Factors associated with delayed initiation of HIV medical care among infected persons attending a southern HIV/AIDS clinic.

Background: Despite the proven benefits conferred by early human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) diagnosis and presentation to care, delays in HIV medical care are common; these delays are not fully understood, especially in the southern United States.

Methods: We evaluated the extent of, and characteristics associated with, delayed presentation to HIV care among 1,209 patients at an HIV/AIDS Outpatient Clinic in Birmingham, Alabama between 1996 and 2005.

Results: Two out of five (41.2%) patients first engaged care only after they had progressed to CDC-defined AIDS. Among these, 53.6% were diagnosed with HIV in the year preceding entry to care. Recent presentation (2002-2005), male sex, age [greater than or equal to]25, Medicare or Medicaid insurance coverage, and presentation within six months of HIV diagnosis were independently associated with initiating care after progression to AIDS.

Conclusions: A high proportion of patients entered clinical care after experiencing substantial disease progression. Interventions that effectively improve the timing of HIV diagnosis and presentation to care are needed.

Key Words: HIV, AIDS, health care, access, Alabama, delay

**********

Diagnosis and presentation to appropriate medical care during the early stages of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection have substantial clinical and public health benefits. Decreased HIV-related morbidity and mortality results from the timely initiation of antiretroviral therapy (ART) (1-6) and opportunistic infection (OI) prophylaxis. (1,5) ART may decrease the likelihood of further HIV transmission by reducing circulating levels of HIV RNA. (7-16) Treatment of other sexually transmitted diseases (STD) and coinfections (17-22) may also decrease the likelihood of further HIV transmission. In addition, care providers can help promote safer behaviors among their HIV-infected clients. (23-29)

Despite the benefits of early HIV diagnosis and presentation to care, a large proportion of HIV-infected Americans delay HIV testing and therefore remain unaware of their HIV status. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimated in 2000 that one-third of an estimated 800,000 to 900,000 HIV-infected persons in the US were unaware of their infection. (30,31) Even among persons with suspected recent exposure, testing may be delayed for months or years. (32,33) As a result, diagnosis during late stages of disease is common; 30 to 40% of persons learn about their HIV status after their condition has already clinically progressed to AIDS, such that they receive both the HIV and AIDS diagnoses concurrently. (34-40) Once individuals learn that they are infected with HIV, substantial risks remain that they will fail to arrange for follow-up with appropriate clinical care providers. As many as 25% of infected persons delay care for up to five years after first testing positive. (28,41,42) Delays of more than one, two, and five years were noted in 39%, 32%, and 18%, respectively, among infected patients in Massachusetts and Rhode Island. (42) Several studies have reported that 56 to 81% of patients present for initial care with CD4+ cell counts already below 500/[micro]L, and 23 to 30% with counts < 200/[micro]L. (36,42) Based on viral load set points (43) and rates of CD4+ cell depletion (44-46) extrapolated from natural history data of untreated HIV disease subjects, approximately 50% of persons presenting to care with CD4+ counts <200 cells/[micro]L have already been infected for a decade or more. (40,47)

Prior research to assess predictors of delayed HIV diagnosis and presentation to medical care in the United States has been published from large urban centers, primarily on the East and West coasts. Predictors of delayed presentation to HIV medical care identified by these studies may not be generalized to the South where a larger proportion of infected persons are women, African-American, uninsured or publicly insured, impoverished, and residing in rural communities. The tendency for multiple barriers to exist among individual HIV-infected Southerners and their relative impact are also not fully understood. We report here on the frequency and extent of delayed presentation to HIV medical care and characteristics associated with these delays at a large Birmingham, Alabama HIV/AIDS outpatient clinic that serves both urban and rural Alabama.

Methods

Study Population

The University of Alabama at Birmingham (UAB) 1917 Outpatient Clinic is an infectious disease clinic providing primary medical, dental, and palliative care, as well as psychosocial, research protocols, and ancillary services to HIV-infected persons. Upon presentation to care, demographic, clinical, and patient tracking information is obtained and entered into an electronic database including risk factors for HIV-infection, HIV-related symptoms and diseases, prior ART use or OI prophylaxis, and former or current non-HIV related medical conditions. All information is self-reported and, when available, verified by patient medical records received from prior care sources. Information from each visit to the 1917 Outpatient Clinic is added to the database including CD4+ cell counts and viral load quantification.

HIV-infected persons with no reported history of prior HIV medical care and who initiated primary care at the 1917 Outpatient Clinic between January 1, 1996, and January 24, 2005, were considered eligible for these analyses. Among 2,656 persons, excluded were 622 (23.4%) patients with a history of prior HIV medical care elsewhere, defined as those with prior ART or OI prophylaxis histories, and 825 (31.1%) who were being seen for nonprimary HIV medical care reasons only (eg, dental clinic, research protocols, addiction counseling). Information regarding prior HIV medical care in which ART or OI prophylaxis was not prescribed was not consistently available. The final sample included 1,209 eligible patients. The UAB Institutional Review Board (IRB) reviewed and approved the current study.

Outcome and Factors of Interest

The outcome of interest was delayed presentation to HIV medical care, defined as persons presenting for initial care at the 1917 Outpatient Clinic with CDC-defined AIDS according to the 1993 expanded AIDS-surveillance case definition; specifically, persons presenting with a CD4+ cell count <200 cells/[micro]L and/or with an AIDS-defining disease. (48) Persons presenting for initial medical care before the onset of CDC-defined AIDS were considered nondelayers. Characteristics of interest included race/ethnicity, sex, age, insurance status, HIV risk exposure group, time since HIV diagnosis, area of residence, distance to clinic in miles, pregnancy at baseline among females, and history of other STDs, diabetes, cardiovascular diseases, non-HIV-related cancer, or mental illness, and year of presentation to care. Year of presentation to care was pertinent to the assessment of time-related trends.

Analyses

Differences between delayers and nondelayers were compared for epidemiologically relevant categorical and continuous variables using chi-square and t tests, respectively. To account for the cross-sectional study design, crude and adjusted prevalence ratios (PR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were obtained using multivariable regression techniques, specifically PROC GENMOD regression procedures for binomially distributed variables (SAS Institute, Inc., SAS Version 9.0, Cary, NC). Based upon crude analyses, categories for several variables were collapsed in adjusted analyses. The final model included characteristics significantly associated with delayed presentation to care, as well as nonsignificant characteristics identified as predictors in prior studies elsewhere. Due to the common concern for results to differ within demographic subgroups, we evaluated the consistency of overall results by stratifying on race/ethnicity (white/non-Hispanic, black/non-Hispanic), sex, and age (< 25, [greater than or equal to] 25 yr). To increase statistical efficiency, stratified analysis models were restricted to significant predictors identified using backward elimination procedures.

Results

The average age at initial presentation to care among 1,209 patients was 37.0 years (SD [+ or -] 9.5; range: 19 to 68); 75% were men. By race/ethnicity, 48.6% were black/non-Hispanic and 46.3% were white/non-Hispanic (hereafter referred to as blacks and whites), with blacks accounting for 42.0% of men and 69.1% of women. Overall, 498 (41.2%) patients presented for initial care with CDC-defined AIDS; among these, 267 (53.6%) had been diagnosed with HIV in the year preceding their entry to care. The median delay from HIV diagnosis to presentation for care was 91.5 days. Log viral load was higher among delayed presenters than nondelayed presenters to care (4.7 versus 3.8 copies/mL, respectively; P < 0.001). Male sex, age 25 years or older, insured by Medicare or Medicaid, presentation within six months or more than five years after HIV diagnosis, and history of diabetes were each associated with delayed presentation to care in bivariate analyses (Table 1). Stratified bivariate analyses indicated differences between whites and blacks in the nature and/or magnitude of the associations of several of these variables, most notably year of presentation to care, gender, age, time since HIV diagnosis, and history of diabetes.

No statistically significant time-related trends were observed in multivariable regression analyses. Log viral load was not included in regression analyses to avoid multicollinearity and instability in the parameter estimates. In addition, history of other STDs, cardiovascular diseases, and non-HIV-related cancer were not significantly associated with delayed presentation and therefore were excluded from the final model. Presenting between 2002 and 2005 (PR = 1.3), male sex (PR = 1.7), age >25 years (25-34 yr PR = 2.3; 35-44 yr PR = 2.5; [greater than or equal to]45 yr PR = 2.1), insured by Medicare or Medicaid (PR = 1.8), and presentation within six months of HIV diagnosis (PR = 1.3) were each independently associated with delayed presentation to care (See Table 2 for referent groups and 95% confidence intervals). A history of mental illness was associated with a decreased likelihood of delayed care (PR = 0.7). Findings did not differ when nonsignificant predictors were excluded from our multivariate models.

Stratified analyses indicated differences by demographic characteristics. Among whites, a trend with increasing age, presentation within six months of initial diagnosis, or presentation more than five years after HIV diagnosis were each associated with delayed presentation to care, while among blacks, recent presentation to care and male sex were associated with delayed care (Table 3). Among women, a history of mental illness was associated with reduced likelihood of delayed care, while among men, history of diabetes was associated with delayed presentation to care (Table 4). Among those younger than 25, black race/ethnicity and recent presentation to care were associated with increased likelihood of delayed presentation to care, while among those age 25 years or older, history of mental illness was associated with reduced likelihood of delayed care (Table 5).

Discussion

We found that 41.2% of persons presented to our clinic for initial medical care having already progressed to CDC-defined AIDS. Among those presenting to care with CDC-defined AIDS, 267 (53.6%) had been diagnosed with HIV in the year preceding their entry to care, which points to the critically important need to identify infected persons much earlier in the course of their disease. CDC-defined AIDS at presentation to care was particularly common among persons presenting in more recent years--after 2002, men, persons aged 25 or older, patients with Medicare or Medicaid insurance, and those presenting within six months of their first HIV-positive test. Although we observed no overall differences by race in time to presentation to care, younger blacks were four times more likely to delay care than younger whites.

The proportions of persons who delayed care for more than one year (34.1%) or more than five years (17.7%) following their initial HIV diagnosis were similar to results reported in Boston and Providence, Rhode Island. (42) Patients presenting to initial medical care with CDC-defined AIDS tended to cluster into two mutually exclusive groups: those presenting soon after a recent HIV diagnosis and those first diagnosed with HIV many years earlier who failed to initiate care for a prolonged period. Among both of these groups, the onset of HIV-related symptoms or illness likely prompted individuals to receive care. However, those in the latter group had an opportunity to access and establish medical care before advanced disease progression. Thus, a distinctly different set of characteristics may be associated with delayed presentation to care for each of these two groups. Studies specifically designed to identify these distinct differences are needed to confirm and further understand these differences not only within the South but throughout the United States. The observed magnitude of clinical AIDS among those accessing care within six months of initial HIV testing suggests that substantial diagnostic delay occurred in our patient population, with approximately 50% of these HIV and AIDS patients being infected for a decade or more before being diagnosed. (40,47) Interventions that promote increased HIV test-seeking behavior and knowledge of serostatus, such as those described in the CDC Serostatus Approach to Fighting the HIV Epidemic (SAFE) initiative, (49) may yield substantial public health and clinical benefits in our patient population and possibly throughout the South.

Our observations that delayed presentation occurred disproportionately among men and persons living in poverty, as indicated by public insurance, are consistent with findings from other studies in other geographic regions of the United States. (40,50-54) The absence of racial differences and delayed presentation to care in our study contrasts with the increased delays reported by others among African-Americans. (55-60) This discrepancy may be due to selection bias in our study. Despite the relative heterogeneity of the 1917 Outpatient Clinic patient population, a large proportion of HIV-infected African Americans and infected persons who relied on public funding have received primary HIV medical care at another large, publicly funded Birmingham clinic. As a result, our measures of association for African-Americans may be biased toward finding no difference due to a subset of high risk persons being seen at the other HIV clinic. Younger blacks were four times more likely to delay care than younger whites. This disparity may reflect behavior of young black men who have sex with men (MSM), but our sample size did not allow age and race interactions to be assessed for independence from other contributing factors.

Few prior studies were large enough to assess the role of other chronic conditions, like diabetes, overall and among subgroups. We postulated that an existing connection to the medical community as a result of a pre-existing condition would reduce delays in being diagnosed and accessing care. What we observed were clear gender-related differences. Among women, pregnancy and a history of mental illness were associated with reduced likelihood of presenting with CDC-defined AIDS; that tendency seemed to confirm our hypothesis. However, diabetic men experienced delayed presentation to HIV care; that observation was opposite to our prior hypothesis. Although these results may have resulted by chance from multiple data comparisons, the association between diabetes and delayed care in men merits further investigation for several reasons. Blood monitoring by medical providers is a standard component of diabetic medical care and disease management. HIV-positive persons receiving diabetic medical care might therefore be expected to have more opportunities for HIV testing, and through their established connection to the medical community, an increased likelihood of successfully accessing HIV care. However, symptoms associated with HIV, such as weight loss, pneumonia, and thrush, are conditions that may be categorized as diabetic complications. Medical providers of diabetic patients may be more likely to consider these as diabetic complications and not recognize the need for HIV testing. Alternatively, our results may simply be another reflection that men are less connected to the medical care system. This observation is supported by the tendency for women in our population with other medical conditions to be less likely to present with CDC-defined AIDS. Studies specifically designed to assess other medical conditions, in particular diabetes, and their influence on timely HIV diagnosis and presentation to medical care are needed to confirm that the current results did not occur by chance alone.

In our study, persons aged 25 or older were more likely than younger individuals to present to care with CDC-defined AIDS. That finding contrasts with the belief that persons of younger age are at increased risk of delayed diagnosis (52,61) and delayed medical care. (62) Our results may simply reflect more recent seroconversion and less progression to clinical AIDS among persons younger than 25. Our analyses stratified by age indicated that young men and young African-Americans may experience increased delays accessing HIV care when compared with their young female and young white counterparts. Prior studies have reported inconsistent results with regard to the effect of age on delayed HIV care. (39,40,51,54,63) The inconsistencies of age-related assessments may indicate true study population differences, or they may raise questions about internal validity. The more pronounced age effect we observed among women than men may be consistent with prior results from elsewhere. One possible explanation is that for these women, the primary risk factors are attributable to their male sexual partners, and therefore are not necessarily modifiable, or even identifiable, by the women at risk. Alternatively, women, particularly those with children, (41,53,64) may defer their own medical needs. (32,41,52,65,66)

Our study had several limitations that could have influenced the findings. Selection bias may have distorted our assessments of race/ethnicity, insurance, and HIV risk exposure group. The cross-sectional study design limited our ability to assess temporal relationships and to adjust for time. In regard to the latter, spurious conclusions could result by varying stages of the epidemic within subpopulations, for example, whites versus blacks and men versus women. Misclassification was also possible. Although 23.4% of persons were excluded for having prior ART or OI prophylaxis, some patients with other forms of prior HIV medical care may have been included and our estimate of persons presenting to care with CDC-defined AIDS may be inflated. Similarly, recall bias and socially desirable reporting may have occurred with self-reported variables. Missing data for education, income, tobacco use, and alcohol use limited our ability to assess these variables. The current analysis was also limited to clinical and demographic variables. Other potential predictors, such as the effects of disclosing HIV status, social support, HIV knowledge and awareness, and religious affiliation, could not be assessed. We were also unable to account for rate of disease progression. Because delayed presentation to care was defined using clinical measures, a disproportionate prevalence of rapid progressors could have introduced information bias. Finally, multiple comparisons across our data may have led to chance associations, particularly in the results of stratified analyses.

Certain valuable aspects of the current study are worth highlighting. Despite the disproportionate burden of the HIV/AIDS epidemic in the southern United States, particularly recently, this is one of very few studies that have focused on delayed HIV medical care in our region. Our study population provided sufficient power to assess several characteristics that smaller studies could not assess, and to detect associations that were not uniformly distributed among epidemiologically important subgroups. In the face of multiple barriers to HIV diagnosis and care in individual HIV-infected Southerners, the ability to identify these relationships is essential and raises the encouraging prospect of further informative work in this setting.

Conclusions

Southern medical care providers and the research and public health communities would benefit from more deliberate attention to delayed HIV diagnosis and medical care. Most needed are interventions that effectively increase HIV risk awareness and the availability of HIV testing and HIV medical care, particularly among men. Recent FDA approval of rapid HIV testing strategies yielding results within the same hour (67) could certainly increase the proportion of persons receiving an early diagnosis (68); however, the utility of these testing procedures depends upon their local availability and accessibility, and on individual awareness of these types of tests. Making HIV testing a routine part of medical care, as described in the CDCs Advancing HIV Prevention initiative, (67) could also increase knowledge of serostatus among infected persons. The benefits conferred by routinely recommended testing are dependent on access to general medical care and may vary among subgroups, particularly by gender. Finally, US federal legislation may help address poverty-related barriers. As of 2000, all Ryan White Care Act grantees have been required to respond to an "unmet need" defined as "HIV positive individuals that are aware of their status and not receiving regular medical care." (69) The Early Treatment for HIV Act (ETHA), which is still pending as of early 2005 (Bill number S. 311; status confirmed on October 3, 2005 at http://thomas.loc.gov), is intended to provide the option for states to cover low-income HIV-infected persons before developing disability. (70) Southern states may disproportionately benefit from ETHA compared with other regions of the country, given the high prevalence of state-based Medicaid and AIDS Drug Assistance Program (ADAP) restrictions. (71)

References

1. McNaghten AD, Hanson DL, Jones JL, et al. Effects of antiretroviral therapy and opportunistic illness primary chemoprophylaxis on survival after AIDS diagnosis: Adult/Adolescent Spectrum of Disease Group. AIDS 1999;13:1687-1695.

2. Palella FJ, Delaney KM, Moorman AC, et al. Declining morbidity and mortality among patients with advanced human immunodeficiency virus infection. N Engl J Med 1998;338:853-860.

3. Palella Jr, FJ Deloria-Knoll M, Chniel JS, et al. Survival benefit of initiating antiretroviral therapy in HIV-infected persons in different CD4+ cell strata. Ann Intern Med 2003;138:620-626.

4. Phillips AN, Staszewski S, Weber R, et al. HIV viral load response to antiretroviral therapy according to the baseline CD4 cell count and viral load. JAMA 2001;286:2560-2567.

5. Kaplan JE, Hanson D, Dworkin MS, et al. Epidemiology of human immunodeficiency virus-associated opportunistic infections in the United States in the era of highly active antiretroviral therapy. Clin Infect Dis 2000;30(Suppl 1):S5-S14.

6. Hogg RS, Yip B, Chan KJ, et al. Rates of disease progression by baseline CD4 cell count and viral load after initiating triple-drug therapy. JAMA 2001;286:2568-2577.

7. Garcia PM, Kalish LA, Pitt J, et al. Maternal levels of plasma human immunodeficiency virus type 1 RNA and the risk of perinatal transmission. N Engl J Med 1999;341:394-402.

8. Mofenson LM, Lambert JS, Stiehm ER, et al. Risk factors for perinatal transmission of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 in women treated with zidovudine: Pediatric AIDS Clinical Trials Group Study 185 Team. N Engl J Med 1999;341:385-393.

9. Operskalski EA, Stram DO, Busch MP, et al. Role of viral load in heterosexual transmission of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 by blood transfusion recipients: Transfusion Safety Study Group. Am J Epidemiol 1997;146:655-661.

10. Quinn TC, Wawer MJ, Sewankambo N, et al. Viral load and heterosexual transmission of human immunodeficiency virus type 1: Rakai Project Study Group. N Engl J Med 2000;342:921-929.

11. Gupta P, Mellors J, Kingsley L, et al. High viral load in semen of human immunodeficiency virus type-1 infected men at all stages of disease and its reduction by therapy with protease and nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors. J Virol 1997;71:6271-6275.

12. Gulick RM, Mellors JW, Havlir D, et al. Treatment with indinavir, zidovudine, and lamivudine in adults with human immunodeficiency virus infection and prior antiretroviral therapy. N Engl J Med 1997;337:734-739.

13. Cavert W, Notermans DW, Stakus K, et al. Kinetics of response in lymphoid tissues to antiretroviral therapy of HIV-1 infection. Science 1997;276:960-964.

14. Anderson DJ, O'Brien TR, Politch JA, et al. Effects of disease stage and zidovudine therapy on the detection of HIV type 1 in semen. JAMA 1992;267:2769-2774.

15. Vernazza PL, Gilliam BL, Dyer J, et al. Quantification of HIV in semen: correlation with antiretroviral treatment and immune status. AIDS 1997;11:987-993.

16. Vernazza PL, Gilliam BL, Flepp M, et al. Effect of antiviral treatment on the shedding of HIV-1 in semen. AIDS 1997;11:1249-1254.

17. Ghys PD, Fransen K, Diallo MO, et al. The associations between cervicovaginal HIV shedding, sexually transmitted diseases and immunosuppression in female sex workers in Abidjan, Cote d'Ivoire. AIDS 1997;11:F85-F93.

18. Kreiss JK, Coombs R, Plummer F, et al. Isolation of human immunodeficiency virus from genital ulcers in Nairobi prostitutes. J Infect Dis 1989;160:380-384.

19. Schacker T, Ryncarz AJ, Goddard J, et al. Frequent recovery of HIV-1 from genital herpes simplex virus lesions in HIV-1 infected men. JAMA 1998;280:61-66.

20. Clemetson DB, Moss GB, Willerford DM, et al. Detection of HIV DNA in cervical and vaginal secretions: prevalence and correlates among women in Nairobi, Kenya. JAMA 1993;269:2860-2864.

21. Cohen MS, Hoffman IF, Royce RA, et al. Reduction of concentration of HIV-1 in semen after treatment of urethritis: implications for prevention of sexual transmission of HIV-1: AIDSCAP Malawi Research Group. Lancet 1997;349:1868-1873.

22. Grosskurth H, Mosha F, Todd J, et al. Impact of improved treatment of sexually transmitted diseases on HIV infection in rural Tanzania: randomised controlled trial. Lancet 1995;346:530-536.

23. Alwano-Edyegu MG, Marum E. Knowledge Is Power: Voluntary HIV Counseling and Testing in Uganda. 1999, UNAIDS: Geneva.

24. Allen S, Serufilira A, Bogaerts J, et al. Confidential HIV testing and condom promotion in Africa: impact on HIV and gonorrhea rates. JAMA 1992;268:3338-3343.

25. Cleary PD, Van Devanter N, Rogers TF, et al. Behavior changes after notification of HIV infection. Am J Public Health 1991;81:1586-1590.

26. Valleroy LA, MacKellar DA, Karon JM, et al. HIV prevalence and associated risk in young men who have sex with men: Young Men's Survey Study Group. JAMA 2000;284:198-204.

27. Wenger NS, Kusseling FS, Beck K, et al. Sexual behavior of individuals infected with the human immunodeficiency virus: the need for intervention. Arch Intern Med 1994;154:1849-1854.

28. Kilmarx PH, Hamers FF, Peterman TA. Living with HIV: experience and perspectives of HIV-infected sexually transmitted disease clinic patients after posttest counseling. Sex Transm Dis 1998;25:28-37.

29. Hays RB, Paul J, Ekstrand M, et al. Actual versus perceived HIV status, sexual behaviors and predictors of unprotected sex among young gay and bisexual men who identify as HIV-negative, HIV-positive and untested. AIDS 1997;11:1495-1502.

30. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Guidelines for national human immunodeficiency virus case surveillance, including monitoring for human immunodeficiency virus infection and acquired immunodeficiency syndrome. MMWR 1999;48:1-29.

31. Fleming P, et al. HIV Prevalence in the United States, 2000. Ninth Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections. 2002. Seattle, WA.

32. Siegel K, Raveis VH, Gorey E. Barriers and pathways to testing among HIV-infected women. AIDS Educ Prev 1998;10:114-127.

33. Wenger NS, Kusseling FS, Beck K, et al. When patients first suspect and find out they are infected with the human immunodeficiency virus: implications for prevention. AIDS Care 1994;6:399-405.

34. Hutchinson CM, Wilson C, Reichart CA, et al. CD4 lymphocyte concentrations in patients with newly identified HIV infection attending STD clinics: potential impact on publicly funded health care resources. JAMA 1991;266:253-256.

35. Dybul M, Bolan R, Condoluci D, et al. Evaluation of initial CD4+ T cell counts in individuals with newly diagnosed human immunodeficiency virus infection, by sex and race, in urban settings. J Infect Dis 2002;185:1818-1821.

36. Samet JH, Retondo MJ, Freedberg KA, et al. Factors associated with initiation of primary medical care for HIV-infected persons. Am J Med 1994;97:347-353.

37. Katz MH, Bindman AB, Keane D, et al. CD4 lymphocyte count as an indicator of delay in seeking human immunodeficiency virus-related treatment. Arch Intern Med 1992;152:1501-1504.

38. Wortley PM, Chu SY, Diaz T, et al. HIV testing patterns: where, why, and when were persons with AIDS tested for HIV? AIDS 1995;9:487-492.

39. Castilla J, Sobrino P, De La Fuente L, et al. Late diagnosis of HIV infection in the era of highly active antiretroviral therapy: consequences for AIDS incidence. AIDS 2002;16:1945-1951.

40. Klein D, Hurley LB, Merrill D, et al. Review of medical encounters in the 5 years before a diagnosis of HIV-1 infection: implications for early detection. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 2003;32:143-152.

41. Siegel K, Karus D, Raveis VH. Testing and treatment behaviour of HIV-infected women: white, African-American, Puerto Rican comparisons. AIDS Care 1997;9:297-309.

42. Samet JH, Freedberg KA, Stein MD, et al. Trillion virion delay: time from testing positive for HIV to presentation for primary care. Arch Intern Med 1998;158:734-740.

43. Perelson AS, Neumann AU, Markowitz M, et al. HIV-1 dynamics in vivo: virion clearance rate, infected cell life-span, and viral generation time. Science 1996;271:1582-1586.

44. Kirschner D, Webb G, Cloyd M. Model of HIV-1 disease progression based on virus induced lymph node homing and homing-induced apoptosis of CD4+ lymphocytes. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 2000;24:352-362.

45. Lang W, Perkins H, Anderson RE, et al. Patterns of T lymphocyte changes with human immunodeficiency virus infection: from seroconversion to the development of AIDS. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 1989;2:63-69.

46. Samet JH, Freedberg KA, Savetsky JB, et al. Understanding delay to medical care for HIV infection: the long-term non-presenter. AIDS 2001;15:77-85.

47. Bacchetti P, Moss AR. Incubation period of AIDS in San Francisco. Nature 1989;338:251-253.

48. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 1993 revised classification system for HIV infection and expanded surveillance case definition for AIDS among adolescents and adults. MMWR 1992;41:(no. RR-17).

49. Janssen RS, Holtgrave DR, Valdiserri RO, et al. The Serostatus Approach to Fighting the HIV Epidemic: prevention strategies for infected individuals. Am J Public Health 2001;91:1019-1024.

50. Stringer EM, Stringer JS, Cliver SP, et al. Evaluation of a new testing policy for human immunodeficiency virus to improve screening rates. Obstet Gynecol 2001;98:1104-1108.

51. Biber CL, Jaker MA, Kloser P, et al. A study of sex differences in presentation for care of HIV. AIDS Patient Care STDs 1999;13:103-110.

52. Sorvillo F. et al Early HIV detection: successes and failures. 12th World AIDS Conference. 1998. Geneva.

53. Shapiro MF, Morton SC, McCaffrey DF, et al. Variations in the care of HIV-infected adults in the United States: results from the HIV Cost and Services Utilization Study. JAMA 1999;281:2305-2315.

54. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Late versus early testing of HIV: 16 sites, United States, 2000-2003. MMWR 2003;52:581-586.

55. Simon PA, Weber M, Ford WL, et al. Reasons for HIV antibody test refusal in a heterosexual sexually transmitted disease clinic population. AIDS 1996;10:1549-1553.

56. Valdiserri RO, Moore M, Gerber AR, et al. A study of clients returning for counseling after HIV testing: implications for improving rates of return. Public Health Rep 1993;108:12-18.

57. Wiley DJ, Frerichs RR, Ford WL, et al. Failure to learn human immunodeficiency virus test results in Los Angeles public sexually transmitted disease clinics. Sex Transm Dis 1998;25:342-345.

58. Turner BJ, Cunningham WE, Duan N, et al. Delayed medical care after diagnosis in a US national probability sample of persons infected with human immunodeficiency virus. Arch Intern Med 2000;160:2614-2622.

59. Schwarcz SK, Spitters C, Ginsberg MM, et al. Predictors of human immunodeficiency virus counselling and testing among sexually transmitted disease clinic patients. Sex Transm Dis 1997;24:347-352.

60. Grinstead OA, Peterson JL, Faigeles B, et al. Antibody testing and condom use among heterosexual African Americans at risk for HIV infection: the National AIDS Behavioral Surveys. Am J Public Health 1997;87:857-859.

61. Rotheram-Borus MJ, et al. Risk acts, health care, and medical adherence among HIV+ youths in care over time. AIDS Behav 1997;1:43-52.

62. Guenter CD, Gill MJ. A population with short delay from diagnosis of human immunodeficiency virus to medical care. Arch Intern Med 1999;159:758-759.

63. Zingmond DS, Wenger NS, Crystal S, et al. Circumstances at HIV diagnosis and progression of diseases in older HIV-infected Americans. Am J Public Health 2001;91:1117-1120.

64. Solomon L, Stein M, Flynn C, et al. Health services use by urban women with or at risk for HIV-1 infection: the HIV Epidemiology Research Study (HERS). J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr Hum Retrovirol 1998;17:253-261.

65. Ungaro AB, et al. CD4+ T lymphocyte counts of HIV infected women seeking an anonymous counseling/testing service in Sao Paulo, Brazil. 12th World AIDS Conference. 1998, Geneva.

66. Solomon L, Moore J, Gleghorn J, et al. HIV testing behaviors in a population of inner-city women at high risk for HIV infection. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr Hum Retrovirol 1996;13:267-272.

67. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Advancing HIV Prevention: New strategies for a changing epidemic: United States, 2003. MMWR 2003;52:329-332.

68. Sy FS, Rhodes SD, Choi ST, et al. The acceptability of oral fluid testing for HIV antibodies: a pilot study in gay bars in a predominantly rural state. Sex Transm Dis 1998;25:211-215.

69. Health Resources and Services Administration, 2004. Available at: http://www.hrsa.gov. Accessed on March 27, 2006.

70. Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. Financing HIV/AIDS care: A quilt with many holes. HIV/AIDS Policy Issue Brief. May 004, page 7. Available at: http://www.kff.org. Accessed on March 27, 2006.

71. Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. Kaiser Statehealthfacts.org. Available at: http://www.statehealthfacts.org. Accessed on March 27, 2006.

Christopher S. Krawczyk, PHD, Ellen Funkhouser, MS, DRPH, J. Michael Kilby, MD, Richard A. Kaslow, MD, MPH, Amita K. Bey, MPH, and Sten H. Vermund, MD, PHD

From the University of Alabama at Birmingham Schools of Public Health and Medicine, Birmingham, AL.

Reprint requests to Christopher S. Krawczyk, PhD, Office of AIDS, California Department of Health Services, MS 7700, PO Box 997426, Sacramento, CA 95899-7426. E-mail: [e-mail]

Christopher S. Krawczyk, PhD, is now affiliated with the California Department of Health Services, Office of AIDS. Sten H. Vermund, MD, PhD, is now affiliated with Vanderbilt University School of Medicine.

Supported in part through National Institutes of Health (NIH) grants to the University of Alabama at Birmingham (UAB): Acute Infection and Early Disease Research Program (AI41530), UAB Center for AIDS Research (5P30AI027767-18), UAB General Clinical Research Center (M01 RR-00032).

Accepted January 25, 2006.

RELATED ARTICLE: Key Points

* Nearly half of all subjects (41.2%) first engaged with an HIV medical provider after they had already progressed to CDC-defined AIDS.

* Among these, 53.6% had received their initial HIV diagnosis in the year preceding entry to care, indicating substantial HIV diagnostic delay in our patient population.

* Characteristics associated with delayed presentation to care included presentation in the most recent time period (2002 to 2005), male sex, age [greater than or equal to] 25 years old, and Medicare or Medicaid insurance coverage.

Table 1. Comparison of patient characteristics at presentation to care,
by status of CDC-defined AIDS: Birmingham, AL, 1996-2005 (a)

                                            Patients presenting to care
                                            with CDC-defined AIDS
                                            All n
Characteristic                n             (%) (b)

Sample                        1209          498 (41.2)
Mean log viral load              4.2 (1.2)    4.7 (1.2)
  ([+ or -] SD)
  P value (d)                                <0.001
Race/Ethnicity                1209
  White/non-Hispanic           560          226 (40.4)
  Black/non-Hispanic           588          250 (42.5)
  Other                         20            7 (35.0)
  Unspecified                   41           15 (36.6)
  P value (d)                                 0.7
Year
  1996-1998                    489          198 (40.5)
  1999-2001                    380          154 (40.5)
  2002-2005                    337          146 (43.3)
  P value (d)                                 0.7
Gender
  Male                         904          397 (43.9)
  Female                       301          100 (33.2)
  P value (d)                                 0.001
Age, years
  < 25                         102           24 (23.5)
  25-34                        401          166 (41.4)
  35-44                        466          207 (44.4)
  [greater than or equal to]   240          101 (42.1)
    45
  P value (d)                                 0.002
Insurance status
  Private                      455          178 (39.1)
  Medicare or Medicaid         336          167 (49.7)
  Ryan White Care Act          185           70 (37.8)
  Private & public (e)         106           46 (43.4)
  None or unspecified          124           37 (29.8)
  P value (d)                                 0.002
Risk exposure group
  Heterosexual                 329          131 (39.8)
  MSM                          432          200 (46.3)
  IDU                           72           31 (43.1)
  MSM & IDU                     27           11 (40.7)
  Other or unspecified         349          125 (35.8)
  P value (d)                                 0.1
Time since HIV diagnosis
  0-6 months                   584          254 (43.5)
  7-12 months                   44           13 (29.6)
  > 1-2 years                   66           22 (33.3)
  > 2-5 years                  130           54 (41.5)
  > 5 years                    214          102 (47.7)
  Unspecified                  171           53 (31.0)
  P value (d)                                 0.006
Area of Residence
  Alabama MSA                  836          342 (40.9)
  Alabama non-MSA              312          135 (43.3)
  Out of state                  57           21 (36.8)
  P value (d)                                 0.6
Distance to clinic (miles)
  [less than or equal to] 5    541          228 (42.1)
    miles
  6-19                         139           68 (48.9)
  20-49                        112           43 (38.4)
  50-99                        204           70 (34.3)
  [greater than or equal to]   204           85 (41.7)
    100
  P value (d)                                 0.09
Pregnancy (among females)       26            5 (19.2)
  No                           270           93 (34.4)
  P value (d)                                 0.1
History of other STDs          251          106 (42.2)
  No                           958          392 (40.9)
  P value (d)                                 0.7
History of diabetes             34           20 (58.8)
  No                          1175          478 (40.7)
  P value (d)                                 0.03
History of CVD                 158           66 (41.8)
  No                          1051          432 (41.1)
  P value (d)                                 0.9
History of cancer               20            6 (30.0)
  No                          1189          492 (41.4)
  P value (d)                                 0.3
History of mental illness      145           55 (37.9)
  No                          1064          443 (41.6)
  P value (d)                                 0.4

                              Patients presenting to care
                              with CDC-defined AIDS
                              White n      Black n
Characteristic                (%) (c)      (%) (c)

Sample                        226          250
Mean log viral load             4.6 (1.3)    4.8 (1.1)
  ([+ or -] SD)
  P value (d)                  <0.001       <0.001
Race/Ethnicity
  White/non-Hispanic          226            -
  Black/non-Hispanic            -          250
  Other                         -            -
  Unspecified                   -            -
  P value (d)
Year
  1996-1998                   110 (43.8)    83 (36.4)
  1999-2001                    62 (36.1)    79 (43.9)
  2002-2005                    54 (39.7)    88 (49.2)
  P value (d)                   0.3          0.03
Gender
  Male                        200 (41.4)   182 (47.9)
  Female                       26 (33.8)    68 (32.7)
  P value (d)                   0.2         <0.001
Age, years
  < 25                          5 (15.6)    19 (29.7)
  25-34                        64 (35.4)    95 (45.9)
  35-44                       102 (42.9)    96 (47.5)
  [greater than or equal to]   55 (50.5)    40 (34.8)
    45
  P value (d)                   0.002        0.02
Insurance status
  Private                      95 (40.3)    74 (37.8)
  Medicare or Medicaid         68 (51.9)    92 (49.7)
  Ryan White Care Act          29 (33.7)    36 (41.4)
  Private & public (e)         18 (36.0)    27 (51.9)
  None or unspecified          16 (28.6)    21 (31.8)
  P value (d)                   0.02         0.03
Risk exposure group
  Heterosexual                 37 (45.1)    86 (38.4)
  MSM                         117 (43.2)    75 (52.8)
  IDU                          15 (44.1)    16 (44.4)
  MSM & IDU                     9 (39.1)     1 (33.3)
  Other or unspecified         46 (33.6)    62 (37.8)
  P value (d)                   0.09         0.1
Time since HIV diagnosis
  0-6 months                  121 (45.5)   123 (41.7)
  7-12 months                   4 (19.1)     9 (47.4)
  > 1-2 years                   9 (34.6)    13 (34.2)
  > 2-5 years                  24 (36.9)    26 (44.8)
  > 5 years                    52 (49.5)    46 (49.5)
  Unspecified                  16 (20.8)    33 (38.8)
  P value (d)                  <0.001        0.6
Area of Residence
  Alabama MSA                 136 (39.8)   191 (42.4)
  Alabama non-MSA              78 (44.3)    53 (43.1)
  Out of state                 12 (30.8)     6 (40.0)
  P value (d)                   0.3          0.9
Distance to clinic (miles)
  [less than or equal to] 5    81 (42.2)   140 (42.7)
    miles
  6-19                         34 (50.0)    32 (49.2)
  20-49                        24 (34.8)    16 (43.2)
  50-99                        40 (35.4)    27 (34.6)
  [greater than or equal to]   45 (39.8)    33 (42.9)
    100
  P value (d)                   0.3          0.5
Pregnancy (among females)       1 (25.0)     4 (20.0)
  No                           25 (34.3)    62 (33.9)
  P value (d)                   1.0          0.3
History of other STDs          47 (39.5)    54 (45.8)
  No                          179 (40.6)   196 (41.7)
  P value (d)                   0.8          0.4
History of diabetes             7 (70.0)    13 (56.5)
  No                          219 (39.8)   237 (42.0)
  P value (d)                   0.09         0.2
History of CVD                 31 (49.2)    33 (39.8)
  No                          195 (39.2)   217 (43.0)
  P value (d)                   0.1          0.6
History of cancer               3 (21.4)     3 (50.0)
  No                          223 (40.8)   247 (42.4)
  P value (d)                   0.1          0.7
History of mental illness      33 (39.8)    21 (36.2)
  No                          193 (40.5)   229 (43.2)
  P value (d)                   0.9          0.3

(a) Patients with missing information included: Gender (n = 4),
insurance status (n = 3), area of residence (n = 4), distance to clinic
(n = 7), and pregnancy (n = 5).
(b) Row percent where denominator is the row value given under "n."
(c) Row percent where denominator is the number of white/black patients
with row characteristic.
(d) Comparison of characteristic levels for a difference between delayed
and nondelayed presenters to HIV medical care.
(e) Private insurance and Medicare, Medicaid, or Ryan White Care Act.
CDC, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; AIDS, acquired
immunodeficiency syndrome; MSM, men who have sex with men; IDU,
intravenous drug user; MSA, metropolitan statistical area; STDs,
sexually transmitted diseases; CVD, cardiovascular disease.

Table 2. Crude and adjusted associations of delayed presentation to
initial HIV medical care: Birmingham, AL, 1996-2005

                                     Crude  Adjusted (a)  Adjusted (a)
Characteristic                       PR     PR            95% CI

Year (vs. 1996-1998)
  1999-2001                          1.0    1.0           (0.7,1.3)
  2002-2005                          1.1    1.3#          (1.0,1.8)#
Race/Ethnicity (vs.
  white/non-Hispanic)
  Black/non-Hispanic                 1.1    1.1           (0.9,1.5)
  Other or unspecified               0.9    0.9           (0.5,1.7)
Male sex (vs. female)                1.3    1.7#          (1.2,2.3)#
Age, years (vs. <25)
  25-34                              1.8    2.3#          (1.4,3.8)#
  35-44                              1.9    2.5#          (1.5,4.1)#
  [greater than or equal to] 45      1.8    2.1#          (1.2,3.6)#
Insurance status (vs. private)
  Medicare or Medicaid               1.3    1.8#          (1.3,2.4)#
  Other or unspecified (b)           0.9    1.0           (0.7,1.3)
Risk exposure group (vs.
  heterosexual)
  MSM                                1.2    1.2           (0.8,1.7)
  Other or unspecified (c)           0.9    1.0           (0.7,1.4)
Time since HIV diagnosis (vs. 7-60
  months)
  0-6 months                         1.2    1.3#          (1.0,1.9)#
  > 5 years                          1.3    1.4           (0.9.2.1)
  Unspecified                        0.8    0.7           (0.5,1.2)
Area of Residence (vs. Alabama MSA)
  Alabama non-MSA                    1.1    1.2           (0.8,1.7)
  Out of state                       0.9    1.1           (0.6,2.2)
Distance to clinic, miles (vs.
  [less than or equal to] 5)
  6-19                               1.2    1.3           (0.8,2.0)
  20-99                              0.9    0.8           (0.5,1.3)
  [greater than or equal to] 100     0.9    0.8           (0.6,1.1)
Pregnancy, among females (vs. no)    0.6    0.4           (0.1,1.1)
History of diabetes (vs. no)         1.4    1.8           (0.9,3.7)
History of mental illness (vs. no)   0.9    0.7#          (0.5,1.0)#

Numbers in bold represent P value < 0.05.
(a) Model adjusted for all variables listed in Table 2.
(b) Includes Ryan White Care Act, combined private and public, none, and
unspecified.
(c) Includes IDU, IDU and MSM, other, and unspecified.
PR, prevalence ratio; CI, confidence interval; MSM, men who have sex
with men; IDU, intravenous drug user; MSA, metropolitan statistical
area.

Note: Represent P value < 0.05 indicated with #.

Table 3. Adjusted associations of delayed presentation to initial HIV
medical care, stratified by race/ethnicity: Birmingham, AL,
1996-2005 (a)

                                 White/non-Hispanic  Black/non-Hispanic
                                 (n = 560)           (n = 588)
Characteristic                   PR   95% CI         PR   95% CI

Year (vs. 1996-1998)
  1999-2001                      0.7  (0.4, 1.0)     1.2  (0.8, 1.8)
  2002-2005                      0.9  (0.5, 1.4)     2.0  (1.3, 3.1)
Male sex (vs. female)            1.3  (0.8, 2.3)     2.2  (1.5, 3.2)
Age, years (vs. < 25)
  25-34                          2.8  (1.0, 7.6)     2.2  (1.2, 4.1)
  35-44                          3.7  (1.4, 10.3)    2.1  (1.1, 3.9)
  [greater than or equal to] 45  4.9  (1.7, 14.1)    1.1  (0.5, 2.1)
Time since HIV diagnosis (vs.
  7-60 mos)
  0-6 months                     1.8  (1.1, 3.0)     1.1  (0.7, 1.8)
  > 5 years                      1.8  (1.0, 3.3)     1.2  (0.7, 2.1)
  Unspecified                    0.6  (0.3, 1.2)     0.8  (0.4, 1.4)

(a) Model adjusted for variables listed and insurance status and history
of diabetes.
PR, prevalence ratio; CI, CI, confidence interval; mos, months.

Table 4. Adjusted associations of delayed presentation to initial HIV
medical care, stratified by sex: Birmingham, AL, 1996-2005 (a)

                                    Male (n = 904)   Female (n = 301)
Characteristic                      PR   95% CI      PR   95% CI

Age [greater than or equal to] 25   2.0  (1.1, 3.5)  3.6  (1.3, 9.9)
  (vs. < 25)
Time since HIV diagnosis (vs. 7-60
  mos)
  0-6 months                        1.4  (0.9, 2.0)  1.4  (0.7, 2.8)
  > 5 years                         1.2  (0.8, 1.8)  2.8  (1.2, 6.7)
  Unspecified                       0.8  (0.5, 1.2)  0.6  (0.2, 1.8)
History of diabetes (vs. no)        2.8  (1.1, 7.6)  0.9  (0.2, 3.0)
History of mental illness (vs. no)  0.8  (0.5, 1.3)  0.4  (0.2, 0.8)

(a) Model adjusted for variables listed and year presented to HIV care,
insurance status, and distance to clinic.
PR, prevalence ratio; CI, confidence interval; mos, months

Table 5. Adjusted associations of delayed presentation to initial HIV
medical care, stratified by age: Birmingham, AL, 1996-2005 (a)

                        < 25 years of age   [greater than or equal to]
                        (n = 102)           25 years of age (n = 1107)
Characteristic          PR   95% CI         PR   95% CI

Year (vs. 1996-1998)
  1999-2001             0.6  (0.1, 3.0)     1.0  (0.7,1.3)
  2002-2005             3.5  (1.0,12.8)     1.2  (0.9,1.6)
Race/ethnicity (vs.
  white/non-Hispanic)
Black/non-Hispanic      4.3  (1.1,16.4)     1.1  (0.9,1.5)
  Other or unspecified  0.0  (0.0,          0.9  (0.5,1.7)
                               [infinity])
Male sex (vs. female)   4.5  (1.2,16.0)     1.7  (1.2,2.3)
History of mental       2.5  (0.4,13.9)     0.7  (0.5,1.0)
  illness (vs. no)

(a) Model adjusted for variables listed and insurance status, time since
HIV diagnosis, and history of diabetes.
PR, prevalence ratio; CI, confidence interval.