Caring for women with HIV: Unique needs and challenges

More than 30 years into the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) epidemic, our understanding of the needs of women living with this virus continues to evolve. In the early years of the epidemic, managing HIV was all about preventing death and treating opportunistic infections. But now it is also about enabling patients to live long, healthy, and productive lives and preventing new HIV infections. In women, these goals can only be achieved by paying careful attention to sex-specific issues.

See related editorial

As a result of longer survival, HIV-infected persons are increasingly developing common health problems that also affect the general population and that require screening, management, and monitoring by primary care providers. Because people infected with HIV are typically seen by both an HIV specialist and a primary care provider, HIV specialists need to be familiar with primary care issues and primary care providers need to be familiar with HIV care recommendations in order to provide optimal care.

AFRICAN AMERICAN WOMEN BEAR A DISPROPORTIONATE BURDEN

In the United States, HIV was first reported in women in 1983 among those who had been steady sexual partners of males with acquired immune deficiency syndrome.¹ Although men with HIV still outnumber women, the number of women with HIV has increased rapidly. At the end of 2010 an estimated one in four people with HIV in the United States was female.²

African American women bear a disproportionate burden of the disease (Table 1).³ In 2010, women accounted for an estimated 9,500 (20%) of the approximately 45,000 new infections occurring in the United States. Of these newly infected women, 64% were black, 18% were white, and 15% were Hispanic. Yet blacks make up only about 12% of the US population, whites make up 68%, and Hispanics 14%.

Regardless of race or ethnicity, unprotected heterosexual contact is the most common mode of transmission of HIV in women.²

Although the overall rates of HIV infection in the United States are relatively low, certain areas of the country have rates similar to those in sub-Saharan Africa, where most HIV-infected people reside.⁴ The HIV Prevention Trials Network found that the incidence of HIV infection in US women living in these “hot spots,” with high rates of poverty and HIV, was 0.32% per year. Compare this with the 2009 estimate of HIV incidence in the general population of US black women of similar age (0.05% per year) and the adult incidence rates in Congo (0.28% per year) and Kenya (0.53% per year).⁵ To better understand the epidemiology of HIV infection in women and concentrate our prevention efforts, we need to focus on these hot spots.

Misinformation abounds in these hot spots, as does disease. In a survey of residents of the South Side Chicago Housing Authority facilities,⁶ many were aware that effective antiretroviral therapy existed, but one-fourth thought that there was an effective HIV vaccine, and 13% thought there was a cure.

In the early years, an HIV diagnosis was essentially a death sentence. Samji et al⁷ estimated that life expectancy of patients who were prescribed antiretroviral therapy in the United States and Canada increased from 36.1 years in 2000–2002 to 51.4 years in 2006–2007, with the greatest increases in those who started with a baseline CD4 count above 350 cells/mm³. Now, a 20-year-old HIV-positive person with a CD4 count greater than 350 cells/mm³ can expect to live into his or her early 70s.

But not all patients achieve these benefits. In 2009, despite major advances in diagnosis and treatment, HIV was the fourth leading cause of death among African American women ages 25 to 44, causing about 800 deaths, or 9% of all deaths in this group.⁸

TEST ALL, UNLESS THEY OPT OUT

Testing is vital in efforts to prevent and treat HIV infection. In 2006, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommended that everyone between the ages of 13 and 64 be screened for HIV regardless of risk.⁹

The CDC recommends an opt-out strategy.⁹ Rather than ask a patient whether he or she wants to be tested for HIV, the provider says something like, “I advise all of my patients to have an HIV test; as long as you have no objection, we will send you to the lab to have it done.” This approach reduces barriers to HIV testing by eliminating pretest counseling and by making HIV testing routine and the standard of care. Separate consent is not required—clinicians just need to document whether the patient has accepted or declined the test.

Testing should be offered at least once and can be done in any health care setting, including primary care offices and clinics, emergency rooms, health departments, and urgent care centers.⁹ Patients at higher risk (injection drug users and their sex partners; people who exchange sex for money or drugs; sex partners of HIV-infected people; men who have sex with men; and heterosexuals who themselves or whose sex partners have had more than one sex partner since their most recent HIV test) should receive repeat screening annually.

HIV testing should also be offered to all pregnant women at entry into care and again in the third trimester. This strategy is cost-effective even in areas of low prevalence.⁹ Since 2006, other professional organizations have made HIV testing recommendations as well (Table 2).^9–12

A cost-effectiveness analysis suggested that routine opt-out testing is economically justified if the prevalence of HIV is greater than 0.2%.¹³