[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
July 2001

Evaluation of Youth Preferences for Rapid and Innovative Human Immunodeficiency Virus Antibody Tests

Author Affiliations

From the Departments of Pediatrics (Drs Peralta and Martin, Ms Deeds, and Mr Ghalib) and Pathology (Dr Constantine), University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore. The testing devices for this study were supplied by the different manufacturers; however, this study was not funded by the manufacturers, and the authors have no financial interest in these devices.

Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2001;155(7):838-843. doi:10.1001/archpedi.155.7.838

Objective  To determine youth preferences for Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved and investigational human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) antibody collection and testing methods before and after subjects learned of test result response times; to determine how influential test result response times are on participants' preferences.

Design  After health educators explained and demonstrated 6 different HIV antibody collection and testing strategies (3 saliva, 1 urine, and 2 fingerstick methods), participants completed a confidential survey about test method preference and tried the different testing methods. The participants had an opportunity to re-rank their test method preference after learning about each test's result response time.

Setting  Health education sessions in both clinical and community settings.

Participants  Youths aged 12 to 24 years.

Results  An oral collection device with a rapid saliva test was the most highly preferred test method. The preference for this method and the rapid response test methods via fingerstick procedures improved significantly after subjects learned of the rapid result response time, while the other methods were given significantly lower preference rankings after subjects learned of the longer result response times. Shifts in preference rankings were not related to sex, age, ethnic group, experience with HIV testing, or practice of risk behaviors.

Conclusions  Our research supports the use of noninvasive and rapid HIV testing methods with rapid response times for adolescents to assist in the early identification of HIV status, while offering HIV prevention opportunities and immediate linkage to care.