slide1 n.
Skip this Video
Download Presentation
Charu Sabharwal, MD MPH Medical Director Epidemiology and Field Services Program

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 34

Charu Sabharwal, MD MPH Medical Director Epidemiology and Field Services Program - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

  • Uploaded on

Concordance of HIV surveillance and medical record data: What do CD4 and viral loads not tell us about linkage to HIV care ?. Charu Sabharwal, MD MPH Medical Director Epidemiology and Field Services Program Bureau of HIV/AIDS Prevention and Control NYC Department of Health.

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Charu Sabharwal, MD MPH Medical Director Epidemiology and Field Services Program' - zita

Download Now An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

Concordance of HIV surveillance and medical record data: What do CD4 and viral loads not tell us about linkage to HIV care?

Charu Sabharwal, MD MPH

Medical Director

Epidemiology and Field Services Program

Bureau of HIV/AIDS Prevention and Control

NYC Department of Health

  • Sarah Braunstein
  • Rebekkah Robbins
  • Colin Shepard
  • HIV Epidemiology and Field Services Program

National HIV/AIDS Strategy

  • NHAS (July, 2010) - first comprehensive roadmap
  • Amore coordinated response to the HIV epidemic
  • Primary Goals for 2015:
    • Reduce infections
    • Increase access to care
    • Reduce health disparities

HIV Continuum of Care

Das, MoupaliPrevention of HIV Acquisition: Behavioral, Biomedical, and Other Interventions.

Medscape 2012

monitoring hiv care cd4 vl
Monitoring HIV Care – CD4/VL
    • HIV Care = outpatient HIV visit with provider authorized to prescribe ART1
  • Clinical monitoring/treatment guidelines2
    • Traditionally, 1st CD4/VL at initial HIV care visit
    • CD4/VL: every 3-6 months;  frequency after ART initiation
  • CD4/VLs proxy for HIV care [HIV care visits not reported]
  • Since 2004, CSTE encouraged all states (59 jurisdictions) to report allCD4 and VLs3[New York2005]
  • Limited comprehensive evaluation of the validity of surveillance data as proxy of HIV care

1Health Resources and Services Administration. The HIV/AIDS Program: HAB Performance Measures Group 1. In; 2009. 2DHHS Guidelines for the Use of Antiretroviral Agents in HIV-1-Infected Adults and Adolescents. In; 2012. 3 CSTE Position statement 04-ID-07

measuring linkage to care
Measuring linkage to care
  • Surveillance traditionally measures linkage by a single event: 1streported CD4/VL on/after HIV diagnosis date
  • Accuracy of 1st CD4/VL1,2 drawn prior to referral to HIV care. For example, at the time of
    • Confirmatory testing after + rapid/point-of-care test
    • Inpatient diagnosis: CD4 impacts treatment decision
    • In New York City: routinemedical record (MR) abstraction for linkage to care is not feasible
    • 3,500 diagnosing providers; 3,000+ HIV cases yearly
    • Timely linkage – entry into care within 3 months of diagnosis. Local3 and national measure

1 BertolliA. et al The Open AIDS Journal 2012,6:131-141. 2Keller et al. J Acquir Immune DeficSyndr2013.

3New York City HIV/AIDS Surveillance Slide Sets.

new york city s care validation study
New York City’s Care Validation Study
  • Validate CD4 and VL tests for persons living with HIV (PLWH) in NYC as proxy measure for HIV care in the first year after diagnosis

1° Objective – evaluate the correspondence between a patients 1st CD4/VL on/after HIV diagnosis and linkage HIV care


Validate 1st lab test (CD4/VL) from the diagnosing facility as measure of timely linkage toHIV care

  • Hypothesis: early post-diagnostic lab tests within first 2 weeks arepart of diagnostic work-up and not an actual linkage event



study population selection new york city hiv registry
Study population selection: New York City HIV Registry
  • Selected high-volume HIV diagnosing sites with co-located care (n=24)
    • Patients with new, confirmed HIV diagnosis in 2009 reported the Registry
    • Patients who had to linked to care at the same diagnosing facility within 12 months as per the Registry
      • PLEASE NOTE – Even though Surveillance does not require linkage to care at the same site of diagnosis, we did in order to conduct this validation study

Figure 1: Final study population

3,536 new, confirmed HIV diagnoses

among > 13 years in NYC in 2009

1,263 (36%) patients reported from high-volume

(> 20 diagnoses) co-located HIV care sites

947 (75%) patients had 1st CD4/VL reported

from co-located site within 12 months of diagnosis eligible for medical record (MR) abstractions

165 (17%) excluded: MR unavailable

782 (83%) patients

Registry (1st CD/VL) and MR (care visit) data

a nalytic population n 782
Analytic population (n=782)

Linkage within 12 months, per Registry



HIV care visit confirmed by MR

No medical visit group

Medical visit group

  • Compared the subgroups based on:
  • Key demographic characteristics (age, gender, risk)
  • Proportion concurrently diagnosed with HIV/AIDS(AIDS within 31 days of HIV diagnosis – local definition)
  • Proportion diagnosed on inpatient service
  • Proportion that died within 12 months of diagnosis
timely linkage to hiv care
Timely linkage to HIV care
  • Compared the proportion who linked to HIV care within 3 months of diagnosis (timely) by Registry (1st CD/VL) vs. MR (care visit)
do 1 st reported cd4 vls indicate timely linkage to hiv care
Do 1st reported CD4/VLs indicate timely linkage to HIV care?
  • Compared subgroups:
    • Median time to 1st lab per the Registry
    • Proportion of 1st labs in 0-7 days and 0-14 days
  • Calculated sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV) of Registry data in correctly classifying patients’ true timely linkage to care status based on the 1st CD/VL within:
    • 0-91 days (no labs excluded: National standard)
    • 8-91 days (excluded labs from 0-7 days)
    • 15-91 days (excluded labs from 0-14 days)
figure 2 linkage to care n 782 registry vs mr
Figure 2: Linkage to care (n=782)Registry vs. MR

No Medical visit

20% (n=157)

1st CD4/VL

100% (n=782)

Medical visit

80% (n=625)

figure 3 inpatient diagnoses
Figure 3: Inpatient diagnoses

No medical visit

Medical visit

figure 5 timely linkage to care registry vs mr
Figure 5: Timely linkage to careRegistry vs. MR


1st CD4/VL

(proxy measure):

0-91 days


True linkage event

(HIV care visit):

0-91 days

timely linkage

Are labs within the early

post-diagnostic period indicative of timely linkage to care?

Timely linkage

figure 6 median time days to linkage based on 1 st cd4 vl by subgroups
Figure 6: Median time (days) to linkage based on 1st CD4/VL, by subgroups

No medical


1 day (IQR 0-5 days)

p <0.001

Medical visit

figure 7 proportion of 1 st labs in the early post diagnostic period by subgroups
Figure 7: Proportion of 1st labs in the early post-diagnostic period, by subgroups

p <0.001

p <0.001














Figure 8: Performance of Registry data


0-91 days

8-91 days

15-91 days

  • First population-based study to validate the use of HIV Surveillance’s proxy measure of timely linkage to care
  • Substantial misclassification of timely linkage in the early post-diagnostic period
  • NYC DOHMH implemented a refined definition of timely linkage to care (labs 8-91 days after diagnosis)
    • HIV labs in 1st 7 days  not indicative of linkage
  • Surveillance data overestimated linkage for older persons, non-traditional HIV risk transmission, and those who died soon after diagnosis
  • Selection of provider
    • A portion had a CD4/VL at an alternate provider which may be the linkage to care visit –DID NOT validate if these patients EVER linked
    • Oversampled the acute care setting
  • Selection of study population
    • Due to the complexities of HIV laboratory reporting, the 1st lab may have been misclassified to the incorrect provider
future directions
Future directions
  • Exploration of surveillance-based retention in care measures vs. medical abstraction data
    • All care visits at diagnosing provider during first 12 months immediately following diagnosis
  • In depth exploration of mortality within 12 months of HIV diagnosis
cjain@health nyc gov

Thank you!