1 / 34

Charu Sabharwal, MD MPH Medical Director Epidemiology and Field Services Program

Concordance of HIV surveillance and medical record data: What do CD4 and viral loads not tell us about linkage to HIV care ?. Charu Sabharwal, MD MPH Medical Director Epidemiology and Field Services Program Bureau of HIV/AIDS Prevention and Control NYC Department of Health.

zita
Download Presentation

Charu Sabharwal, MD MPH Medical Director Epidemiology and Field Services Program

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Concordance of HIV surveillance and medical record data: What do CD4 and viral loads not tell us about linkage to HIV care? Charu Sabharwal, MD MPH Medical Director Epidemiology and Field Services Program Bureau of HIV/AIDS Prevention and Control NYC Department of Health

  2. Acknowledgements • Sarah Braunstein • Rebekkah Robbins • Colin Shepard • HIV Epidemiology and Field Services Program

  3. Background

  4. National HIV/AIDS Strategy • NHAS (July, 2010) - first comprehensive roadmap • Amore coordinated response to the HIV epidemic • Primary Goals for 2015: • Reduce infections • Increase access to care • Reduce health disparities

  5. HIV Continuum of Care Das, MoupaliPrevention of HIV Acquisition: Behavioral, Biomedical, and Other Interventions. Medscape 2012

  6. Monitoring HIV Care – CD4/VL • HIV Care = outpatient HIV visit with provider authorized to prescribe ART1 • Clinical monitoring/treatment guidelines2 • Traditionally, 1st CD4/VL at initial HIV care visit • CD4/VL: every 3-6 months;  frequency after ART initiation • CD4/VLs proxy for HIV care [HIV care visits not reported] • Since 2004, CSTE encouraged all states (59 jurisdictions) to report allCD4 and VLs3[New York2005] • Limited comprehensive evaluation of the validity of surveillance data as proxy of HIV care 1Health Resources and Services Administration. The HIV/AIDS Program: HAB Performance Measures Group 1. In; 2009. 2DHHS Guidelines for the Use of Antiretroviral Agents in HIV-1-Infected Adults and Adolescents. In; 2012. 3 CSTE Position statement 04-ID-07

  7. Measuring linkage to care • Surveillance traditionally measures linkage by a single event: 1streported CD4/VL on/after HIV diagnosis date • Accuracy of 1st CD4/VL1,2 drawn prior to referral to HIV care. For example, at the time of • Confirmatory testing after + rapid/point-of-care test • Inpatient diagnosis: CD4 impacts treatment decision • In New York City: routinemedical record (MR) abstraction for linkage to care is not feasible • 3,500 diagnosing providers; 3,000+ HIV cases yearly • Timely linkage – entry into care within 3 months of diagnosis. Local3 and national measure 1 BertolliA. et al The Open AIDS Journal 2012,6:131-141. 2Keller et al. J Acquir Immune DeficSyndr2013. 3New York City HIV/AIDS Surveillance Slide Sets. http://www.nyc.gov/html/doh/html/data/epi-surveillance.shtml

  8. New York City’s Care Validation Study • Validate CD4 and VL tests for persons living with HIV (PLWH) in NYC as proxy measure for HIV care in the first year after diagnosis 1° Objective – evaluate the correspondence between a patients 1st CD4/VL on/after HIV diagnosis and linkage HIV care

  9. Purpose Validate 1st lab test (CD4/VL) from the diagnosing facility as measure of timely linkage toHIV care • Hypothesis: early post-diagnostic lab tests within first 2 weeks arepart of diagnostic work-up and not an actual linkage event

  10. Methods Methods

  11. Study population selection: New York City HIV Registry • Selected high-volume HIV diagnosing sites with co-located care (n=24) • Patients with new, confirmed HIV diagnosis in 2009 reported the Registry • Patients who had to linked to care at the same diagnosing facility within 12 months as per the Registry • PLEASE NOTE – Even though Surveillance does not require linkage to care at the same site of diagnosis, we did in order to conduct this validation study

  12. Figure 1: Final study population 3,536 new, confirmed HIV diagnoses among > 13 years in NYC in 2009 1,263 (36%) patients reported from high-volume (> 20 diagnoses) co-located HIV care sites 947 (75%) patients had 1st CD4/VL reported from co-located site within 12 months of diagnosis eligible for medical record (MR) abstractions 165 (17%) excluded: MR unavailable 782 (83%) patients Registry (1st CD/VL) and MR (care visit) data

  13. Data Analysis

  14. Analytic population (n=782) Linkage within 12 months, per Registry NO YES HIV care visit confirmed by MR No medical visit group Medical visit group • Compared the subgroups based on: • Key demographic characteristics (age, gender, risk) • Proportion concurrently diagnosed with HIV/AIDS(AIDS within 31 days of HIV diagnosis – local definition) • Proportion diagnosed on inpatient service • Proportion that died within 12 months of diagnosis

  15. Timely linkage to HIV care • Compared the proportion who linked to HIV care within 3 months of diagnosis (timely) by Registry (1st CD/VL) vs. MR (care visit)

  16. Do 1st reported CD4/VLs indicate timely linkage to HIV care? • Compared subgroups: • Median time to 1st lab per the Registry • Proportion of 1st labs in 0-7 days and 0-14 days • Calculated sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV) of Registry data in correctly classifying patients’ true timely linkage to care status based on the 1st CD/VL within: • 0-91 days (no labs excluded: National standard) • 8-91 days (excluded labs from 0-7 days) • 15-91 days (excluded labs from 0-14 days)

  17. RESULTS

  18. Figure 2: Linkage to care (n=782)Registry vs. MR No Medical visit 20% (n=157) 1st CD4/VL 100% (n=782) Medical visit 80% (n=625)

  19. Table 1: Demographics/clinical outcomes

  20. Figure 3: Inpatient diagnoses No medical visit Medical visit

  21. Figure 4: Mortality outcomes:Deaths within 12 months of HIV diagnosis

  22. Timely Linkage to Care

  23. Figure 5: Timely linkage to careRegistry vs. MR 97% 1st CD4/VL (proxy measure): 0-91 days 75% True linkage event (HIV care visit): 0-91 days

  24. Are labs within the early post-diagnostic period indicative of timely linkage to care? Timely linkage

  25. Figure 6: Median time (days) to linkage based on 1st CD4/VL, by subgroups No medical visit 1 day (IQR 0-5 days) p <0.001 Medical visit

  26. Figure 7: Proportion of 1st labs in the early post-diagnostic period, by subgroups p <0.001 p <0.001 19% 31% No medical visit No medical visit Medical visit Medical visit

  27. Figure 8: Performance of Registry data 99% 0-91 days 8-91 days 15-91 days

  28. Refinement of NYC’s timely linkage to care indicator

  29. Figure 9: Final study population: Refining timely linkage to care No lag applied Lag applied

  30. Figure 10: New York City’s refined Timely linkage to care indicator No lag No lag Lag Lag

  31. Conclusions • First population-based study to validate the use of HIV Surveillance’s proxy measure of timely linkage to care • Substantial misclassification of timely linkage in the early post-diagnostic period • NYC DOHMH implemented a refined definition of timely linkage to care (labs 8-91 days after diagnosis) • HIV labs in 1st 7 days  not indicative of linkage • Surveillance data overestimated linkage for older persons, non-traditional HIV risk transmission, and those who died soon after diagnosis

  32. Limitations • Selection of provider • A portion had a CD4/VL at an alternate provider which may be the linkage to care visit –DID NOT validate if these patients EVER linked • Oversampled the acute care setting • Selection of study population • Due to the complexities of HIV laboratory reporting, the 1st lab may have been misclassified to the incorrect provider

  33. Future directions • Exploration of surveillance-based retention in care measures vs. medical abstraction data • All care visits at diagnosing provider during first 12 months immediately following diagnosis • In depth exploration of mortality within 12 months of HIV diagnosis

  34. Thank you! cjain@health.nyc.gov

More Related