You are here

  • Home
  • Archive
  • Volume 92, Issue 1
  • The acceptability of routine HIV testing in general medical admissions using a sexual health advisor/healthcare assistant model

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Letter
The acceptability of routine HIV testing in general medical admissions using a sexual health advisor/healthcare assistant model
  1. Amina Buba1,2,
  2. Martin Fisher1,3,
  3. Jonathan Roberts1,
  4. Elaney Youssef1,
  5. Mohammed Hassan Ibrahim1,
  6. Michael Brown2,
  7. Daniel Richardson1,3
  1. 1 Department of Sexual Health & HIV Medicine, Brighton & Sussex University Hospitals NHS Trust, Brighton, UK
  2. 2 Faculty of Infectious & Tropical Diseases, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK
  3. 3Brighton & Sussex Medical School, Brighton, UK
  1. Correspondence to Amina Buba, Brighton & Sussex University Hospitals NHS Trust, Eastern Road, Brighton BN2 5BE, UK; Buba{at}doctors.org.uk

https://doi.org/10.1136/sextrans-2015-052335

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    UK guidelines recommend routine HIV testing in general medical admissions where HIV prevalence exceeds 2/1000.1

    Brighton has the highest UK HIV prevalence (7.96/1000) outside London.2 A previous study in Brighton showed that 39.7% of medical admissions were offered HIV tests in a physician-led testing programme, and the acceptance was 91%.3

    Since February 2013, Royal Sussex County Hospital, Brighton has offered routine HIV testing in general medical admissions aged 18–79, not known …

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Contributors AB: key researcher and manuscript writer. MF, MB and DR: main project supervisors. JR, ER and MHI: data collection, support with analysis and provision of laboratory data.

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed.