Racial disparities in CD4 counts at initial HIV-1 diagnosis: Analysis of the Adult Spectrum of HIV disease dataset and public health implications

Introduction. The HIV/AIDS disease burden disproportionately affects minority populations, specifically African Americans. While sexual risk behaviors play a role in the observed HIV burden, other factors including gender, age, socioeconomics, and barriers to healthcare access may also be contributory. The goal of this study was to determine how far down the HIV/AIDS disease process people of different ethnicities first present for healthcare. The study specifically analyzed the differences in CD4 cell counts at the initial HIV-1 diagnosis with respect to ethnicity. The study also analyzed racial differences in HIV/AIDS risk factors. ^ Methods. This is a retrospective study using data from the Adult Spectrum of HIV Disease (ASD), collected by the City of Houston Department of Health. The ASD database contains information on newly reported HIV cases in the Harris County District Hospitals between 1989 and 2000. Each patient had an initial and a follow-up report. The extracted variables of interest from the ASD data set were CD4 counts at the initial HIV diagnosis, race, gender, age at HIV diagnosis and behavioral risk factors. One-way ANOVA was used to examine differences in baseline CD4 counts at HIV diagnosis between racial/ethnic groups. Chi square was used to analyze racial differences in risk factors. ^ Results. The analyzed study sample was 4767. The study population was 47% Black, 37% White and 16% Hispanic [p<0.05]. The mean and median CD4 counts at diagnosis were 254 and 193 cells per ml, respectively. At the initial HIV diagnosis Blacks had the highest average CD4 counts (285), followed by Whites (233) and Hispanics (212) [p<0.001 ]. These statistical differences, however, were only observed with CD4 counts above 350 [p<0.001], even when adjusted for age at diagnosis and gender [p<0.05]. Looking at risk factors, Blacks were mostly affected by intravenous drug use (IVDU) and heterosexuality, whereas Whites and Hispanics were more affected by male homosexuality [ p<0.05]. ^ Conclusion. (1) There were statistical differences in CD4 counts with respect to ethnicity, but these differences only existed for CD4 counts above 350. These differences however do not appear to have clinical significance. Antithetically, Blacks had the highest CD4 counts followed by Whites and Hispanics. (2) 50% of this study group clinically had AIDS at their initial HIV diagnosis (median=193), irrespective of ethnicity. It was not clear from data analysis if these observations were due to failure of early HIV surveillance, HIV testing policies or healthcare access. More studies need to be done to address this question. (3) Homosexuality and bisexuality were the biggest risk factors for Whites and Hispanics, whereas for Blacks were mostly affected by heterosexuality and IVDU, implying a need for different public health intervention strategies for these racial groups. ^

'Reform' of the British national health service after the election of a labour government: Understanding the policy development process

The policy development process leading to the Labour government's white paper of December 1997—The new NHS: Modern, Dependable—is the focus of this project and the public policy development literature is used to aid in the understanding of this process. Policy makers who had been involved in the development of the white paper were interviewed in order to acquire a thorough understanding of who was involved in this process and how they produced the white paper. A theoretical framework is used that sorts policy development models into those that focus on knowledge and experience, and those which focus on politics and influence. This framework is central to understanding the evidence gathered from the individuals and associations that participated in this policy development process. The main research question to be asked in this project is to what extent do either of these sets of policy development models aid in understanding and explicating the process by which the Labour government's policies were developed. The interview evidence, along with published evidence, show that a clear pattern of policy change emerged from this policy development process, and the Knowledge-Experience and Politics-Influence policy making models both assist in understanding this process. The early stages of the policy development process were characterized as hierarchical and iterative, yet also very collaborative among those participating, with knowledge and experience being quite prevalent. At every point in the process, however, informal networks of political influence were used and noted to be quite prevalent by all of the individuals interviewed. The later stages of the process then became increasingly noninclusive, with decisions made by a select group of internal and external policy makers. These policy making models became an important tool with which to understand the policy development process. This Knowledge-Experience and Politics-Influence dichotomy of policy development models could therefore be useful in analyzing other types of policy development. ^