Background Dramatic increases in patients requiring linkage to HIV treatment are anticipated in response to updated CDC HIV testing recommendations advocating routine, opt-out testing. Methods A retrospective analysis nested within a prospective HIV clinical cohort study evaluated patients establishing initial outpatient HIV treatment at the University of Alabama at Birmingham 1917 HIV/AIDS Clinic between 1 January 2000 and 31 December 2005. Survival methods were used to evaluate the impact of missed visits in the first year of care on subsequent mortality in the context of other baseline sociodemographic, psychosocial, and clinical factors. Mortality was ascertained by query of the Social Security Death Index as of 1 August 2007. Results Among 543 study participants initiating outpatient HIV care, 60% missed a visit in the first year. Mortality was 2.3 per 100 person-years for patients who missed visits compared with 1.0 per 100 person-years for those who attended all scheduled appointments during the first year after establishing outpatient treatment (P=0.02). In Cox proportional hazards analysis, higher hazards of death were independently associated with missed visits (HR=2.90, 95%CI=1.28–6.56), older age (HR=1.58 per 10 years, 95%CI=1.12–2.22), and baseline CD4 count <200 cells/mm3 (HR=2.70, 95%CI=1.00–7.30). Conclusions Patients who missed visits in the first year after initiating outpatient HIV treatment had more than twice the rate of long-term mortality relative to those who attended all scheduled appointments. We posit that early missed visits are not causally responsible for the higher observed mortality, but rather identify patients more likely to exhibit health behaviors that portend increased subsequent mortality.

Following HIV diagnosis, linkage to outpatient treatment, antiretroviral initiation, and longitudinal retention in care represent the foundation for successful treatment. While prior studies have evaluated these processes in isolation, a systematic evaluation of successive steps in the same cohort of patients has not yet been performed. To ensure optimal long-term outcomes, a better understanding of the interplay of these processes is needed. Therefore, a retrospective cohort study of patients initiating outpatient care at the University of Alabama at Birmingham 1917 HIV/AIDS Clinic between January 2000 and December 2005 was undertaken. Multivariable models determined factors associated with: late diagnosis/linkage to care (initial CD4 < 350 cells/mm3), timely antiretroviral initiation, and retention across the first two years of care. Delayed linkage was observed in two-thirds of the overall sample (n = 567) and was associated with older age (odds ratio [OR] 1.31 per 10 years; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.06-1.62) and African American race (OR = 2.45; 95% CI = 1.60-3.74). Attending all clinic visits (hazard ratio [HR] = 6.45; 95% CI = 4.47-9.31) and lower initial CD4 counts led to earlier antiretroviral initiation. Worse retention in the first 2 years was associated with younger age (OR = 0.68 per 10 years; 95% CI = 0.56-0.83), higher baseline CD4 count, and substance abuse (OR = 1.78; 95% CI = 1.16-2.73). Interventions to improve timely HIV diagnosis and linkage to care should focus on older patients and African Americans while efforts to improve retention should address younger patients, those with higher baseline CD4 counts, and substance abuse. Missed clinic visits represent an important obstacle to the timely initiation of antiretroviral therapy. These data inform development of interventions to improve linkage and retention in HIV care, an emerging area of growing importance.

Durability of contemporary once-daily fixed-dose antiretroviral regimens has significantly eclipsed the duration of earlier antiretroviral drug options. Our results indicate this is due to both more convenient dosing and improved tolerability of modern antiretroviral regimens.

Summary The generalizability of clinical trial findings (efficacy) to routine care (effectiveness) may be limited. The present study found similar first year virologic and CD4 outcomes among antiretroviral-naïve patients treated through routine care vs. those participating in clinical trials. Background The generalizability of clinical trial findings (efficacy) to routine care (effectiveness) may be limited due to study eligibility criteria and volunteer bias. While well chronicled in many conditions, the efficacy vs. effectiveness of antiretroviral therapy (ART) remains understudied. Methods A retrospective study of the UAB 1917 Clinic Cohort evaluated naïve patients starting ART between 1/1/00–12/31/06. Patients received ART through clinical trials or routine care. Multivariable logistic and linear regression models were fit to evaluate factors associated with virologic failure (VF=VL>50 copies/mL) and change from baseline CD4 count 6 and 12 months after ART initiation. Sensitivity analyses evaluated the impact of missing data on outcomes. Results Among 570 patients starting ART during the study period, 121 (21%) enrolled in clinical trials vs. 449 (79%) receiving ART via routine care. ART receipt through routine care was not associated with VF at either 6 (OR=1.00;95%CI=0.54–1.86) or 12 (OR=1.56;95%CI=0.80–3.05) months in primary analyses. No significant differences in CD4 count responses at 6 and 12 months were observed. Conclusions Though marked differences in efficacy vs. effectiveness have been observed in the therapeutic outcomes of other conditions, our analyses found no evidence of such divergence among our patients initiating antiretroviral therapy for HIV.

No abstract

Purpose of reviewNonoperating room anesthesia (NORA) procedures continue to increase in type and complexity as procedural medicine makes technical advances. Patients presenting for NORA procedures are also older and sicker than ever. Commensurate with the requirements of procedural medicine, anesthetic monitoring must meet the American Society of Anesthesiologists standards for basic monitoring. Recent findingsThere have been improvements in the required monitors that are used for intraoperative patient care. Some of these changes have been with new technologies and others have occurred with software refinements. In addition, specialized monitoring devises have also been introduced into NORA locations (depth of hypnosis, respiratory monitoring, point-of care ultrasound). These additions to the monitoring tools available to the anesthesiologist working in the NORA-environment push the boundaries of procedures which may be accomplished in this setting. SummaryNORA procedures constitute a growing percentage of total administered anesthetics. There is no difference in the monitoring standard between that of an anesthetic administered in an operating room and a NORA location. Anesthesiologists in the NORA setting must have the same compendium of monitors available as do their colleagues working in the operating suite.