Background Dissociative seizures are paroxysmal events resembling epilepsy or syncope with characteristic features that allow them to be distinguished from other medical conditions. We aimed to compare the effectiveness of cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) plus standardised medical care with standardised medical care alone for the reduction of dissociative seizure frequency. MethodsIn this pragmatic, parallel-arm, multicentre randomised controlled trial, we initially recruited participants at 27 neurology or epilepsy services in England, Scotland, and Wales. Adults (≥18 years) who had dissociative seizures in the previous 8 weeks and no epileptic seizures in the previous 12 months were subsequently randomly assigned (1:1) from 17 liaison or neuropsychiatry services following psychiatric assessment, to receive standardised medical care or CBT plus standardised medical care, using a web-based system. Randomisation was stratified by neuropsychiatry or liaison psychiatry recruitment site. The trial manager, chief investigator, all treating clinicians, and patients were aware of treatment allocation, but outcome data collectors and trial statisticians were unaware of treatment allocation. Patients were followed up 6 months and 12 months after randomisation. The primary outcome was monthly dissociative seizure frequency (ie, frequency in the previous 4 weeks) assessed at 12 months. Secondary outcomes assessed at 12 months were: seizure severity (intensity) and bothersomeness; longest period of seizure freedom in the previous 6 months; complete seizure freedom in the previous 3 months; a greater than 50% reduction in seizure frequency relative to baseline; changes in dissociative seizures (rated by others); health-related quality of life; psychosocial functioning; psychiatric symptoms, psychological distress, and somatic symptom burden; and clinical impression of improvement and satisfaction. p values and statistical significance for outcomes were reported without correction for multiple comparisons as per our protocol. Primary and secondary outcomes were assessed in the intention-to-treat population with multiple imputation for missing observations. This trial is registered with the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial registry, ISRCTN05681227, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02325544.

HIV care cascades can evaluate programmatic success over time. However, methodologies for estimating cascade stages vary, and few have evaluated differences by demographic subgroups. We examined cascade performance over time and by age, sex, and race/ethnicity in Kaiser Permanente, providing HIV care in eight US states and Washington, DC. We created cascades for HIV+ members' age ≥13 for 2010-2012. We measured "linkage" (a visit/CD4 within 90 days of being diagnosed for new patients; ≥1 medical visit/year if established); "retention" (≥2 medical visits ≥60 days apart); filled ART (filled ≥3 months of combination ART); and viral suppression (HIV RNA <200 copies/mL last measured in year). The cascades were stratified by calendar year, sex, age, and race/ethnicity. We found men had statistically (p < 0.05) higher percent linkage, filled ART, and viral suppression for 2010 and 2011 but not for 2012. Women had significantly greater retention for all years. Annually, older age was associated (p < 0.05) with retention, filled ART, and viral suppression but not linkage. Latinos had greater (p < 0.05) retention than whites or blacks in all years, with similar retention comparing blacks and whites. Filled ART and viral suppression was increased (p < 0.05) for whites compared with all racial/ethnic groups in all years. Cascade methodology requiring success at upstream stages before measuring success at later stages (i.e., "dependent" methodology) underreported performance by up to 20% compared with evaluating each stage separately ("independent"). Thus, care results improved over time, but significant differences exist by patient demographics. Specifically, retention efforts should be targeted toward younger patients and blacks; women, blacks, and Latinos require greater ART prescribing.

Barriers to HIV preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) use have not been well-characterized in people who became HIV-infected, all of whom could have benefited from PrEP. We invited members of Kaiser Permanente Northern California with an HIV diagnosis during 2014-2016, following a negative HIV test in the year prior to diagnosis, to complete a survey assessing barriers to PrEP use prior to HIV diagnosis. We used chi-square tests to identify factors associated with specific barriers, and Cochran-Armitage tests to assess trends in barriers by year of HIV diagnosis. Of 268 patients surveyed, 122 (46%) responded. Median age of respondents was 36, most (84%) were men who have sex with men, and 64% were of minority racial/ethnic background. Thirty-six (30%) had discussed PrEP with a provider, of whom 10 were diagnosed with HIV at PrEP intake. Overall, only 5 (4.1%) had used PrEP, and all 5 discontinued before diagnosis. Among all respondents, the most common barrier to PrEP use was lack of PrEP awareness (51%). Among those aware of PrEP, the most common barriers were cost/insurance concerns (36%) and perceived low risk for HIV (24%). Lack of PrEP awareness ranged from 39% among those aged 25-34 to 88% among those aged <25 (P=0.011), and from 33% among Hispanics to 69% among Blacks (P=0.055). Lack of PrEP awareness decreased from 61% of those diagnosed in 2014 to 37% in 2016 (P=0.032). Increasing awareness and affordability of PrEP, and facilitating accurate assessment of HIV risk, are critical to reducing missed opportunities for PrEP.

HRA was generally well tolerated and may be an acceptable screening approach for patients at high risk of anal cancer.

No abstract