ArticleHepatology, medicine and policy2018
Uptake of hepatitis B-HIV co-infection screening and management in a resource limited setting.
Article in Hepatology, medicine and policy, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The epidemiology of hepatitis b virus infection in Uganda after two decades of vaccination: a meta-analysis and meta-regression.BMC infectious diseases · 2025Pooled it
- HIV and hepatitis B virus co-infection in Mozambique: Policy review and health professionals' knowledge and practices.PloS one · 2024Article
- Prevalence and predictors of hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection in east Africa: evidence from a systematic review and meta-analysis of epidemiological studies published from 2005 to 2020.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWHO hepatitis B guidelines recommend testing all new HIV patients, treating them accordingly or providing immunization. At the Infectious Diseases Institute (IDI) following an audit done in 2012, only 46% patients had been screened for hepatitis B with variable management plans therefore new internal guidelines were implemented. This study describes the uptake of hepatitis B screening and management of patients with hepatitis B and HIV con-infection after the implementation.
methodsData included for all HIV positive patients in care at IDI by October 2015. Data are expressed as median with interquartile range (IQR) and percentages were compared using the chi square test. Statistical analysis was performed using STATA version 13. The IDI laboratory upper limit of normal for alanine aminotransferase (ALT) and aspartate aminotransferase (ASTs) was 40 IU/ml.
resultsNumber of hepatitis B screening tests increased from 800 by 2012 to 1400 in 2015. By 2015 8042/8604(93.5%) patients had been screened for hepatitis B. Overall hepatitis B positive were 359 (4.6%). 166 (81.4%) hepatitis B positives were switched to a tenofovir (TDF) containing regimen.
conclusionOur study confirms the importance of screening for hepatitis B and of using ART regimens containing tenofovir in hepatitis B co-infected patients. Whilst our program has made improvements in care still 18.6% of patients with hepatitis B were not on tenofovir regimens, 98.1% had no hepatitis B viral loads done. Clinicians should recognize the potential for hepatitis B in HIV positive patients and the importance of early diagnosis and treatment to ensure optimal management of cases and follow up.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.