Emergency Department versus Community Screening on Hepatitis C Follow-Up Care

• Authors: Austin T Jones, Denver Health Medical Center; Lisa Moreno-Walton, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center; Torrence Tran, University of California Los Angeles Medical Center; Christopher Briones, University of California Los Angeles Medical Center,; Kanayo Okeke-Eweni, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center; Rachael Stevens, Tulane University School of Medicine; Kacie Isaacson, Emory University; Hua He, Tulane University; Patricia J Kissinger, Tulane University
• Journal Title: AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EMERGENCY MEDICINE
• Volume: Volume 56
• Publisher: WB Saunders | 2022-06-01, Pages 151-157
• Type of Work: Article | Post-print: After Peer Review
• Publisher DOI: http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajem.2022.03.041
• Subjects: Health Sciences, Medicine and Surgery; Health Sciences, Epidemiology
• Keywords: Hepatitis C; emergency department; linkage to care; screening; community clinic

Abstract

Objectives Emergency department (ED) hepatitis C virus (HCV) screening programs are proliferating, and it is unknown whether EDs are more effective than traditional community screening at promoting HCV follow-up care. The objective of this study was to investigate whether patients screened HCV seropositive (HCV+) in the ED are linked to care and retained in treatment more successfully than patients screened HCV+ in the community. Methods A retrospective cohort study was performed including patients screened HCV+ at twelve screening facilities in xx, xx from March 1, 2015 to July 31, 2017. Treatment outcomes, including retention and time to follow-up care, were assessed using the HCV continuum of care model. Results ED patients (n=3,008) were significantly more likely to achieve RNA confirmation (aRR=1.91, 95% CI=1.54–2.37), initiate HCV therapy (aRR=2.23 [1.76–2.83]), complete HCV therapy (aRR=1.77 [1.40–2.24]), and achieve HCV functional cure (aRR=2.80 [1.09–7.23]) compared to community-screened patients (n=322). ED screening was associated with decreased likelihood of fibrosis staging (aRR=0.65 [0.51–0.82]) and no difference in linkage to specialty care (aRR=1.03 [0.69–1.53]). In time to follow up, RNA confirmation occurred at faster rates in the ED (aHR=2.26 [1.86–2.72]), although these patients completed fibrosis staging at slower rates (aHR=0.49 [0.38–0.63]) than community patients. Conclusions Compared to community screening, HCV screening in the ED was associated with higher rates of disease confirmation, treatment initiation/completion, and cure. Our findings provide new evidence that EDs may be the most effective setting to screen patients for HCV to promote follow-up care.