high-risk populations. Antibody tests can take 23 to 90 days to detect HIV infection after an exposure, most rapid tests and self-tests are antibody tests. Furthermore, antibody tests that use blood from a vein can detect HIV sooner after infection than tests done with blood from a finger prick or with oral fluid (CDC, 2019). According to Mourez et al. (2018) the specificity was high (98.5–100%) and sensitivity excellent (100%) for samples from patients chronically infected with the pandemic strains. The performance for infrequent situations with a major epidemiological and clinical impact, such as infection with divergent viruses or primary infection, was highly variable, depending on the test. “Our study showed that not all tests are equal for the detection of major HIV variants or early stages of HIV infection” (Mourez et al., 2018). As a future APN, I would integrate using a rapid HIV screening tool especially for high-risk individuals. I would educate adolescents and anyone who is sexually active on safe-sex practices and offer them screening tools. Although the result is not 100% accurate it can be used to target those who need it the most and if their result is positive, alternative laboratory tests would be ordered to confirm HIV diagnosis. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). (2014). Guide to Clinical Preventive Services: HIV Infection. https://www.ahrq.gov/prevention/guidelines/guide/section2b.html#HIV Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC]. (2019) HIV Testing. https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/basics/testing.html#kinds-of-tests-available Mourez, T., Lemée, V., Delbos, V., Delaugerre, C., Alessandri-Gradt, E., Etienne, M., Simon, F., ChaixJean, M.L., Plantier, J.C. (2018). HIV rapid screening tests and self-tests: Be aware of differences in performance and cautious of vendors. EBio Medicine, 37,382-391. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ebiom.2018.10.012 [Show More]

Last updated: 1 year ago

Preview 1 out of 2 pages