HIV seroprevalence and the acceptance of voluntary HIV testing among newly incarcerated male prison inmates in Wisconsin.

Human Immunodeficiency Virus Seroprevalence among Inmates of the Penitentiary Complex of the Region of Campinas, State of São Paulo, Brazil

“…Others, as the study by Hoxie et al (1990) carried out between 1986 and 1988, but published in 1990, concentrated its target much more on the relationship between ingress inmates and intravenous drug users (IVDUs). Almost at the same time, Vlahov et al (1991) carried out one of the most complete studies among 10,994 ingress inmates in ten different penitentiaries in USA, but the focus was the IVDUs before confinement and consequently cannot be compared with our data with regard to almost 700 inmates, from two different types of prison systems, and whose period of study was not longer than seven months.…”

“…Most works including high number of prisoners were carried out in Scotland (Bird et al 1995), and United States of America (Hoxie et al 1990, Vlahov et al 1991 showing, with slight differences, that the frequencies of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) positive reactions were higher among prisoners than in the normal population, excluding those groups, which are under risk factors pressures (Stark et al 1995, Carvalho et al 1996, Zapiola et al 1996.…”

From Corrections to Communities as an HIV Priority

“…6 Although the American Medical Association has recommended mandatory HIV 48 Early studies in Oregon and Wisconsin prisons, states with low HIV prevalence, showed high levels of acceptance by inmates of voluntary HIV testing in prison and a high level of detection of HIV infected inmates. 49,50 However, when voluntary testing was established in Maryland state prisons, where prevalence was relatively high, at 8%, acceptance by inmates was about 50% and detection of HIV infected inmates 33%. 15 Reasons for refusal were not related to confidentiality concerns but instead were due to inaccurate perceptions of risk of knowledge of HIV status prior to incarceration.…”

Cost-effectiveness of HIV counseling and testing in US prisons

“…9 Published reports show that 47% of inmates in Maryland and 71% in Wisconsin accepted voluntary testing. 11,12 For our base model, we assumed that, among inmates who did not know their HIV status, 50% would accept CT if offered; we used a range of 20%-90% for sensitivity analysis.…”