Skip to main content

Table 2 Regression analyses of the association between adoption of CDC HIV pre-test counseling guidelines and availability of HCV testing (HCV testing vs. No HCV testing)

From: Spillover effects of HIV testing policies: changes in HIV testing guidelines and HCV testing practices in drug treatment programs in the United States

 

No HCV testing options offereda

HCV testing offered

P-value

Unadjusted Odds Ratio (95 % CI)b

Adjusted Odds Ratio (95 % CI)b

State-level legislation enables eliminating HIV pretest counseling requirement

 

<0.01

  

  No

44 (24.7)

134 (75.3)

 

1

1

  Yes

26 (12.7)

179 (87.3)

 

2.26 (1.32, 3.86)

0.87 (0.19, 4.07)

Prevalence of injection drug users

 

0.07

  

   < 25 %

33 (24.8)

100 (75.2)

 

1

1

  25-74 %

24 (14.9)

137 (85.1)

 

1.88 (1.05, 3.39)

2.21 (0.97, 5.04)

   ≥ 75 %

13 (15.5)

71 (84.5)

 

1.80 (0.89, 3.67)

1.44 (0.51, 4.11)

African-American patients

 

0.05

  

   < 10 %

24 (13.9)

148 (86.1)

 

1

1

   ≥ 10 %

46 (21.8)

165 (78.2)

 

0.58 (0.34, 0.99)

0.85 (0.37, 1.94)

Hispanic patients

 

0.17

  

   < 10 %

41 (20.9)

155 (79.1)

 

1

1

   ≥ 10 %

29 (15.5)

158 (84.5)

 

1.44 (0.85, 2.44)

1.27 (0.54, 2.97)

Revenue from federal government

 

0.85

  

  None

50 (18.5)

220 (81.5)

 

1

1

   ≥ 1 %

20 (17.7)

93 (82.3)

 

1.06 (0.60, 1.87)

1.15 (0.53, 2.49)

Revenue from private insurance

 

0.18

  

  None

35 (16.0)

184 (84.0)

 

1

1

   ≥ 1 %

35 (21.3)

129 (78.7)

 

0.70 (0.42, 1.18)

1.11 (0.51, 2.43)

Human resources

    

  Log Staff-to-patient ratio, mean (SD)

-3.56 (0.76)

-3.31 (0.72)

0.01

1.53 (1.09, 2.16)

1.30 (0.82, 2.06)

CARF accreditation

 

0.01

  

  No

45 (23.2)

149 (76.8)

 

1

1

  Yes

25 (13.2)

164 (86.8

 

1.98 (1.16, 3.39)

2.23 (0.98, 5.08)

Ownership

 

0.78

  

  Private not-for-profit

36 (19.6)

148 (80.4)

 

1

1

  Private for profit

24 (16.6)

121 (83.4)

 

1.22 (0.69, 2.17)

0.91 (0.40, 2.08)

  Public

10 (18.5)

44 (81.5)

 

1.07 (0.49, 2.33)

0.97 (0.33, 2.80)

Hospital affiliation

 

0.09

  

  No

64 (19.7)

261 (80.3)

 

1

1

  Yes

6 (10.3)

52 (89.7)

 

2.12 (0.87, 5.17)

3.39 (1.13, 10.2)

Methods of treatment

 

<0.01

  

  Methadone only

45 (20.7)

172 (79.3)

 

1

1

  Buprenorphine only

22 (23.2)

73 (76.8)

 

0.87 (0.49, 1.55)

1.55 (0.62, 3.88)

  Methadone + Buprenorphine

3 (4.2)

68 (95.8)

 

5.93 (1.78, 19.8)

6.63 (1.61, 27.4)

Time

  

<0.01

  

  2005

50 (26.7)

137 (73.3)

 

1

1

  2011

20 (10.2)

176 (89.8)

 

3.21 (1.82, 5.65)

3.20 (0.87, 11.7)

    N

70 (18.3)

313 (81.7)

 

383

292c

  1. Notes: apercentages in parentheses are row percentages; badjusted odds ratios are obtained from a logistic regression in which all variables in the table are included as independent variables. Standard errors are adjusted for clustering of observations by state. cOnly states in which laws changed between 2005 & 2011 are included in model with state-level fixed effects. p-value derived from a Wald test showed that at least one of the state dummies included in the model is significant at p < 0.05