Background: Many persons with HIV infection do not receive consistent
ambulatory medical care and are excluded from studies of patients in
medical care. However, these hard-to-reach groups are important to
study because they may be in greatest need of services.
Objective:
This study compared the sociodemographic, clinical, and health care
utilization characteristics of a multisite sample of HIV-positive
persons who were hard to reach with a nationally representative cohort
of persons with HIV infection who were receiving care from known HIV
providers in the United States and examined whether the independent
correlates of low ambulatory utilization differed between the 2 samples.
Methods:
We compared sociodemographic, clinical, and health care utilization
characteristics in 2 samples of adults with HIV infection: 1286 persons
from 16 sites across the United States interviewed in 2001-2002 for the
Targeted HIV Outreach and Intervention Initiative (Outreach), a study
of underserved persons targeted for supportive outreach services; and
2267 persons from the HIV Costs and Services Utilization Study (HCSUS),
a probability sample of persons receiving care who were interviewed in
1998. We conducted logistic regression analyses to identify differences
between the 2 samples in sociodemographic and clinical associations
with ambulatory medical visits.
Results: Compared with the HCSUS
sample, the Outreach sample had notably greater proportions of black
respondents (59% vs. 32%, P = 0.0001), Hispanics (20% vs. 16%),
Spanish-speakers (9% vs. 2%, P = 0.02), those with low socioeconomic
status (annual income <$10,000 75% vs. 45%, P = 0.0001), the
unemployed, and persons with homelessness, no insurance, and heroin or
cocaine use (58% vs. 47%, P = 0.05). They also were more likely to have
fewer than 2 ambulatory visits (26% vs. 16%, P = 0.0001), more likely
to have emergency room visits or hospitalizations in the prior 6
months, and less likely to be on antiretroviral treatment (82% vs. 58%,
P = 0.0001). Nearly all these differences persisted after stratifying
for level of ambulatory utilization (fewer than 2 vs. 2 or more in the
last 6 months). In multivariate analysis, several variables showed
significantly different associations in the 2 samples (interacted) with
low ambulatory care utilization. The variables with significant
interactions (P values for interaction shown below) had very different
adjusted odds ratios (and 95% confidence intervals) for low ambulatory
care utilization: age greater than 50 (Outreach 0.55 [0.35-0.88], HCSUS
1.17 [0.65-2.11)], P = 0.05), Hispanic ethnicity (Outreach 0.81
[0.39-1.69], HCSUS 2.34 [1.56-3.52], P = 0.02), low income (Outreach
0.73 [0.56-0.96], HCSUS 1.35 [1.04-1.75], P = 0.002), and heavy alcohol
use (Outreach 1.74 [1.23-2.45], HCSUS 1.00 [0.73-1.37], P = 0.02).
Having CD4 count less than 50 was associated with elevated odds of low
ambulatory medical visits in the Outreach sample (1.53 [1.00-2.36], P =
0.05).
Conclusions: Compared with HCSUS, the Outreach sample had
far greater proportions of traditionally vulnerable groups, and were
less likely to be in care if they had low CD4 counts. Furthermore,
heavy alcohol use was only associated with low ambulatory utilization
in Outreach. Generalizing from in care populations may not be
warranted, while addressing heavy alcohol use may be effective at
improving utilization of care for hard-to-reach HIV-positive
populations. (Authors)