Re: Round-the-Clock, Rapid Oral Fluid HIV Testing of Women in Labor in Rural India

[Guest guest]

Dear Moderator,

Re: /message/8848

This is a very interesting and important study, in line with CDC protocols.

Unfortunately, the resource document mentioned as a URL at the bottom of this

post seems to have been removed and therefore some questions remain unanswered.

[The web link to the article is

http://medicine.plosjournals.org/perlserv/?request=get-document & doi=10.1371/jour\

nal.pmed.0050092 Editor]

The study mentions the number of women who accepted testing. Is there any data

on the percentage of mothers who opted out? Was opting out an option?

It would appear that the authors used two rapid testing methods, one derived

from oral fluid and the other derived from whole blood. In addition a venous

sample was drawn. What was this used for? If this was used for an ELISA test,

have any comparisons been drawn between these three methods used to establish

the relative sensitivity and specificity as seen in their sample?

Of the mothers who tested positive by rapid tests, which test was found more

useful?

I am also curious to know if a confirmatory test was done later and did this

show if there were any false positives by the rapid tests?

As some women who are not infected will receive ARV prophylaxis on the basis of

a false-positive result from a rapid HIV test, were these women counselled to

this effect?

Thank you,

Yours sincerely,

Dr Deepak Batura

e-mail: <d_batura@...>