Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Introduction

Late diagnosis of HIV is associated with increased morbidity and mortality, and an increased risk of non-infectious comorbidities. On a societal level, late diagnosis leads to higher treatment and healthcare costs and is a major driver of HIV transmission. Despite improvements in other areas of the HIV care pathway, late diagnosis remains an individual and public health concern globally.

Objective

To examine the barriers to HIV testing and highlight successful strategies to improve prompt diagnosis. This review describes the prevalence of late diagnosis in the UK and discusses key factors that contribute to late diagnosis, including the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic. Late HIV diagnosis is lower in the UK than in most other European countries. In this review, pilot projects and ongoing initiatives that have reduced late diagnosis in the UK are highlighted; moreover, further strategies for improving prompt diagnosis are suggested.

Conclusions

Insufficient testing is the fundamental reason for late HIV diagnosis, with societal, systemic, and individual factors all contributing to inadequate testing. Improving access to testing, removing barriers to health-seeking behaviour, and ensuring all people with HIV indicator conditions are promptly tested are key to reducing the rates of late diagnosis globally.

Keywords

HIV Europe ART diagnosis screening

Introduction

Modern combination antiretroviral therapy has transformed outcomes for people living with HIV, but prompt HIV diagnosis and linkage to care are critical for successful treatment. Late diagnosis (Box 1) is associated with higher mortality, morbidity, and healthcare costs compared with prompt diagnosis.^1–3 Across Europe from 2010 to 2016, the incidence of AIDS and mortality in the first year after diagnosis was estimated to be nine times higher in people who were diagnosed late than in those who were diagnosed promptly.⁴ Late HIV diagnosis is also associated with a higher prevalence of non-infectious comorbidities.² Quality of life, which has been suggested as the fourth ‘90’ to supplement the UNAIDS targets,⁵ may also be negatively affected by late diagnosis, owing to pain/discomfort or depression/anxiety.^6,7 On a societal level, late HIV diagnosis is associated with higher healthcare costs: total medical costs in the first year after diagnosis are approximately twice as high in patients who are diagnosed late compared with those who are diagnosed early.^2,3 Additional avoidable healthcare costs are also likely incurred before an HIV diagnosis is made, but these are not well quantified.³ Furthermore, even if a person who is diagnosed late recovers their health following treatment, they may have lost their employment and savings through ill health and therefore may require additional state support.³ It is imperative to improve prompt diagnosis to optimise clinical outcomes, improve patient health-related quality of life, and reduce costs for the health service and wider society.

Every year, two-fifths of new HIV diagnoses in the UK are late diagnoses.⁸ Nevertheless, late HIV diagnosis has been consistently lower in the UK than in most other European countries in the past decade, with numbers falling dramatically in certain regions. Here, we highlight regional trends and demographic groups who are more likely to receive a late diagnosis in the UK and we identify barriers to prompt diagnosis, including the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic. Crucially, we evaluate pilot projects and ongoing initiatives that have successfully reduced late diagnoses in the UK and could be adopted in other regions and countries facing similar challenges. The key objective of this review is to provide readers with practical advice for reducing late HIV diagnoses. With strong leadership and commitment from stakeholders, including national bodies, to test in community settings, we can work to achieve zero late HIV diagnoses. Alongside further improvements in engagement and retention in care, this will contribute to ending HIV transmission.⁹ Box 1

Definition of late HIV diagnosis.

Late HIV diagnosis is defined as a CD4 count below 350 cells/mm³ of blood within 91 days of diagnosis, excluding individuals with evidence of recent HIV acquisition (either a negative test in the 24 months before their first positive HIV test, or the result of a Recent Infection Testing Algorithm).^10,11

Methods

A UK-based expert author group – comprising HIV clinicians, pharmacists, industry professionals, and a social scientist – was assembled to reflect the collaborative networks of people working together to end the HIV epidemic in the UK. Data on HIV late diagnoses were sourced from UK public health bodies and the World Health Organization (WHO). References were identified through a targeted literature search of PubMed articles published from 01/01/2018 to 08/12/2022 using the search terms ‘HIV’, ‘late’, and ‘diagnosis’; the resulting 1073 titles were reviewed to identify all UK studies and highly relevant articles from other countries. Additional articles and grey literature were identified via internet searches and from the authors’ own libraries.

Prevalence of late HIV diagnosis in the UK and patient characteristics

Prevalence of late diagnosis in the UK

In 2021, 43% of HIV diagnoses in the UK were late.⁸ The proportion of people receiving a late HIV diagnosis remained relatively steady between 2013 and 2019, ranging between 32% and 38% in England.¹² Since 2019, late HIV diagnoses have exceeded 40% in many regions of the UK (Figure 1). England has seen an increase in late diagnoses, from 41% (961/2343) in 2019 to 46% (786/1715) in 2021, although absolute numbers have fallen.¹⁰ Scotland had an HIV outbreak among people who inject drugs (PWID) that peaked in 2015, but has since achieved a remarkable reduction in new HIV infections and late HIV diagnoses.¹³ In 2019, just 27% of HIV diagnoses in Scotland were late and this fell further to 16% in 2021 (Figure 1).¹³

Figure 1.

Late HIV diagnoses by region in the UK: 2019–2021. Data between 2019 and 2020 are not available for Wales. Figure developed using data from UK Health Security Agency, Health and Social Care Public Health Agency, Public Health Wales, and Public Health Scotland.^12–15

Despite this overall upward trend in the UK during the COVID-19 pandemic, the proportion of late HIV diagnoses in the UK is still lower than that reported for many other European countries, including Germany (61.1%), France (57.2%), Italy (63.2%), Spain (50.0%), Ireland (58.5%), and the overall EU/EEA average (55.5%).⁸ These countries also saw an increase in late diagnosis during the COVID-19 pandemic.^8,16

Risk factors for late diagnosis in the UK

Although HIV in the UK is most commonly diagnosed in men, in individuals between 25 and 49 years of age, and in persons of white ethnicity, late diagnosis was most prevalent in women (47–53%), older individuals (56–61% in those aged 50 to 64 years, and 58–73% in those aged 65 years and over), and individuals of Black African ethnicity (55–61%) in England from 2017 to 2021.¹² Demographic traits do not exist independently of one another and may compound the risk of late diagnosis.

Heterosexual contact now accounts for more new HIV diagnoses than sex between men in the UK.¹² The majority of men (54–63%) and half of women (48–51%) who were likely to have been exposed to HIV via heterosexual contact were diagnosed late.¹² For those born outside the UK, this trend may be more pronounced. Among 1256 migrant men and women who acquired HIV via heterosexual transmission, most (70–80%) acquired HIV premigration with a mean time from HIV infection to diagnosis in the UK of more than 5 years.¹⁷ This is consistent with patterns seen among migrant populations elsewhere in Europe.¹⁸

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on late HIV diagnosis

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the UK Government imposed a strict national lockdown from March 2020. Routine HIV screening was disrupted during this time. For example, in Northern Ireland, first-episode HIV screens decreased by approximately 70%.¹⁹ Health-seeking behaviour changed dramatically: in England, primary care consultations dropped in 2020, only fully recovering in May 2021.²⁰ This may have been due to the fear of COVID-19, concerns about NHS capacity, and reduced or adapted services. Diagnosis across a range of conditions fell significantly.²⁰ This widespread reduction in routine testing and health-seeking behaviour (including reduced access to sexual health services) may have contributed to the increase in the proportion of late HIV diagnoses seen in 2020 and 2021.¹⁰ Mortality also increased markedly during the COVID-19 pandemic, underlining the consequences of late diagnosis. In 2020, people who were diagnosed late in the UK were 17 times more likely to die within a year, up from six times more likely in 2019.^10,12

Strategies to improve prompt diagnosis of HIV

Insufficient testing is the fundamental reason for late HIV diagnosis. Societal, systemic, and individual factors all contribute to inadequate testing. Individuals may face structural, interpersonal, and internalised discrimination based on their age, gender, ethnicity, or sexual orientation; this complex network of factors results in barriers to routine testing, health-seeking behaviour, and testing in response to clinical disease (Figure 2).²¹ Interventions that could facilitate prompt diagnosis if more widely adopted are detailed below (Table 1).

Figure 2.

Common barriers to HIV testing and key routes to prompt diagnosis.

Table 1.

Interventions that may contribute to improving prompt diagnosis of HIV, by role.

HCPs (primary and secondary care)	HIV specialists	Healthcare managers	Policy makers	Other (e.g. charitable organisations and professional societies)
1. Combat stigma by using people-first language	1. Perform routine audits of cases of late diagnosis	1. Provide clear guidance on HIV testing consent procedures	1. Fund public information campaigns to educate the public on HIV, reduce stigma, and encourage testing	1. Combat stigma by using people-first language
2. Stay up to date by completing training sessions on national testing guidelines	2. Provide feedback to primary and secondary care HCPs	2. Train healthcare staff on HIV stigma and national testing guidelines (e.g. through mandatory eLearning)	2. Publish information in non-local languages to improve access for recent migrants	2. Run public information campaigns to educate the public on HIV, reduce stigma, and encourage testing
3. Use electronic case note prompts for clinical indicator conditions	3. Share best practice with colleagues and non-specialists	3. Combat stigma by running communications campaigns	3. Introduce opt-out HIV testing in EDs, in areas of high prevalence, and in other settings where blood is routinely taken	3. Participate in outreach to normalise testing and educate the public on HIV (e.g. Pride events, churches, and community events)
4. Address misinformation by providing accurate information to patients (e.g. U=U)	4. Participate in outreach events to encourage routine testing and educate the public on HIV	4. Prevent discrimination by adopting a clear reporting process	4. Increase the provision of free at-home tests	4. Lobby local decision-makers to introduce changes to policy
5. Be an HIV testing ambassador and encourage best practice among peers	5. Lobby local decision-makers to introduce changes to policy	5. Provide support for staff living with or affected by HIV	5. Improve access to testing in healthcare settings, including primary care and non-traditional settings	5. Provide HCP training to increase awareness of the national testing guidelines

ED, emergency department; HCP, healthcare professional; U=U, undetectable = untransmittable.

Health-seeking behaviour

Many factors may prevent someone from getting an HIV test.²² Some people are unaware that they are at risk of HIV or have misconceptions about who is likely to be exposed to HIV. For example, older people may have the impression that HIV is only relevant to young people and may misattribute their symptoms to an already diagnosed comorbidity, and healthcare workers may have the same misconceptions.²³ Socioeconomic factors are also strong influencers of health-seeking behaviour.²⁴ Furthermore, anticipated stigma can deter people from getting tested.²⁵ Many of these barriers to health-seeking behaviour can be overcome with targeted actions.

Educate the public about HIV

Knowledge of HIV among the general population has not kept pace with clinical developments and HIV remains highly stigmatised.²⁶ Individuals may fear the consequences of diagnosis,²² and so educating the public that people living with HIV – when given appropriate treatment promptly – can have a normal life expectancy, could motivate people to get tested. Targeted public information campaigns and community-specific outreach programmes can reduce the fear and misconceptions around HIV.²⁷ ‘Undetectable = Untransmittable (U=U)’ and ‘Can’t Pass It On’ are public health campaigns highlighting that when a person with HIV has an undetectable viral load they cannot transmit HIV through sexual contact. In a study of attitudes of the UK general public, a greater understanding of U=U was associated with lower HIV stigma.²⁸ This represents an opportunity to improve awareness and reduce stigma. Big, bold, community-led movements have the potential to change attitudes among the wider public and challenge outdated ideas about who is at risk of HIV.²⁹

Combat ignorance and stigma surrounding HIV in the healthcare setting

Proposed strategies to reduce stigma in healthcare settings include training staff about HIV stigma, running campaigns within organisations, adopting a clear reporting process for people who experience discrimination, and providing support for staff living with or affected by HIV.²⁹ A UK pilot of mandatory HIV stigma eLearning for healthcare staff, which included interviews with people who had experienced HIV-related stigma in healthcare, was successful and could be rolled out more widely with the support of senior leadership.³⁰ People-first language, language that puts the person before a diagnosis as outlined in the People First Charter, should always be used in healthcare settings to help tackle stigma.^31,32 Moreover, the language employed should reflect that a person with HIV is not responsible for their late diagnosis. ‘Late presentation’ and ‘late presenter’ terminology may imply that the patient is responsible for not seeking health services, but in reality, late diagnosis is often a result of missed opportunities for testing in the clinical setting.

Increase access to testing among those born abroad

Information about healthcare entitlements should be made available in languages spoken by local migrant communities because those who move to a new country may be unfamiliar with the healthcare system.³³ For example, in the UK, information should confirm that HIV testing and treatment is free, confidential and will not impact an individual’s immigration status. Opt-out HIV testing is recommended when patients born abroad register with a primary care provider, particularly for those from countries with a high rate of HIV infection.^33,34

Routine testing provision and access

Sexual health clinics (also called genitourinary medicine clinics) are traditionally the most common setting for new HIV diagnoses in the UK (accounting for 69% of all new diagnoses), followed by emergency departments (8.6%), general practice (6.4%), and antenatal services (5.5%).³⁵ Notably, diagnoses outside of sexual health clinics are more common among Black African and Black Caribbean individuals than among individuals of other ethnicities.³⁵ Those diagnosed outside of the sexual health clinic setting are more than twice as likely to be diagnosed late;³⁵ therefore, improving access to routine HIV testing in non-genitourinary medicine settings may reduce late diagnosis.

Universal testing in emergency departments

Universal HIV testing for pregnant women, established in the 1990s in the UK, has been highly successful and cost-effective.³⁵ Trials of a similar universal testing approach for blood-borne viruses in Emergency Departments (EDs) found that testing was feasible and effective.^36–38 Opt-out testing has been introduced in EDs across London and other areas with high prevalence of HIV.³⁹ In the first 9 months of the programme (April–Dec 2022), 665,746 HIV tests were carried out and 282 new diagnoses were made.^40,41 This programme is estimated to have increased HIV testing in UK EDs eight-fold between April 2022 and April 2023, making EDs the second most common healthcare setting for testing.⁴⁰ In Portugal, opt-out testing in EDs was successful in reducing late HIV diagnoses;⁴² therefore, a wider rollout of this approach across the UK has the potential to significantly reduce late diagnoses. A British HIV charity, the Terrence Higgins Trust, is campaigning for the expansion of opt-out testing in EDs across England.⁴³ Opt-out testing when someone registers with a primary care provider, or in settings where blood is routinely taken, is also recommended in areas of high prevalence.³⁴

Improved access to home HIV testing

Discomfort in sexual health clinic waiting rooms is a barrier to HIV testing, which may be particularly significant for people from ethnic minority backgrounds.⁴⁴ Self-testing kits offer a discreet and convenient way to test at home. During the COVID-19 pandemic, these services became vital as many people were unable to attend in-person appointments. Across much of the UK, free home tests are available to order from services such as SH:24 and Free Testing HIV.^45,46 Such services were vital during the pandemic; for example, testing via SH:24 accounted for 24% of all HIV testing in Northern Ireland in 2020.^19,45 However, in some regions free online tests are only available for those most at risk of HIV infection, including MSM, women and men from Black African communities, and trans women.⁴⁶ HIV self-tests are typically £20–30, which may be a barrier for individuals who do not have access to free tests or are unaware of these services. Improving access to and awareness of free HIV home testing services could improve prompt diagnosis, and particularly support those on low incomes.

Testing in non-traditional settings

Routine HIV testing in non-traditional settings can prevent individuals from feeling targeted or judged, help to diagnose those with HIV who are not in an at-risk group, and more broadly help to tackle stigma.⁴⁷ For example, The Test@Work programme provided general health checks with optional HIV testing at UK construction worksites, resulting in a high uptake of opt-in HIV testing.⁴⁷ Other non-traditional settings may include prisons, pharmacies, termination clinics, and addiction and substance misuse services.⁴⁸ Dedicated community work can improve testing among minority groups who are not engaged with formal healthcare services; for example, the Naz Project London employed one Latin American community worker to discuss HIV and offer free HIV tests within his network, resulting in 26 new diagnoses in 18 months.⁴⁸ This strategy is particularly effective in areas with a high incidence of HIV in specific populations. Public health campaigns featuring celebrities and influencers, such as the National HIV Testing Week ‘Give HIV the finger: a finger-prick test is all it takes’ campaign organised by HIV Prevention England, are also important for raising awareness and normalising testing.⁴⁹ Expanding successful programmes and encouraging innovation are crucial to reaching underserved populations.

Targeted testing in response to a local HIV outbreak

Targeted action to improve access to HIV testing among more traditional at-risk groups still has a role in reducing late diagnoses. An expansion of testing across multiple settings in response to an ongoing HIV outbreak in Scotland increased testing from 33% to 67% among PWID.⁵⁰ This increase in targeted testing is likely to have contributed to low levels of late diagnosis reported in Scotland in recent years (Figure 1).

Testing in response to symptoms in the clinic

National testing guidelines for HIV, which list clinical indicator conditions and symptoms of primary HIV infection, were first introduced in 2008 in the UK and most recently updated in 2020.^51,52 Unfortunately, knowledge of and adherence to these guidelines is not universal, contributing to inadequate testing and late diagnoses. In a local UK audit, 37% of individuals who received a late diagnosis in 2019 had a clinical indicator disease in their past medical history and, of these, 83% had a probable missed opportunity for diagnosis.⁵³ Poor testing rates may be influenced by providers’ misconceptions about HIV risk, operational barriers, inadequate training, or a lack of time.⁵⁴ Stigma and stereotyping by healthcare professionals about who is likely to be living with HIV may also be hindering testing.⁵⁵ Discrimination (in the form of sexism, heterosexism, transphobia, racism, xenophobia, ageism, ableism, and other prejudices) may also play a role in missed diagnoses. Health inequalities and inequity based on gender, age, and ethnicity are evident from the data on late diagnosis in the UK,¹⁰ suggesting that these factors have a real impact on patient care.

In line with national testing guidelines, clinicians should offer a test to all patients presenting with an HIV indicator condition, regardless of demographic factors.⁵² The widespread education of healthcare professionals on consent procedures for testing, or the simplification of these procedures, may also be useful.⁵⁵ Educational campaigns may be run by national bodies or in partnership with industry. For example, the ‘HIV in the UK today’ digital educational campaign targeted non-HIV healthcare professionals in primary and secondary care and directly engaged over 7700 healthcare professionals.⁵⁶

Testing in primary and secondary care

Analyses of very late diagnoses in England and Wales found that approximately 60% of missed opportunities for testing occurred in primary care and approximately 30% in secondary care.^57,58 In the hospital setting, high staff turnover, competing clinical priorities, and confusion around consenting procedures may contribute to missed opportunities for diagnosis.⁵⁵ Peers encouraging best practice and the provision of up-to-date information to physicians via trusted sources (e.g. in the UK, the British HIV Association [BHIVA], British Medical Association conferences, or the Royal College of General Practitioners) are essential to improving testing. Practical interventions have also been shown to be effective: the introduction of electronic testing prompts in primary care resulted in a substantial initial increase in testing.^59,60 Similarly, in a secondary care setting, healthcare professional education combined with case note prompts highlighting the presence of an indicator condition (a highly visible sticker manually inserted into clinical notes) increased HIV testing from 3% to 34%.⁶¹ Treating missed opportunities for HIV diagnosis as a patient safety issue in cases of patient death may also facilitate individual and institutional learning.⁵⁷

Learning from local audits

Identifying the local barriers to testing, learning from cases of late diagnosis, and sharing best practice within countries and internationally are all fundamental to making structural improvements that will reduce late diagnoses.

It is vital to identify gaps relating to testing and to adopt formal, routine audit processes to learn from any cases of late diagnosis. BHIVA’s good practice position statement on recording and investigating late HIV diagnoses offers practical advice, protocols, and case studies.³ These free resources support organisations to identify areas for improvement and communicate lessons to the relevant teams. This was successfully implemented in Greater Manchester, where improvements in late diagnosis were reported following audits in 2016 and 2019.⁵³ However, in a national audit in 2016, 55% of HIV services had not reviewed cases of late diagnosis, owing to there being no clearly defined process, poor access to health record data, concerns about stigma, patient embarrassment or confidentiality, and concerns about apportioning blame.⁵⁷ More recently, the BHIVA Late Diagnosis Review Protocol was published (Figure 3).⁶² This supports units in assessing whether there were missed opportunities for testing and if the patients were harmed as a result, and whether serious incident review should be performed. The overarching aims are (1) to provide direct feedback to clinical areas that are failing to test for HIV according to national guidelines, and (2) to provide data nationally on late diagnoses and missed opportunities, which can be shared to encourage learning from these missed opportunities and improve testing.

Figure 3.

Overview of the procedure for investigating late diagnoses and potential missed opportunities for HIV testing. Adapted from the British HIV Association Late Diagnosis Review Protocol.⁶²

Best practice sharing and global partnerships

The limitations of this review include the focus on the UK experience as a case study, the potential for selection bias in our literature review, and the small number of UK pilot studies. There may be differences in policies (e.g. immigration rules) and healthcare provision (e.g. availability of free testing) in other countries, but even within the UK there are regional differences, and different solutions are relevant locally. Best-practice sharing, nationally and internationally, offers the opportunity to learn from others facing similar challenges. Globally, partnerships between charities, industry, and the community are contributing to innovative solutions. Fast-Track Cities is a global partnership that aims to share knowledge and experience to maximise collective efforts to end the HIV, tuberculosis, hepatitis B virus, and hepatitis C virus epidemics, and has published useful resources on the issues surrounding late HIV diagnosis.⁶³ RADIAN is an example of successful collaboration between a charity (the Elton John AIDS Foundation), industry, and local stakeholders, aiming to improve HIV prevention and care in Eastern Europe and Central Asia.⁶⁴ Furthermore, the industry-sponsored ‘Zeroing In: Ending the HIV Epidemic’ grant programme and ‘HIV Prevention Fund’ support organisations and community-led initiatives to end the HIV epidemic globally.^65,66 Proactive sharing of successful initiatives to reduce late diagnosis will allow all countries to tackle this problem in an evidence-based way.

Conclusion

Absolute numbers of new HIV diagnoses in the UK are low and declining owing to advancements in treatment and prevention, but since the COVID-19 pandemic, 43% of new diagnoses are late and this warrants action.⁸ Societal, systemic, and individual factors contribute to the insufficient testing that results in late diagnosis. By identifying the barriers in our local communities, appropriate interventions to improve testing can be implemented. HIV stigma and discrimination must continue to be addressed and lessons must be learnt from cases of late diagnosis. Recent advances include improved access to home testing and a successful pilot of opt-out testing in London EDs. Although these initiatives have been successful locally and may be helpful blueprints for others, the UK still has a long way to go on the journey to zero late HIV diagnoses. Continued sharing of best practices between countries is essential for these goals to be met globally. Ultimately, this will optimise clinical outcomes, improve patient health-related quality of life, and reduce costs for healthcare services and wider society.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Public Health Wales for kindly providing data on late HIV diagnosis, and Lucy Eberhard, PhD, of PharmaGenesis London, London, UK, for providing medical writing support, which has been funded by Gilead Sciences, Inc., Foster City, CA, USA, in accordance with the Good Publications Practice 2022 (GPP 2022) guidelines ().

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author(s) declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: Marta Boffito received travel grants, speaker and advisor fees, and research grants to the organisation from Janssen, Roche, ViiV, Bristol Myers Squibb, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Gilead Sciences, Mylan, Cipla, Novavax, Valneva, GSK, Atea, Moderna, Teva, AZ and Pfizer. David R Chadwick is a trustee/executive member of the British HIV Association and has recently chaired a sub-group on guidelines for Emergency Department opt-out testing using implied consent. He has also received research grants from Gilead Sciences. Samuel Kabagambe is an employee of Gilead Sciences and may own stock options in Gilead Sciences. Bakita Kasadha has previously received speaker honoraria and consultancy fees from Gilead Sciences. Cindy Elliott is an employee of Gilead Sciences and may own stock options in Gilead Sciences. Emily Boardman, and Emily Cheserem declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: Gilead Sciences, Inc., Foster City, CA, USA, provided funding for medical writing support.

ORCID iDs

Emily Boardman

David R Chadwick

Bakita Kasadha

References

Sobrino-Vegas

Moreno

Rubio

, et al. Impact of late presentation of HIV infection on short-, mid- and long-term mortality and causes of death in a multicenter national cohort: 2004–2013. J Infect 2016; 72: 587–596.

Guaraldi

Zona

Menozzi

, et al. Late presentation increases risk and costs of non-infectious comorbidities in people with HIV: an Italian cost impact study. AIDS Res Ther 2017; 14: 8.

British HIV Association . Recording and investigation of late HIV diagnoses: good practice position statement. London, UK: British HIV Association, 2015.

Late Presentation Working Groups in EuroSIDA and COHERE

Estimating the burden of HIV late presentation and its attributable morbidity and mortality across Europe 2010–2016. BMC Infect Dis 2020; 20: 728.

Lazarus

Safreed-Harmon

Barton

, et al. Beyond viral suppression of HIV – the new quality of life frontier. BMC Med 2016; 14: 94.

Farnham

Gopalappa

Sansom

, et al. Updates of lifetime costs of care and quality-of-life estimates for HIV-infected persons in the United States: late versus early diagnosis and entry into care. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 2013; 64: 183–189.

Popping

Kall

Nichols

, et al. Quality of life among people living with HIV in England and the Netherlands: a population-based study. Lancet Reg Health Eur 2021; 8: 100177.

World Health Organization . Regional office for Europe & European centre for disease prevention and control. HIV/AIDS surveillance in Europe: 2022 – 2021 data. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization, 2022.

Department of Health and Social Care . Towards zero: the HIV action plan for England - 2022 to 2025, London, UK: Department of Health and Social Care, 2021.

10.

Lester

Martin

Shah

, et al. HIV testing, PrEP, new HIV diagnoses, and care outcomes for people accessing HIV services: 2022 report. London, UK: UK Health Security Agency, 2022.

11.

Croxford

Stengaard

Brannstrom

, et al. Late diagnosis of HIV: An updated consensus definition. HIV Med 2022; 23: 1202–1208.

12.

UK Health Security Agency . UKHSA publication number GOV-13322. London, UK: UK Health Security Agency, 2022.

13.

Public Health Scotland . HIV in Scotland: update to 31 December 2021. Scotland, UK: Public Health Scotland, 2022. https://publichealthscotland.scot/media/16641/hiv-infection-in-scotland-update-to-31-december-2021-main-report.pdf (accessed 27 July 2023).

14.

HSC Public Health Agency . HIV surveillance in Northern Ireland 2022: an analysis of data for 2021. London, UK: HSC Public Health Agency, 2022.

15.

Public Health Wales . Personal communication. Carmarthen, Wales: Public Health Wales, 2022.

16.

World Health Organization . Regional office for Europe & European centre for disease prevention and control. HIV/AIDS surveillance in Europe: 2020 – 2019 data. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization, 2020.

17.

Stirrup

Tostevin

Ragonnet-Cronin

, et al. Diagnosis delays in the UK according to pre or postmigration acquisition of HIV. AIDS 2022; 36: 415–422.

18.

Alvarez-Del Arco

Fakoya

Thomadakis

, et al. High levels of postmigration HIV acquisition within nine European countries. AIDS 2017; 31: 1979–1988.

19.

HSC Public Health Agency . HIV surveillance in Northern Ireland 2021: an analysis of data for 2020. London, UK: HSC Public Health Agency, 2022.

20.

Department of Health and Social Care and the Office of National Statistics . Direct and Indirect Health Impacts of COVID-19. England: National Statistics, 2021.

21.

Karver

Atkins

Fonner

, et al. HIV-related intersectional stigma and discrimination measurement: state of the science. Am J Public Health 2022; 112: S420–S432.

22.

van Opstal

SEM

van der Zwan

Wagener

, et al. Late presentation of HIV infection in the Netherlands: reasons for late diagnoses and impact on vocational functioning. AIDS Behav 2018; 22: 2593–2603.

23.

Kirby

. Three in five over 50s receiving late HIV diagnoses in the UK. Lancet HIV 2020; 7: e226.

24.

Morrison

Colon-Gonzalez

Morbey

, et al. Demographic and socioeconomic patterns in healthcare-seeking behaviour for respiratory symptoms in England: a comparison with non-respiratory symptoms and between three healthcare services. BMJ Open 2020; 10: e038356.

25.

Gamarel

Nelson

Stephenson

, et al. Anticipated HIV stigma and delays in regular HIV testing behaviors among sexually-active young gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men and transgender women. AIDS Behav 2018; 22: 522–530.

26.

Anderson

Fenton

. HIV related stigma: a dangerous roadblock. BMJ 2022; 379: o2989.

27.

Collins

Namiba

Sparrowhawk

, et al.

Late diagnosis of HIV in 2022: why so little change?

HIV Med 2022; 23: 1118–1126.

28.

Coyne

Walsh

Noone

. Awareness, Understanding and HIV Stigma in Response to Undetectable = Untransmittable Messages: Findings from a Nationally Representative Sample in the United Kingdom. AIDS Behav 2022; 26: 3818–3826.

29.

Fast-Track Cities London . Evolving the care of people living with HIV in London. London, UK: Fast-Track Cities London, 2021.

30.

McQuillan

Kendrick

Hammond

, et al. Mandatory HIV Stigma E-Learning for NHS Staff. Poster session presented at: Fast-Track Cities 2022, Sevilla, Spain, 11–13 October 2022.

31.

Waters

. People First Charter: recommended terminology for research and publications related to HIV. Report. London: People First Charter, 2022.

32.

Waters

Hodson

Josh

. Language matters: The importance of person-first language and an introduction to the People First Charter. HIV Med 2023; 24: 3–5.

33.

National Aids Trust . HIV and migration: understanding the barriers faced by people born abroad living with HIV in the UK. London: National Aids Trust, 2021.

34.

National Institute for Health and Care Excellence . HIV testing: increasing uptake among people who may have undiagnosed HIV - NICE guideline [NG60]. London, UK: National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, 2016.

35.

Croxford

Yin

Kall

, et al. Where do we diagnose HIV infection? Monitoring new diagnoses made in nontraditional settings in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. HIV Med 2018; 19: 465–474.

36.

Smout

Phyu

Hughes

, et al. Real-world clinical effectiveness and sustainability of universal bloodborne virus testing in an urban emergency department in the UK. Sci Rep 2022; 12: 19257.

37.

Simmons

Plunkett

Cieply

, et al. Blood-borne virus testing in emergency departments - a systematic review of seroprevalence, feasibility, acceptability and linkage to care. HIV Med 2023; 24: 6–26.

38.

Orkin

Flanagan

Wallis

, et al. Incorporating HIV/hepatitis B virus/hepatitis C virus combined testing into routine blood tests in nine UK Emergency Departments: the "Going Viral" campaign. HIV Med 2016; 17: 222–230.

39.

NHS England . Emergency department opt out testing for HIV, hepatitis B and hepatitis C: the first 100 days. London, UK: NHS England, 2022.

40.

Hill-Tout

Hindle

Fagg

, et al. Implementation of routine opt-out bloodborne virus (BBV) screening in 34 emergency departments (EDs) in areas of extremely high HIV prevalence in England. Paper presented at: British HIV Association Spring Conference 2023, Gateshead, UK, 24–26 April 2023.

41.

The Lancet

HIV

. Opt-out HIV testing in the UK. Lancet HIV 2023; 10: e351.

42.

Vaz-Pinto

Gorgulho

Esteves

, et al. Increasing HIV early diagnosis by implementing an automated screening strategy in emergency departments. HIV Med 2022; 23: 1153–1162.

43.

Terrence Higgins Trust . Government must make every contact count in emergency departments. London, UK: Terrence Higgins Trust, 2023. https://www.tht.org.uk/news/government-must-make-every-contact-count-emergency-departments (accessed 18 May 2023).

44.

Nicholls

Samba

McCabe

, et al. Experiences of and attitudes towards HIV testing for Asian, Black and Latin American men who have sex with men (MSM) in the SELPHI (HIV Self-Testing Public Health Intervention) randomized controlled trial in England and Wales: implications for HIV self-testing. BMC Publ Health 2022; 22: 809.

45.

SH:24 . Sexual health 24 hours a day. https://sh24.org.uk (accessed 4 January 2023).

46.

Free Testing HIV . Free at home HIV tests, 2023. www.freetesting.hiv (accessed 4 January 2023).

47.

Somerset

Jones

Evans

, et al. Opt-in HIV testing in construction workplaces: an exploration of its suitability, using the socioecological framework. BMC Publ Health 2022; 22: 1409.

48.

National AIDS Trust, Terrence Higgins Trust and Elton John AIDS Foundation . Joint submission to the APPG on HIV/AIDS: enquiry on HIV testing. London, UK: National AIDS Trust, 2021.

49.

HIV Prevention England . National HIV testing week. London, UK: HIV Prevention England, 2022, https://www.hivpreventionengland.org.uk/campaigns/national-hiv-testing-week/ (accessed 4 January 2023).

50.

Trayner

KMA

Palmateer

McAuley

, et al. Evaluation of the scale-up of HIV testing among people who inject drugs in Scotland in the context of an ongoing HIV outbreak. Int J Drug Policy 2021; 96: 103304.

51.

British HIV Association , British Association of Sexual Health and HIV and British Infection Society. UK National guidelines for HIV testing. London, UK: British HIV Association, 2008

52.

Palfreeman

Sullivan

Rayment

, et al. British HIV Association/British Association for Sexual Health and HIV/British Infection Association adult HIV testing guidelines 2020. HIV Med 2020; 21: 1–26.

53.

Boardman

Tomkins

Babu

. A re-audit of individuals with a late diagnosis of HIV in 2016 and 2019 in Greater Manchester. Int J STD AIDS 2022; 33: 1078–1083.

54.

Elmahdi

Gerver

Gomez Guillen

, et al. Low levels of HIV test coverage in clinical settings in the U.K.: a systematic review of adherence to 2008 guidelines. Sex Transm Infect 2014; 90: 119–124.

55.

Youssef

Wright

Davies

, et al. Factors associated with offering HIV testing to people aged ≥ 50 years: a qualitative study. Int J STD AIDS 2022; 33: 289–295.

56.

Marshall

Brady

Dandridge

, et al. Achieving high levels of engagement among UK primary and secondary healthcare professionals using a World AIDS Day digital media, augmented reality, and email education campaign. Poster session presented at: British HIV Association Spring Conference 2022, Manchester, UK, 20–22 April 2022.

57.

Lee

Curtis

van Halsema

, et al. Evaluating a pilot process for reviewing late HIV diagnoses in England and Wales. Clin Med 2020; 20: 189–195.

58.

Horsley Downie

Pegler

Widdrington

, et al. Late HIV diagnosis and missed opportunities for testing: piloting a standardised, multi-source review process. Int J STD AIDS 2020; 31: 208–213.

59.

Chadwick

Forbes

Lawrence

, et al. Using an electronic health record alert to prompt blood-borne virus testing in primary care. AIDS 2021; 35: 1845–1850.

60.

National AIDS Trust . Improving and integrating HIV care in south east London. London, UK: National AIDS Trust, 2020.

61.

Youssef

Sanghera

Bexley

, et al. HIV testing in patients presenting with indicator conditions in outpatient settings: offer and uptake rates, and educational and active interventions. Int J STD AIDS 2018; 29: 1289–1294.

62.

British HIV Association . Late diagnosis review protocol. London, UK: British HIV Association, 2021.

63.

Fast-track Cities . Global Web Portal, 2023. https://www.fast-trackcities.org/ (accessed 4 January 2023).

64.

Gilead Sciences . RADIAN, 2023, https://www.gilead.com/purpose/partnerships-and-community/radian (accessed 18 May 2023).

65.

Gilead Sciences . Zeroing in: ending the HIV epidemic, 2023. https://www.gilead.com/purpose/giving/zeroing-in-ending-hiv-epidemic (accessed 4 January 2023).

66.

ViiV Healthcare . Viiv Healthcare launches HIV Prevention Fund to support community-led initiatives in efforts to end AIDS by 2030. https://viivhealthcare.com/hiv-news-and-media/news/company-statements/viiv-healthcare-launches-hiv-prevention-fund/ (accessed 26 June 2023).

Tackling late HIV diagnosis: Lessons from the UK in the COVID-19 era

Abstract

Introduction

Objective

Conclusions

Keywords

Introduction

Methods

Prevalence of late HIV diagnosis in the UK and patient characteristics

Prevalence of late diagnosis in the UK

Risk factors for late diagnosis in the UK

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on late HIV diagnosis

Strategies to improve prompt diagnosis of HIV

Health-seeking behaviour

Educate the public about HIV

Combat ignorance and stigma surrounding HIV in the healthcare setting

Increase access to testing among those born abroad

Routine testing provision and access

Universal testing in emergency departments

Improved access to home HIV testing

Testing in non-traditional settings

Targeted testing in response to a local HIV outbreak

Testing in response to symptoms in the clinic

Testing in primary and secondary care

Learning from local audits

Best practice sharing and global partnerships

Conclusion

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

Declaration of conflicting interests

Funding

ORCID iDs

References