0
Clinical Guidelines |

Prenatal Screening for HIV: A Review of the Evidence for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force FREE

Roger Chou, MD; Ariel K. Smits, MD, MPH; Laurie Hoyt Huffman, MS; Rongwei Fu, PhD; and P. Todd Korthuis, MD, MPH
[+] Article and Author Information

From the Oregon Evidence-based Practice Center and Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon.


Acknowledgments: The authors thank Kim Villemyer for her help in preparing the full evidence report and the manuscript; Christina Bougatsos for her help in preparing the manuscript; and Andrew Hamilton, MLS, MS, for conducting the literature searches. They also thank Mark Helfand, MD, MPH; Heidi D. Nelson, MD, MPH; David Lanier, MD; members of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force; and reviewers for their contributions to this project.

Grant Support: This study was conducted by the Oregon Evidence-based Practice Center under contract to the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality under contract 290-02-0024, task order no. 2, for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.

Potential Financial Conflicts of Interest: None disclosed.

Requests for Single Reprints: Roger Chou, MD, Oregon Health & Science University, Mail Code BICC, 3181 SW Sam Jackson Park Road, Portland, OR 97239; e-mail, chour@ohsu.edu.

Current Author Addresses: Dr. Chou and Ms. Hoyt Huffman: Oregon Health & Science University, Mail Code BICC, 3181 SW Sam Jackson Park Road, Portland, OR 97239.

Dr. Smits: Oregon Health & Science University, Mail Code FM, 3181 SW Sam Jackson Park Road, Portland, OR 97239.

Dr. Fu: Oregon Health & Science University, Mail Code CB 669, 3181 SW Sam Jackson Park Road, Portland, OR 97239.

Dr. Korthuis: Oregon Health & Science University, Mail Code L-475, 3181 SW Sam Jackson Park Road, Portland, OR 97239.


Ann Intern Med. 2005;143(1):38-54. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-143-1-200507050-00009
Text Size: A A A

Background: Each year in the United States, 6000 to 7000 women with HIV give birth. The management and outcomes of prenatal HIV infection have changed substantially since the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force issued recommendations in 1996.

Purpose: To synthesize current evidence on risks and benefits of prenatal screening for HIV infection.

Data Sources: MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, reference lists, and experts.

Study Selection: Studies of screening, risk factor assessment, accuracy of testing, follow-up testing, and efficacy of interventions.

Data Extraction: Data on settings, patients, interventions, and outcomes were abstracted for included studies; quality was graded according to criteria developed by the Task Force.

Data Synthesis: No published studies directly link prenatal screening for HIV with clinical outcomes. In developed countries, the rate of mother-to-child transmission from untreated HIV-infected women is 14% to 25%. Targeted screening based on risk factors would miss a substantial proportion of infected women. “Opt-out” testing policies appear to increase uptake rates. Standard HIV testing is highly (>99%) sensitive and specific, and initial studies of rapid HIV tests found that both types of testing had similar accuracy. Rapid testing can facilitate timely interventions in persons testing positive. Recommended interventions (combination antiretroviral regimens, elective cesarean section in selected patients, and avoidance of breastfeeding) are associated with transmission rates of 1% to 2% and appear acceptable to pregnant women.

Limitations: Long-term safety data for antiretroviral agents are not yet available. Data are insufficient to accurately estimate the benefits of screening on long-term maternal disease progression or other clinical outcomes, such as horizontal transmission.

Conclusions: Identification and treatment of asymptomatic HIV infection in pregnant women can greatly decrease mother-to-child transmission rates.

Women are the fastest-growing group of persons with new HIV diagnoses, accounting for 30% of new U.S. infections in 2001 (12). An estimated 6000 to 7000 HIV-positive women give birth each year in the United States (3), and 280 to 370 HIV-infected infants were born in the United States annually between 1999 and 2001 (4). In 2000, 40% of HIV-infected infants were born to mothers not known to have HIV infection before delivery (5). As of 2003, about 5000 cumulative deaths from perinatally acquired AIDS had occurred in the United States (6).

Mother-to-child transmission of HIV infection can occur during pregnancy (antepartum), during labor and delivery (intrapartum), and after delivery (postnatal). In the absence of breastfeeding, antepartum transmission is thought to account for 25% to 40% of cases of mother-to-child transmission; the remaining cases occur during labor and delivery (7). Pregnancy and labor management techniques that minimize contact between infected maternal blood and the fetus can decrease the risk for transmission (8). Breastfeeding is thought to be the only important mode for postnatal transmission (4, 9) and accounts for about 44% of infant cases in settings with high breastfeeding rates (10). Higher maternal viral loads and lower CD4 cell counts are associated with an increased risk for transmission (1115). In the United States, combination antiretroviral regimens, in conjunction with avoidance of breastfeeding and cesarean section before labor and before rupture of membranes (elective cesarean section) in selected women, are the standard of care to reduce mother-to-child transmission of HIV (1617).

To update its 1996 recommendations, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a new systematic review of the risks and benefits of prenatal testing for anti-HIV antibodies in asymptomatic women (18).

The Figure summarizes the analytic framework and key questions for this review. Key question 1 addresses direct evidence on the effects of screening on clinical outcomes. The other key questions address the chain of evidence necessary to estimate the effects of screening on clinical outcomes if direct evidence is insufficient. Appendix A discusses the scope and the methods used for this review in more detail.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure.
Screening for HIV—analytic framework for pregnant women.(19)

Key question (KQ) 1: Does screening for HIV in pregnant women reduce mother-to-child transmission or premature death and disability? KQ 2: Can clinical or demographic characteristics (including specific settings) identify subgroups of asymptomatic pregnant women at increased risk for HIV infection compared to the general population of pregnant women? KQ 3: What are the test characteristics of HIV antibody (HIV ab) test strategies in pregnant women? KQ 4: What are the harms (including labeling and anxiety) associated with screening? Is screening acceptable to pregnant women? KQ 5: How many HIV-infected pregnant women who meet criteria for interventions receive them? KQ 6: What are the harms associated with the work-up for HIV infection in pregnant women? KQ 7: a) How effective are interventions (antiretroviral prophylaxis [to prevent mother-to-child transmission] or treatment [to improve maternal outcomes]; avoidance of breastfeeding, elective cesarean section [in selected patients], or other labor management practices; counseling on risky behaviors; immunizations; routine monitoring and follow-up; or prophylaxis against opportunistic infections) in reducing mother-to-child transmission rates or improving clinical outcomes (mortality, functional status, quality of life, symptoms, or opportunistic infections) in pregnant women with HIV infection? b) Does immediate antiretroviral treatment in HIV-infected pregnant women result in improvements in clinical outcomes compared to delayed treatment until the infected woman becomes symptomatic? c) How well do interventions reduce the rate of viremia, improve CD4 cell counts, or reduce risky behaviors? How does identification of HIV infection in pregnant women affect future reproductive choices? KQ 8: What are the harms (including adverse effects from in utero exposure) associated with antiretroviral drugs and elective cesarean section? KQ 9: Have improvements in intermediate outcomes (CD4 cell counts, viremia, or risky behaviors) in HIV-infected pregnant women been shown to improve clinical outcomes or reduce mother-to-child transmission? A separate report reviews KQs 6, 7b, 9, and parts of 7a (counseling, immunizations, labor management practices other than elective cesarean section, routine monitoring and follow-up, and prophylaxis against opportunistic infections); 7c (effects on viral loads, CD4 counts, and risky behaviors); and 9.

Grahic Jump Location

Briefly, we identified relevant studies from MEDLINE (1983 through 30 June 2004) and the Cochrane Clinical Trials Registry (2004, issue 2), reference lists, hand searches of relevant journals, and suggestions from experts (Appendix B). We selected studies that provided evidence on the benefits and harms of screening, risk factor assessment, follow-up testing, interventions, and the acceptability of prenatal HIV testing. For interventions, we focused on studies of the safety and effectiveness of antiretroviral prophylaxis (17). We also reviewed studies on the safety and effectiveness of elective cesarean section (20) and avoidance of breastfeeding. A separate report (19) reviews other recommended interventions, such as vaccinations, prophylaxis against opportunistic infections, and routine monitoring and follow-up (7, 2123).

We assessed the internal validity and relevance of included studies using predefined criteria developed by the USPSTF (Appendix C) (24). We rated the overall body of evidence for each key question using the system developed by the USPSTF.

We used the results of the evidence review to construct an outcomes table estimating the effects of one-time screening for HIV infection in hypothetical cohorts of pregnant women. We calculated numbers needed to screen (NNS) and treat (NNT) to prevent 1 case of mother-to-child transmission or to cause 1 complication from interventions. The point estimates and 95% CIs for NNS and NNT were based on Monte Carlo simulations.

This research was funded by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality under a contract to support the work of the USPSTF. Agency staff and USPSTF members participated in the initial design of the study and reviewed interim analyses and the final report. Draft reports were distributed to 13 content experts for review. Agency approval was required before this manuscript could be submitted for publication, but the authors are solely responsible for the content and the decision to submit it for publication.

Does Screening for HIV in Pregnant Women Reduce Mother-to-Child Transmission or Premature Death and Disability?

No studies compare clinical outcomes from screening or not screening pregnant women for HIV. Although the number of infants with perinatally acquired HIV transmission has markedly declined in the United States, this reduction is probably due to a combination of increased prenatal screening and increased effectiveness and uptake of therapies (3, 7). No studies estimated the relative impact of these factors.

Can Clinical or Demographic Characteristics Identify Subgroups of Asymptomatic Pregnant Women at Increased Risk for HIV Infection Compared with the General Population of Pregnant Women?

Risk factors for HIV infection appear similar in pregnant and nonpregnant women and include risky sexual behaviors, injection drug use, and transfusion between 1978 and 1985 (22, 25). Heterosexual transmission has become the most common route of HIV infection among U.S. women (26).

The largest (n = 73 472) study of U.S. women at prenatal or obstetrics clinics found that 0.6% were HIV positive (27). Smaller U.S. studies of pregnant women have reported prevalence rates ranging from 0.13% to 5% (2830). In the United States, HIV prevalence varies by region, and minority women are more likely to be infected (26).

Observational studies in the United States (all published before 1996) found that 8% to 57% of HIV-infected pregnant women had identifiable risk factors (3135). Differences in the criteria used to define high-risk behaviors and varying stringency of risk factor assessment (31) could explain some of the variation in results. No study evaluated different targeted prenatal screening strategies to determine the proportion of infected women correctly identified.

In 1995, the U.S. Public Health Service (36) and the American Academy of Pediatrics (37) recommended prenatal counseling and voluntary HIV testing. No U.S. studies since 1995 evaluated the yield of targeted compared with universal screening. In a 7-state observational study, however, the proportion of HIV-infected women given a diagnosis before delivery increased from 70% to 80% between 1993 and 1996 (38). In the United Kingdom, 1 observational study found an increased incidence of known HIV seropositivity after the implementation of universal prenatal testing (39), but another found that 50% of seropositive women (identified by anonymous testing) remained undiagnosed (40).

What Are the Test Characteristics of HIV Antibody Test Strategies in Pregnant Women?

The use of enzyme immunoassay followed by confirmatory Western blot or immunofluorescent assay remains the standard method for diagnosing HIV-1 infection. This method is associated with a sensitivity and specificity greater than 99% (4142). False-positive diagnoses are rare, even in low-risk settings (43). The diagnostic accuracy of standard HIV testing is thought to be similar for pregnant and nonpregnant persons, although indeterminate results may occur slightly more frequently in pregnancy (44).

Rapid HIV antibody tests provide results in 10 to 30 minutes, compared with 1 to 2 weeks for standard testing (45). Patients should be notified of positive rapid test results before confirmation when doing so might benefit them, such as for women with unknown HIV status presenting in active labor (46). However, this could result in unnecessary exposure to antiretroviral therapy if the rapid test result is a false positive.

Three good-quality (4749) and 4 fair-quality (5053) studies evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of rapid HIV testing during pregnancy using standard testing as the reference standard. The only study to evaluate a rapid HIV test currently in use in the United States was a good-quality prospective study of the OraQuick Advance test (OraSure Technologies, Inc., Bethlehem, Pennsylvania) on blood samples from 5744 women (prevalence, 0.59%) who presented in labor (47). The sensitivity was 100% (95% CI, 90% to 100%), the specificity was 99.9% (CI, 99.78% to 99.98%), the positive predictive value was 90% (CI, 75% to 97%), and the negative predictive value was 100%. In studies of nonpregnant persons, the sensitivities of currently available rapid HIV tests ranged from 96% to 100%, and the specificities were all greater than 99% (5458). No studies have compared the diagnostic accuracy of prenatal HIV testing using home-based sampling kits or noninvasive (urine or oral) specimens with the accuracy of standard testing as the reference standard. Although 1 Indian study found a lower sensitivity with the OraQuick test on saliva than on plasma (75.0% vs. 86.4%), it did not use standard enzyme immunoassay plus Western blot as the reference standard, and local conditions may have affected saliva specimens (59).

No clinical studies have evaluated the yield of repeated prenatal HIV testing, which would depend in part on the incidence of HIV infections during pregnancy (60).

What Are the Harms Associated with Screening?

In a recent U.S. study of rapid HIV testing during labor, 4 of 4849 women had a false-positive rapid test result and briefly received antiretroviral prophylaxis before negative confirmatory results (47). Other evidence on the frequency and harms from false-positive diagnoses in pregnant women is anecdotal (61) but could include elective pregnancy termination based on incorrect test results, anxiety, discrimination, or altered partner relationships. False-negative and true-negative test results could encourage continued risky behaviors. Data on rates and consequences (such as anxiety) of indeterminate tests in pregnant women are lacking (62).

True-positive tests can also result in anxiety, depression, social stigmatization, changes in relationships with sexual partners, and discrimination (37, 63). Most studies of harms from testing have been performed in nonpregnant populations. One small (n = 40) study of prenatal testing among U.S. women found statistically significantly higher anxiety and depression scores among HIV-positive women compared with matched uninfected controls, as well as a nonsignificant trend toward increased partnership dissolution (64). A recent good-quality cohort study found that receiving a prenatal HIV diagnosis did not increase risk for intimate partner violence (65). Data are insufficient to estimate suicide risk associated with prenatal diagnosis of HIV (66).

Is Screening Acceptable to Pregnant Women?

Because mandatory testing of pregnant women could result in avoidance of prenatal care (67), there remains general consensus that HIV testing should be voluntary and performed after obtaining informed consent (22). A good-quality systematic review found that acceptance rates for HIV testing among more than 174 000 pregnant women in 25 studies published through 1995 ranged from 23% to 100% (68). More recent data from 16 U.S. states and 5 Canadian provinces found a similar range of testing uptake (25% to 98%) (69). A large U.S. survey found that overall prenatal testing rates increased from 41% in 1995 (when recommendations for universal prenatal HIV counseling and testing were issued) to 60% in 1998 (70).

Several factors appear to influence testing rates. One randomized trial found that prenatal testing rates were significantly higher in women offered HIV testing (35%) than in those not receiving a direct offer (6%) (71). Strong provider endorsement of testing also increased uptake (7273). Testing rates were generally higher in states and Canadian provinces that used an “opt-out” policy (in which women are informed that an HIV test is a standard part of prenatal care and that they may decline it) than in those that used an “opt-in” policy (in which women are required to specifically consent to an HIV test)—71% to 98% compared with 25% to 83% (69). Noncomparative studies also reported high (85% to 88%) uptake rates with opt-out testing (71, 7475). We identified no studies evaluating the effect of anonymous versus name-based testing on prenatal screening rates, or the effects of streamlined or targeted counseling.

Newer screening methods, such as home sample collection, rapid tests, and noninvasive sampling, could increase rates of prenatal HIV testing (45). A recent U.S. observational study of pregnant women in labor found that 84% accepted rapid testing (47). We identified no studies evaluating the effect of oral sampling or home-based collection on acceptance of prenatal HIV testing.

How Many HIV-Infected Pregnant Women Who Meet Criteria for Interventions Receive Them?

In a large U.S. study, 91% (3690 of 4062) of tested pregnant women received their results (76). One randomized trial from Africa found that rapid testing increased notification rates compared with standard testing (96% vs. 65%) among pregnant HIV-positive women (77).

Several recent U.S. studies found that HIV-infected women used antiretroviral drugs in more than 90% of pregnancies, with a trend toward increased combination regimen use (58% to 80% from 1998 to 1999) (7882). In 1 U.S. study of rapid testing, all HIV-infected pregnant women (n = 18) who were given a diagnosis during active labor in time to administer intrapartum zidovudine received the drug (47). In recent large U.S. observational studies, scheduled cesarean section rates for HIV-positive women ranged from 37% to 50% (78, 81, 83).

How Effective Are Interventions in Reducing Mother-to-Child Transmission Rates or Improving Clinical Outcomes in Pregnant Women with HIV Infection?
Antiretroviral Agents

In the absence of antiretroviral prophylaxis, the risk for mother-to-child transmission of HIV is 14% to 25% in developed countries and 13% to 42% in countries with high rates of breastfeeding (84). The landmark Pediatric AIDS Clinical Trials Group protocol 076 (PACTG 076) study found that a 3-phase maternal and infant zidovudine regimen in nonbreastfeeding women starting at 14 to 34 weeks' gestation (median, 26 weeks' gestation) through 6 weeks postpartum decreased the risk for transmission from about 25% to 8% compared with placebo (85). A good-quality systematic review of zidovudine monotherapy clinical trials found that any zidovudine regimen (including shorter courses and in breastfeeding women) significantly reduced the risk for mother-to-child transmission compared with placebo (odds ratio, 0.46 [CI, 0.35 to 0.60]) (86). Zidovudine was also associated with decreased risk for infant death within the first year (odds ratio, 0.57 [CI, 0.38 to 0.85]) and stillbirth (relative risk, 0.31 [CI, 0.11 to 0.90]).

In the United States, treatment of seropositive pregnant women has evolved to multidrug regimens, including highly active antiretroviral therapy, or HAART (≥3 drugs, usually from ≥2 classes) (17). The only randomized trial of full-course combination regimens (nelfinavir or nevirapine plus zidovudine) during pregnancy was discontinued early because of a high rate of treatment-limiting or serious side effects in the nevirapine group (87). Four large U.S. or European cohort studies (3 good-quality, 1 fair-quality) evaluated the relative effectiveness of antiviral regimens with 2 or more drugs versus 1-drug regimens or no antiretroviral agents in nonbreastfeeding women (Table 1) (82, 8890). In all 4 studies, regimens with more antiretroviral drugs were superior to regimens with fewer antiretroviral drugs for preventing mother-to-child transmission (Table 2). The only study that specifically compared the effectiveness of HAART regimens with that of no antiretroviral agents reported an adjusted odds ratio of 0.13 (CI, 0.06 to 0.27) for prevention of mother-to-child transmission (89).

Table Jump PlaceholderTable 1.  Large Observational Cohort Studies of the Effect of Combination Antiretroviral Regimens on Risk for Mother-to Child Transmission of HIV Infection
Table Jump PlaceholderTable 2.  Number of Drugs in Full-Course Antiretroviral Regimens and Risk for Mother-to-Child Transmission of HIV Infection

The addition of single-dose intrapartum (maternal) and postpartum (infant) nevirapine to antiretroviral regimens initiated before 34 weeks' gestation was evaluated in 2 good-quality randomized, controlled trials performed in nonbreastfeeding settings (Table 3) (9192). One trial found that the addition of single doses of intrapartum and postpartum nevirapine to a slightly abbreviated (28 weeks' gestation to 1 week postpartum) course of zidovudine alone reduced mother-to-child transmission from 6.3% to 1.9% (92). In contrast, an earlier trial found that the addition of single-dose intrapartum and postpartum nevirapine therapy to primarily (77%) combination antiretroviral regimens did not further decrease already low transmission rates (1.4% to 1.6%) (91).

Table Jump PlaceholderTable 3.  Randomized, Controlled Trials of Antiretroviral Prophylaxis for Reduction of Mother-to-Child Transmission of HIV Infection

Shorter courses of antiretroviral prophylaxis started after 34 weeks' gestation have primarily been evaluated for use in resource-poor countries. Although shorter courses may be associated with an increased risk for antiretroviral drug resistance, they may be considered for use in U.S. women who did not receive a diagnosis early enough to receive a full course. In general, shorter courses were less effective than full courses, although they did reduce transmission rates (Table 3) (9397). Even very abbreviated regimens administered during labor were associated with some reduction in transmission (98102). Neonatal prophylaxis alone was less effective than regimens that included maternal prophylaxis (99).

A recent good-quality prospective observational study of HIV-positive women who were given a diagnosis through rapid testing during labor and were treated with zidovudine with or without nevirapine found a transmission rate of 9% (3 of 32) (47).

No studies have evaluated clinical progression, death, quality of life, or horizontal transmission associated with different antiretroviral regimens for HIV-infected women identified during pregnancy.

Avoidance of Breastfeeding

Two meta-analyses of observational studies found that breastfeeding was associated with an overall increased rate of mother-to-child transmission of HIV of 14% to 16% (9, 103). In another recent meta-analysis (104), the rate of late (beyond 4 weeks postnatal) transmission was 9.3% after 36 months.

No randomized, controlled trials have evaluated the rate of mother-to-child transmission associated with breastfeeding in the United States or in women receiving antiretroviral therapy. One large, good-quality prospective Italian cohort study of 3770 children found that breastfeeding significantly increased transmission rates after adjustment for other factors, including antiretroviral use (adjusted odds ratio, 10.20 [CI, 2.73 to 38.11]) (88). An African trial among women not receiving antiretroviral agents found that breastfeeding was associated with a probability of mother-to-child transmission of 36.7% (CI, 29.4% to 44.0%) at 24 months compared with 20.5% (CI, 14.0% to 27.0%) with formula feeding, and a mortality rate of 24.4% (CI, 18.2% to 30.7%) compared with 20.0% (CI, 14.4% to 25.6%), respectively (105).

Elective Cesarean Section

One good-quality European cohort study evaluated the effectiveness of elective cesarean section in the HAART era (89). The rate of mother-to-child transmission was 1.6% in women delivering by elective cesarean compared with 6.5% in those delivering vaginally, with an odds ratio (adjusted for antiretroviral therapy, prematurity, and maternal CD4 cell count and viral load) of 0.33 (CI, 0.11 to 0.94). In the subgroup of women receiving HAART, the odds ratio was 0.64 (CI, 0.08 to 5.37) for elective cesarean compared with vaginal delivery, and in the subgroup with undetectable viremia, the odds ratio was 0.07 (CI, 0.02 to 0.31) for elective cesarean compared with vaginal or emergency cesarean delivery.

Other studies of elective cesarean section were conducted before the widespread use of combination antiretroviral regimens. One good-quality European randomized clinical trial found a mother-to-child transmission rate of 10.5% in women randomly assigned to vaginal delivery compared with 1.8% in those randomly assigned to elective cesarean section (P = 0.009) (106). Among 119 babies delivered to women who received zidovudine and underwent cesarean section, the rate of HIV infection was 0.8%. A good-quality meta-analysis of 15 prospective cohort studies found a 50% reduction in the likelihood of mother-to-child transmission with elective cesarean section compared with other modes of delivery (odds ratio, 0.43 [CI, 0.33 to 0.56]) (107). The benefits of elective cesarean section were additive with zidovudine exposure; the likelihood of transmission was reduced by approximately 87% with both interventions compared with nonelective cesarean section or vaginal delivery and no antiretroviral agents (adjusted odds ratio, 0.13 [CI, 0.09 to 0.19]). A meta-analysis of 7 prospective cohort studies (108) found that cesarean section (elective or nonelective) was associated with a lower risk for transmission in women with viral loads less than 1000 copies/mL; however, the overall transmission rate was low (3.6%) and was reduced by antiretroviral agents alone to about 1%.

How Does Identification of HIV Infection in Pregnant Women Affect Future Reproductive Choices?

Knowledge of HIV status could affect future reproductive choices such as contraceptive use, subsequent pregnancy, sterilization, or abortion. In 2 studies, HIV seropositivity was associated with a lower rate of pregnancy (109), or a trend toward a lower rate (110), than in uninfected women, but another study found an increasing rate of pregnancy among HIV-infected women (111). One U.S. study found that 27% of HIV-infected women chose tubal ligation compared with 15% of uninfected controls, and oral contraceptive use was less likely in seropositive women (110). Two other noncomparative U.S. studies reported rates of tubal ligation among HIV-infected women of 24% and 27% (38, 112). An African study found that single-session postpartum counseling did not appear to influence decisions on condom use or reproductive behavior (113). In 2 U.S. studies, pregnancy termination rates did not differ between HIV-infected and uninfected women (64, 114).

What Are the Harms Associated with Antiretroviral Drugs and Elective Cesarean Section?
Maternal Harms from Antiretroviral Drugs

Antiretroviral exposure during pregnancy is associated with significant short-term nonobstetric adverse events, but these often resolve after therapy with the offending drug or drug combination is discontinued; in addition, effective alternatives are usually available (17). Guidelines reviewing adverse events associated with specific antiretroviral drugs, classes, and combinations in pregnancy are regularly updated, and specific antiretroviral drugs and combinations associated with serious complications are not recommended or should be used only with caution (17, 115).

One good-quality meta-analysis found that zidovudine exposure during pregnancy did not cause any deaths or long-term maternal adverse events (86). The largest (n = 1407) prospective study of combination antiretroviral therapy found that gestational diabetes was the only associated adverse event; it occurred most frequently with regimens that included a protease inhibitor (116). Although continuous nevirapine therapy is associated with serious hepatic and cutaneous adverse events (87, 117119), no laboratory or clinical evidence of liver toxicity with single-dose intrapartum nevirapine has been reported (92, 98, 100).

Another potential harm of antiretroviral therapy initiated during pregnancy is the development of drug resistance, particularly in women who receive single-dose nevirapine or regimens that do not fully suppress viral replication (120). No studies have evaluated the effects of limited exposure to combination antiretroviral agents during pregnancy on long-term clinical outcomes (121). Studies examining the effect of limited exposure to zidovudine alone did not find a negative impact on disease progression or response to later therapy (122124). The only study that evaluated the impact of nevirapine resistance mutations (125127) after single-dose intrapartum exposure found that women who received intrapartum nevirapine were less likely to have complete virologic suppression after 6 months of postpartum treatment with a nevirapine-containing regimen (49% vs. 68%) (128). CD4 cell count response and degree of weight loss, however, did not significantly differ between groups receiving and not receiving intrapartum nevirapine, although longer follow-up is needed.

Maternal Harms from Elective Cesarean Section

Cesarean section is associated with an increased risk for maternal complications compared with vaginal delivery, although elective surgery is safer than an emergency cesarean section (129). Women with HIV infection are at higher risk for cesarean section–related complications than uninfected women (130131).

One randomized, controlled trial found that the rate of postpartum fever was 1.1% (2 of 183) in HIV-infected women delivering vaginally and 6.7% (15 of 225) in those having a planned cesarean section, but no serious complications occurred in either group (106). The largest (n = 1186) prospective observational study found that elective cesarean section was associated with increased rates of postpartum fever (14.3%; relative risk, 4.16 [CI, 1.99 to 8.70]), hemorrhage (7.1%; relative risk, 1.58 [CI, 0.58 to 4.26]), endometritis (5.4%; relative risk, 2.57 [CI, 0.78 to 8.51]), urinary tract infection (5.4%; relative risk, 3.64 [CI, 1.06 to 12.54]), and any postpartum morbidity (26.7%; relative risk, 2.62 [CI, 1.61, 4.20]) compared with vaginal delivery (132). A smaller prospective study reported similar findings (133).

Harms Associated with In Utero Exposure to Antiretroviral Drugs

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration classifies the in utero safety of antiretroviral drugs, but for most drugs data are limited or are based on animal studies (134). One good-quality U.S. meta-analysis of 5 prospective cohort studies and 1 good-quality, large European prospective cohort study found no significant differences in the rates of congenital anomalies, neonatal conditions, or low birthweight between infants exposed to any combination of antiretroviral agents and unexposed infants (15, 135). Data on the association between combination antiretroviral regimens and increased rates of premature delivery are mixed. A recent large prospective cohort study found an increased rate of premature birth associated with combination regimens (adjusted odds ratio, 4.14 with a protease inhibitor and 2.66 without a protease inhibitor compared with no treatment) (136), but an earlier meta-analysis found no increased risk (135).

Although molecular and biochemical evidence of mitochondrial dysfunction has been reported in infants exposed in utero to antiretroviral agents (137139), the clinical impact of such dysfunction is unclear (140141). Observational studies have found no clear evidence of clinical symptoms (15, 137, 142) or deaths (143145) due to mitochondrial dysfunction among uninfected infants exposed to HAART in utero.

Long-term (4 to 6 years) studies of adverse events from in utero antiretroviral exposure are available only for zidovudine. One good-quality meta-analysis and 1 good-quality prospective cohort study found no increase in long-term clinical adverse events or changes in growth or development in exposed infants up to 4 years of age (86, 146), and no tumors or deaths from cancer after 6 years (147).

Estimates of Numbers Needed To Screen

Table 4 estimates the outcomes of one-time prenatal screening before the third trimester in 3 hypothetical cohorts (0.15% prevalence, 0.30% prevalence, and 5% prevalence [high risk]) of 10 000 nonbreastfeeding pregnant women, using the highest-quality and most applicable evidence (see Appendix Table, for base-case assumptions). In settings with a maternal prevalence of 0.15%, the estimated NNS to prevent 1 case of mother-to-child transmission ranged from 3500 to 12 170; in a cohort of high-risk patients, the NNS ranged from 105 to 365. There were insufficient data with which to estimate the long-term benefits of screening on maternal disease progression or other clinical outcomes (such as horizontal transmission).

Table Jump PlaceholderTable 4.  Outcomes of Screening for HIV Infection in 3 Hypothetical Cohorts of 10 000 Asymptomatic Pregnant Women

No published studies directly link prenatal screening for HIV with clinical outcomes. Other evidence obtained for the systematic review (summarized in Table 5) indicates that testing is extremely accurate, uptake of recommended interventions is high, and perinatal transmission can be reduced from 14% to 25% without interventions to 1% to 2%.

Table Jump PlaceholderTable 5.  Summary of Findings of Systematic Evidence Review
Table Jump PlaceholderAppendix Table.  Base-Case Assumptions for Outcomes Table (Table 4) of Counseling and One-Time Screening for HIV Infection in Pregnant Women

Targeted prenatal screening for HIV according to risk factor assessment would miss a substantial proportion of infected women who report no risk factors. Although universal screening in low-prevalence settings could lead to thousands of women being tested for each case of perinatal HIV prevented, a high priority is placed on prevention of perinatal HIV infection in the United States. Several U.S. expert panels recommend universal prenatal HIV screening (7, 148149).

Despite the tremendous efficacy of interventions for preventing mother-to-child transmission of HIV infection, uptake of HIV screening and use of antiretroviral therapy remain incomplete in the United States. Data indicate that use of “opt-out” testing policies could improve uptake rates, and use of rapid tests could facilitate timely interventions for persons testing positive.

The case for universal prenatal screening would be further strengthened by data showing improvements in long-term maternal or other outcomes, such as horizontal transmission, future reproductive choices, or risky behaviors. Other important areas requiring additional study include clinical trials to identify optimal combination antiretroviral regimens, methods to improve uptake of screening and recommended interventions, and methods to improve access to screening. In addition, further studies to determine the risk for potential harms from prenatal screening, such as intimate partner violence and methods to minimize those risks, are needed. Additional studies assessing long-term maternal outcomes and effects of brief, interrupted, or less intensive antiretroviral regimens on future response to HAART and long-term maternal and infant risks from antiretroviral exposure will also help further clarify risks and benefits of interventions.

Perinatal HIV infection is a largely preventable disease. Despite major reductions in the incidence of perinatal HIV infection in the United States since the early 1990s, more thorough uptake of prenatal testing and use of recommended interventions could reduce the incidence further.

Appendix A. Methods
Scope of Evidence Synthesis

The analytic framework in the Figure shows the target populations, interventions, and intermediate and health outcome measures we examined. The analytic framework was developed in consultation with the USPSTF and was refined after review by 7 content experts. We included all pregnant women regardless of age. Our review considered the standard screening strategy for HIV-1 infection to be an office-based venipuncture with a repeatedly reactive serum anti-HIV enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, followed by confirmatory Western blot or immunofluorescent assay for positive test results. The other major screening method that we considered was the use of rapid testing in women with unknown HIV status who presented to labor and delivery units. We also considered data on the use of home-based collection methods and tests using noninvasive samples such as saliva or urine in pregnant women. Testing of viral load and CD4 cell counts was considered the standard work-up to determine the stage of infection in seropositive patients.

For treatment of HIV infection in pregnant women, we evaluated recommended antiretroviral prophylaxis (to prevent mother-to-child transmission) and treatment (to improve maternal outcomes), avoidance of breastfeeding, elective cesarean section in women with viral loads greater than 1000 copies/mL, immunizations, prophylaxis against opportunistic infections, counseling to reduce risky behaviors, and routine monitoring and follow-up. A separate review (19) reports results for the latter 4 interventions. We did not include interventions not shown to be effective or not recommended in current guidelines for antiretroviral-naive pregnant women in the United States, such as hydroxyurea, HIV immune globulin, vitamin supplementation, routine resistance testing, and specific antiretroviral agents (such as efavirenz in the first trimester or the oral liquid formulation of amprenavir) or combinations (such as stavudine plus didanosine) (17, 20) that are no longer recommended. The major clinical outcome of interest in this review was mother-to-child transmission of HIV. We also reviewed data on the risk for clinical progression and death in HIV-positive women whose infection is diagnosed during pregnancy. Adverse outcomes of interventions in both mothers and infants were reviewed, with emphasis on severe or intolerable events. We were particularly interested in evidence on long-term maternal and child risks from antiretroviral exposure during pregnancy. Although antiretroviral exposure is associated with significant short-term side effects, many patients can be switched to effective alternative regimens, and intolerable or serious side effects are incorporated into intention-to-treat analyses of clinical outcomes (150). Intermediate outcomes were loss of detectable viremia, improvement in CD4 cell counts, and changes in risky behaviors. We also reviewed harms from screening, work-up, and treatment. Although the potential for the development of antiretroviral resistance is an important consideration in deciding which antiretroviral regimen to use during pregnancy, we primarily focused on reviewing the effects of resistance on long-term clinical outcomes (125126, 151152).

Methods
Literature Search and Strategy

We searched the topic of HIV in the MEDLINE and Cochrane Library databases. Most searches were done from 1983 (the year that HIV was characterized) through 30 June 2004. For antiretroviral regimens, electronic searches were performed from 1998, the year that HAART was first recommended in U.S. guidelines (153); these searches were supplemented by an electronic search for systematic reviews of antiretroviral regimens from 1983. We performed a total of 13 searches covering the areas of risk factor assessment, screening tests, work-up, and interventions. Because a preliminary search found that search strategies limited by terms for pregnancy excluded relevant studies, we performed general searches on topics of interest and performed supplemental searches specifically related to pregnancy. Appendix B presents detailed electronic search strategies and results. Periodic hand searching of relevant medical journals, reviews of reference lists, and peer review suggestions supplemented the electronic searches. Abstracts were not included in systematic searches, but major abstracts cited in reference lists or presented at recent conferences were included. We also obtained reviews, policy statements, and other papers with contextual value.

Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria

We selected papers for full review if they were about HIV infection in pregnant women, were relevant to key questions, and met inclusion criteria. For all key questions, articles were limited to those that evaluated the general population of pregnant women with HIV infection. Although the population of interest was pregnant women with unsuspected HIV infection who would be identified by screening, we included studies of pregnant women with a broad spectrum of chronic HIV disease to get a picture of the benefits and adverse effects of screening and treatment in patients with different degrees of immune deficiency. We included studies performed in the United States, Australia, Canada, and western Europe (areas in which the epidemiology and management of chronic HIV infection are similar). When important studies for a specific key question had been performed only in other countries, we also included these studies. We excluded studies of nonhuman subjects and those without original data. We considered non–English-language papers if they reported on clinical trials and if an abstract was available in English. We searched for relevant systematic reviews for all key questions. A separate report lists additional key question–specific inclusion criteria (19).

Data Extraction and Synthesis

We used predefined criteria from the USPSTF to assess the internal validity of included systematic reviews, trials, and observational studies, which we rated as “good,” fair,” or “poor.” We also rated the applicability of each study to the population that would be identified by screening. The rating system was developed by the USPSTF and is described in detail elsewhere (24) and summarized in Appendix C. For included trials and systematic reviews, we abstracted information about setting, patients, interventions, and outcomes. We rated the overall body of evidence for each key question using the system developed by the USPSTF.

Methods for Outcomes Table

Table 4 estimates the outcomes from screening before the third trimester in 3 hypothetical cohorts (0.15% prevalence, 0.30% prevalence, and 5% prevalence [high risk]) of 10 000 pregnant women. We did not include areas in this table in which no reliable data were available to estimate the clinical magnitude of benefit or harm, such as harms from screening (anxiety, labeling, violence, suicide, partnership dissolution) or decreased horizontal transmission from counseling. We focused on the benefits of combination antiretroviral regimens for reducing mother-to-child transmission because this intervention has the greatest impact on transmission rates and because there were insufficient or limited data on other clinical outcomes (such as long-term maternal outcomes or horizontal transmission rates) or benefits associated with other interventions (such as prophylaxis against opportunistic infections, counseling on risky behaviors, immunizations, routine monitoring and follow-up, or additional benefits from elective cesarean section in women receiving HAART). For harms of interventions, we focused on the rate of postpartum complications from elective cesarean section because studies have not shown clear evidence of long-term infant adverse events from antiretroviral exposure and because there are insufficient data on the risks for antiretroviral agents on long-term maternal outcomes. We calculated NNS and NNT to prevent 1 case of mother-to-child transmission and to cause 1 postpartum complication (postpartum fever, endometritis, hemorrhage, or urinary tract infection) from elective cesarean section.

To estimate the benefits of counseling and screening for HIV infection in pregnant women, we made several assumptions. We used recent estimates of rates of combination antiretroviral therapy (60% to 90%) (7882) and elective cesarean section (37% to 50%) by HIV-infected pregnant women in the United States (78, 81, 83). Our estimates of the effectiveness of interventions were conservative and did not include potential benefits from elective cesarean section or avoidance of breastfeeding in women receiving combination therapy (15, 88). We also did not include potential benefits from screening on long-term maternal outcomes.

Calculations of NNS and NNT were based on estimates from different sources in the literature (Appendix Table). The indicated range of estimates and variation associated with estimates were incorporated in the calculations and are reflected by the ranges in the calculated NNS and NNT. We used Monte Carlo simulations to incorporate variation associated with the estimates. The sampling distributions of the estimates used in the simulations were either the underlying distribution on which the calculation of 95% CI was based or one that best approximated the point estimate and CI. For example, if the estimate was a rate or proportion, the logit of the rate or proportion was sampled assuming an approximately normal distribution and was then transformed back to its original scale. For relative risk, we assumed that the log of relative risk was approximately normally distributed. The log of the relative risk was sampled from the normal distribution and then transformed back to relative risk. In each iteration of the Monte Carlo simulation, 1 sample of each proportion, relative risk, or other estimate was drawn to calculate the NNSB and NNTB. The point estimates and 95% CIs of NNS and NNT were based on 1 000 000 samples. A simple program using R statistical language was written to perform simulations and calculate summary statistics (154).

Appendix B. Search Strategies
Immunization—Database: MEDLINE (1996 to Present)

  1. exp hiv infections/ or exp hiv/

  2. exp Viral Hepatitis Vaccines/

  3. exp Influenza Vaccine/

  4. exp Bacterial Vaccines/

  5. 2 or 3 or 4

  6. 1 and 5

  7. exp IMMUNIZATION/

  8. exp Immunization Programs/

  9. 7 or 8

  10. exp HEPATITIS/

  11. exp INFLUENZA/

  12. exp PNEUMONIA/

  13. 10 or 11 or 12

  14. 1 and 9 and 13

  15. 6 or 14

  16. exp Evaluation Studies/

  17. exp Epidemiologic Studies/

  18. Comparative Study/

  19. 16 or 17 or 18

  20. 15 and 19

  21. limit 15 to (clinical trial or guideline or meta-analysis or multicenter study or practice guideline)

  22. 20 or 21

  23. limit 22 to (human and english language)

  24. from 23 keep 1-206

Prophylaxis—Database: MEDLINE (1996 to Present)

  1. exp AIDS-Related Opportunistic Infections/pc [Prevention & Control]

  2. prophyla$.mp.

  3. exp HIV Infections/co [Complications]

  4. exp AIDS-Related Opportunistic Infections/

  5. 2 and (3 or 4)

  6. 1 or 5

  7. limit 6 to (human and english language and (clinical trial or guideline or meta-analysis or multicenter study or practice guideline))

  8. from 7 keep 1-396

Counseling—Database: MEDLINE (1996 to Present)

  1. exp HIV Infections/ or exp HIV/

  2. exp COUNSELING/

  3. 1 and 2

  4. exp impulsive behavior/ or risk reduction behavior/ or risk-taking/

  5. 1 and 4

  6. 3 or 5

  7. exp Evaluation Studies/

  8. Comparative Study/

  9. exp Epidemiologic Studies/

  10. 7 or 8 or 9

  11. 6 and 10

  12. limit 6 to (clinical trial or guideline or meta-analysis or multicenter study or practice guideline)

  13. 11 or 12

  14. limit 13 to (human and english language)

  15. from 14 keep 1-1272

Risk Factors—Database: MEDLINE (1996 to Present)

  1. exp RISK/

  2. exp HIV Infections/mo, ep, eh, et, tm, pc [Mortality, Epidemiology, Ethnology, Etiology, Transmission, Prevention & Control]

  3. 1 and 2

  4. limit 3 to (human and english language and (clinical trial or guideline or meta-analysis or multicenter study or practice guideline))

  5. exp HIV/

  6. 1 and 5

  7. limit 6 to (human and english language and (clinical trial or guideline or meta-analysis or multicenter study or practice guideline))

  8. 4 or 7

  9. exp Evaluation Studies/

  10. Comparative Study/

  11. exp Epidemiologic Studies/

  12. 9 or 10 or 11

  13. (3 or 6) and 12

  14. limit 13 to (human and english language)

  15. from 8 keep 1-573

Screening—Database: MEDLINE (1996 to Present)

  1. exp AIDS Serodiagnosis/

  2. exp HIV SERONEGATIVITY/ or exp HIV ANTIGENS/ or exp HIV/ or exp HIV SEROPREVALENCE/ or exp HIV SEROPOSITIVITY/ or exp HIV ANTIBODIES/

  3. exp Mass Screening/

  4. 2 and 3

  5. 1 or 4

  6. exp “Sensitivity and Specificity”/

  7. 5 and 6

  8. ae.fs.

  9. exp stress, psychological/

  10. Life Change Events/

  11. exp prejudice/ or prejudic$.mp.

  12. 8 or 9 or 10 or 11

  13. 5 and 12

  14. exp diagnostic errors/

  15. 5 and 14

  16. 7 or 13 or 15

  17. exp Evaluation Studies/

  18. Comparative Study/

  19. exp longitudinal studies/

  20. 17 or 18 or 19

  21. 16 and 20

  22. limit 16 to (clinical trial or guideline or meta-analysis or multicenter study or practice guideline or review)

  23. 22 or 21

  24. limit 23 to (human and english language)

  25. limit 23 to (human and abstracts)

  26. 24 or 25

  27. from 26 keep 1-247

Antiviral Drug—Database: MEDLINE (1998 to Present)

  1. exp HIV Infections/dt [Drug Therapy]

  2. exp HIV/de [Drug Effects]

  3. 1 or 2

  4. exp Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitors/ad, tu

  5. exp HIV Protease Inhibitors/ad, tu

  6. exp antihiv agents/ad, tu

  7. 4 or 5 or 6

  8. 3 and 7

  9. limit 8 to (human and english language and (clinical trial or guideline or meta-analysis or multicenter study or practice guideline))

  10. exp Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitors/ae, ct, to, po

  11. exp HIV Protease Inhibitors/ae, ct, to, po

  12. exp antihiv agents/ae, ct, to, to

  13. 10 or 11 or 12

  14. 3 and 13

  15. limit 14 to (human and english language and (clinical trial or guideline or meta-analysis or multicenter study or practice guideline))

  16. 14 and exp epidemiologic studies/

  17. 14 and (exp evaluation studies/ or exp comparative study/)

  18. 16 or 17

  19. limit 18 to (human and english language)

  20. 15 or 19

  21. limit 9 to yr = 1998-2003

  22. from 21 keep 1-1157

Adverse Effects—Database: MEDLINE (1998 to Present)

  1. exp HIV Infections/dt [Drug Therapy]

  2. exp HIV/de [Drug Effects]

  3. 1 or 2

  4. exp Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitors/ad, tu

  5. exp HIV Protease Inhibitors/ad, tu

  6. exp antihiv agents/ad, tu

  7. 4 or 5 or 6

  8. 3 and 7

  9. limit 8 to (human and english language and (clinical trial or guideline or meta-analysis or multicenter study or practice guideline))

  10. exp Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitors/ae, ct, to, po

  11. exp HIV Protease Inhibitors/ae, ct, to, po

  12. exp antihiv agents/ae, ct, to, to

  13. 10 or 11 or 12

  14. 3 and 13

  15. limit 14 to (human and english language and (clinical trial or guideline or meta-analysis or multicenter study or practice guideline))

  16. 14 and exp epidemiologic studies/

  17. 14 and (exp evaluation studies/ or exp comparative study/)

  18. 16 or 17

  19. limit 18 to (human and english language)

  20. 15 or 19

  21. limit 9 to yr = 1998-2003

  22. from 21 keep 1-1157

  23. limit 20 to yr = 1998-2003

  24. from 23 keep 1-732

  25. from 24 keep 1-732

Work-up—Database: MEDLINE (1998 to Present)

  1. exp HIV/

  2. viral load.mp. or Viral Load/

  3. VIREMIA/

  4. exp HIV Infections/

  5. 1 or 4

  6. 2 or 3

  7. 5 and 6

  8. (exp leukocyte count/ and cd4.mp.) or exp cd4 lymphocyte count/

  9. exp “pathologic conditions, signs and symptoms”/ or disease progression/

  10. 7 and 8 and 9

  11. exp “sensitivity and specificity”/

  12. 10 and 11

  13. exp epidemiologic studies/

  14. 10 and 13

  15. limit 10 to (human and english language and (clinical trial or guideline or meta-analysis or multicenter study or practice guideline))

  16. limit 14 to (human and english language)

  17. 15 or 16

  18. from 17 keep 1-232

Maternal—Database: MEDLINE (1996 to Present)

  1. exp HIV/ or exp HIV INFECTIONS/

  2. exp Anti-HIV Agents/ad, ae, po, ct, tu, to [Administration & Dosage, Adverse Effects, Poisoning, Contraindications, Therapeutic Use, Toxicity]

  3. exp Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitors/ad, ae, po, ct, tu, to [Administration & Dosage, Adverse Effects, Poisoning, Contraindications, Therapeutic Use, Toxicity]

  4. exp HIV Protease Inhibitors/ad, ae, po, tu, ct, to [Administration & Dosage, Adverse Effects, Poisoning, Therapeutic Use, Contraindications, Toxicity]

  5. 1 and (2 or 3 or 4)

  6. exp Disease Transmission, Vertical/

  7. exp HIV Infections/tm

  8. pregnancy complications/ or exp pregnancy complications, infectious/

  9. exp Pregnancy/

  10. 6 or 7

  11. 8 or 9

  12. 10 and 11

  13. 5 and 12

  14. limit 13 to (human and english language and (clinical trial or guideline or meta-analysis or multicenter study or practice guideline))

  15. exp Evaluation Studies/

  16. Comparative Study/

  17. exp Epidemiologic Studies/

  18. 15 or 16 or 17

  19. 13 and 18

  20. limit 19 to (human and english language)

  21. 14 or 20

  22. from 21 keep 1-373

Cesarean—Database: MEDLINE (1996 to Present)

  1. exp HIV/ or exp HIV INFECTIONS/

  2. exp Anti-HIV Agents/ad, ae, po, ct, tu, to [Administration & Dosage, Adverse Effects, Poisoning, Contraindications, Therapeutic Use, Toxicity]

  3. exp Reverse Transcriptase Inhibitors/ad, ae, po, ct, tu, to [Administration & Dosage, Adverse Effects, Poisoning, Contraindications, Therapeutic Use, Toxicity]

  4. exp HIV Protease Inhibitors/ad, ae, po, tu, ct, to [Administration & Dosage, Adverse Effects, Poisoning, Therapeutic Use, Contraindications, Toxicity]

  5. exp cesarean section/

  6. 1 and (2 or 3 or 4 or 5)

  7. exp Disease Transmission, Vertical/

  8. exp HIV Infections/tm

  9. pregnancy complications/ or exp pregnancy complications, infectious/

  10. exp Pregnancy/

  11. 7 or 8

  12. 9 or 10

  13. 11 and 12

  14. 6 and 13

  15. limit 14 to (human and english language and (clinical trial or guideline or meta-analysis or multicenter study or practice guideline))

  16. exp Evaluation Studies/

  17. Comparative Study/

  18. exp Epidemiologic Studies/

  19. 16 or 17 or 18

  20. 14 and 19

  21. limit 20 to (human and english language)

  22. 15 or 21

Cost of Screening—Database: MEDLINE (1996 to Present)

  1. exp HIV Infections/

  2. exp HIV/

  3. 1 or 2

  4. exp “Costs and Cost Analysis”/

  5. 3 and 4

  6. Comparative Study/

  7. exp Evaluation Studies/

  8. exp epidemiologic study characteristics/

  9. 5 and (6 or 7 or 8)

  10. limit 9 to (human and english language)

  11. exp Mass Screening/

  12. 9 and 11

  13. 5 and 11

  14. limit 13 to (human and english language)

  15. ec.fs.

  16. 3 and 15

  17. 16 and 11

  18. limit 17 to (human and english language)

  19. 14 or 18

  20. from 19 keep 1-179

Systematic Reviews—Database: PubMed

  1. hiv/de [mh] OR hiv infections/dt [mh]

  2. anti hiv agents[pa] OR reverse transcriptase inhibitors[pa] OR hiv protease inhibitors [pa]

  3. #1 OR #2

  4. evaluation studies[mh] OR epidemiologic studies[mh] OR comparative study [mh]

  5. #3 AND #4

  6. tu[sh] OR ad[sh] OR ae[sh] OR to[sh] OR po[sh] OR ct[sh]

  7. #5 AND #6

  8. #7 AND systematic [sb]

  9. #8 AND Limits: Publication Date from 1989 to 1997, English, Human

Note: Systematic [sb] represents the following strategy as taken from the Clinical Queries search help page within PubMed.

((systematic review$ OR systematic literature review$ OR meta-analysis.pt. OR meta-analysis.ti. OR meta-analysis.ti. OR meta-analyses.ti. OR evidence-based medicine OR (evidence-based AND (guideline.tw. OR guidelines.tw. OR recommendations)) OR (evidenced-based AND (guideline.tw. OR guidelines.tw. OR recommendation$)) OR consensus development conference.pt. OR health planning guidelines OR guideline.pt. OR cochrane database syst rev OR acp journal club OR health technol assess OR evid rep technol assess summ OR evid based nurs OR evid based ment health OR clin evid) OR ((systematic.tw. OR systematically OR critical.tw. OR (study.tw. AND selection.tw.) OR (predetermined OR inclusion AND criteri$.tw.) OR exclusion criteri$ OR main outcome measures OR standard of care) AND (survey.tw. OR surveys.tw. OR overview$ OR review.tw. OR reviews OR search$ OR handsearch OR analysis.tw. OR critique.tw. OR appraisal OR (reduction AND risk AND (death OR recurrence))) AND (literature.tw. OR articles OR publications.tw. OR publication.tw. OR bibliography.tw. OR bibliographies OR published OR unpublished OR citation OR citations OR database OR internet.tw. OR textbooks.tw. OR references OR trials OR meta-analysis.mh. OR (clinical.tw. AND studies) OR treatment outcome)) NOT (case report.ti. OR case report.mh. OR editorial.ti. OR editorial.pt. OR letter.pt. OR newspaper article.pt.))

Appendix C. USPSTF Quality Rating Criteria
Diagnostic Accuracy Studies
Criteria

  1. Screening test relevant, available for primary care, adequately described.

  2. Credible reference standard, performed regardless of test results.

  3. Reference standard interpreted independently of screening test.

  4. Indeterminate results handled in a reasonable manner.

  5. Spectrum of patients included in study.

  6. Sample size.

  7. Administration of reliable screening test.

Definition of Ratings Based on Above Criteria

Good: Evaluates relevant available screening test; uses a credible reference standard; interprets reference standard independently of screening test; assesses reliability of test; has few or handles indeterminate results in a reasonable manner; includes large number (>100) broad-spectrum patients with and without disease.

Fair: Evaluates relevant available screening test; uses reasonable although not best standard; interprets reference standard independently of screening test; has moderate sample size (50 to 100 participants), and includes a “medium” spectrum of patients.

Poor: Has important limitations, such as inappropriate reference standard, improperly administered screening test, biased ascertainment of reference standard, or very small sample size of very narrow selected spectrum of patients.

Randomized, Controlled Trials and Cohort Studies
Criteria

  1. Initial assembly of comparable groups: randomized, controlled trials—adequate randomization, including concealment and statement of whether potential confounders were distributed equally among groups; cohort studies—consideration of potential confounders with either restriction or measurement for adjustment in the analysis; consideration of inception cohorts.

  2. Maintenance of comparable groups (includes attrition, crossovers, adherence, and contamination).

  3. Important differential loss to follow-up or overall high loss to follow-up.

  4. Measurements: equal, reliable, and valid (includes masking of outcome assessment).

  5. Clear definition of interventions.

  6. Important outcomes considered.

  7. Analysis: adjustment for potential confounders for cohort studies, or intention-to-treat analysis for randomized, controlled trials.

Definition of Ratings Based on Above Criteria

Good: Meets all criteria—comparable groups are assembled initially and maintained throughout the study (follow-up ≥80%), reliable and valid measurement instruments are used and applied equally to the groups, interventions are spelled out clearly, important outcomes are considered, and appropriate attention to confounders in analysis.

Fair: Studies will be graded “fair” if any or all of the following problems occur, without the important limitations noted in the “poor” category below: Generally comparable groups are assembled initially but some question remains as to whether some (although not major) differences occurred in follow-up, measurement instruments are acceptable (although not the best) and generally applied equally, some but not all important outcomes are considered, and some but not all potential confounders are accounted for.

Poor: Studies will be graded “poor” if any of the following major limitations exists: Groups assembled initially are not close to being comparable or maintained throughout the study, unreliable or invalid measurement instruments are used or not applied at all equally among groups (including failure to mask outcome assessment), and key confounders are given little or no attention.

Case–Control Studies
Criteria

  1. Accurate ascertainment of cases.

  2. Nonbiased selection of case-patients and controls, with exclusion criteria applied equally to both.

  3. Response rate.

  4. Diagnostic testing procedures applied equally to each group.

  5. Measurement of exposure accurate and applied equally to each group.

  6. Appropriate attention to potential confounding variable.

Definition of Ratings Based on Above Criteria

Good: Appropriate ascertainment of cases and nonbiased selection of case-patients and controls, exclusion criteria applied equally to case-patients and controls, response rate of 80% or greater, diagnostic procedures and measurements accurate and applied equally to case-patients and controls, and appropriate attention to confounding variables.

Fair: Recent, relevant, without major apparent selection or diagnostic work-up bias but with response rate less than 80% or attention to some but not all important confounding variables.

Poor: Major selection or diagnostic work-up biases, response rates less than 50%, or inattention to confounding variables.

Wortley PM, Fleming PL.  AIDS in women in the United States. Recent trends. JAMA. 1997; 278:911-6. PubMed
CrossRef
 
Lee LM, Fleming PL.  Trends in human immunodeficiency virus diagnoses among women in the United States, 1994-1998. J Am Med Womens Assoc. 2001; 56:94-9. PubMed
 
Lindegren ML, Byers RH Jr, Thomas P, Davis SF, Caldwell B, Rogers M. et al.  Trends in perinatal transmission of HIV/AIDS in the United States. JAMA. 1999; 282:531-8. PubMed
 
Bulterys M, Nolan ML, Jamieson DJ, Dominguez K, Fowler MG.  Advances in the prevention of mother-to-child HIV-1 transmission: current issues, future challenges. AIDScience. 2002. Accessed athttp://www.aidscience.org/Articles/aidscience017.aspon 22 March 2005.
 
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.  Reducing obstetrician barriers to offering HIV testing. 2002. Accessed athttp://www.cdc.gov/hiv/projects/perinatal/materials/ps_oig.pdfon 22 March 2005.
 
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.  HIV/AIDS Surveillance Report. 2003 (Volume 15). Accessed athttp://www.cdc.gov/hiv/stats/2003SurveillanceReport.pdfon 22 March 2005.
 
.  Revised recommendations for HIV screening of pregnant women. MMWR Recomm Rep. 2001; 50:63-85; quiz CE1-19a2-CE6-19a2. PubMed
 
Mandelbrot L, Mayaux MJ, Bongain A, Berrebi A, Moudoub-Jeanpetit Y, Benifla JL. et al.  Obstetric factors and mother-to-child transmission of human immunodeficiency virus type 1: the French perinatal cohorts. SEROGEST French Pediatric HIV Infection Study Group. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1996; 175:661-7. PubMed
 
Dunn DT, Newell ML, Ades AE, Peckham CS.  Risk of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 transmission through breastfeeding. Lancet. 1992; 340:585-8. PubMed
 
Nduati R.  Breastfeeding and HIV-1 infection. A review of current literature. Adv Exp Med Biol. 2000; 478:201-10. PubMed
 
Mofenson LM, Lambert JS, Stiehm ER, Bethel J, Meyer WA 3rd, Whitehouse J. et al.  Risk factors for perinatal transmission of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 in women treated with zidovudine. Pediatric AIDS Clinical Trials Group Study 185 Team. N Engl J Med. 1999; 341:385-93. PubMed
 
Shapiro DE, Sperling RS, Mandelbrot L, Britto P, Cunningham BE.  Risk factors for perinatal human immunodeficiency virus transmission in patients receiving zidovudine prophylaxis. Pediatric AIDS Clinical Trials Group protocol 076 Study Group. Obstet Gynecol. 1999; 94:897-908. PubMed
 
Garcia PM, Kalish LA, Pitt J, Minkoff H, Quinn TC, Burchett SK. et al.  Maternal levels of plasma human immunodeficiency virus type 1 RNA and the risk for perinatal transmission. Women and Infants Transmission Study Group. N Engl J Med. 1999; 341:394-402. PubMed
 
.  Mother-to-child transmission of human immunodeficiency virus in Italy: temporal trends and determinants of infection. The Italian Collaborative Study on HIV infection in pregnancy. Hum Reprod. 1999; 14:242-6. PubMed
 
.  HIV-infected pregnant women and vertical transmission in Europe since 1986. European collaborative study. AIDS. 2001; 15:761-70. PubMed
 
Mofenson LM.  Advances in the prevention of vertical transmission of human immunodeficiency virus. Semin Pediatr Infect Dis. 2003; 14:295-308. PubMed
 
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.  Public Health Service Task Force recommendations for use of antiretroviral drugs in pregnant HIV-1-infected women for maternal health and interventions to reduce perinatal HIV-1 transmission in the United States. 2005. Accessed athttp://aidsinfo.nih.gov/guidelines/perinatal/PER_022405.pdfon 22 March 2005.
 
U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.  Guide to Clinical Preventive Services. 2nd ed. Alexandria, VA: International Medical Publishing; 1996.
 
Chou R, Smits AK, Huffman LH, Fu R, Korthuis PT.  Screening for human immunodeficiency virus in pregnant women: systematic evidence synthesis. Available athttp://www.ahrq.gov/clinic.
 
ACOG committee opinion.  Scheduled cesarean delivery and the prevention of vertical transmission of HIV infection. Number 219, August 1999. Committee on Obstetric Practice. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 1999; 66:305-6. PubMed
 
Kaplan JE, Masur H, Holmes KK.  Guidelines for preventing opportunistic infections among HIV-infected persons—2002. Recommendations of the U.S. Public Health Service and the Infectious Diseases Society of America. MMWR Recomm Rep. 2002; 51:1-52. PubMed
 
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.  Recommended adult immunization schedule by age group and medical conditions. United States, 2003-2004. 2003. Accessed athttp://www.cdc.gov/nip/recs/adult-schedule.pdfon 28 June 2004.
 
.  Revised guidelines for HIV counseling, testing, and referral. MMWR Recomm Rep. 2001; 50:1-57; quiz CE1-19a1-CE6-19a1. PubMed
 
Harris RP, Helfand M, Woolf SH, Lohr KN, Mulrow CD, Teutsch SM. et al.  Current methods of the US Preventive Services Task Force: a review of the process. Am J Prev Med. 2001; 20:21-35. PubMed
 
U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.  Screening for human immunodeficiency virus infection. In: Guide to Clinical Preventive Services. Accessed athttp://www.ahrq.gov/clinic/2ndcps/hiv.pdfon 11 March 2005.
 
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.  AIDS cases, deaths, and persons living with AIDS by year, 1985-2002—United States. HIV/AIDS Surveillance Report. 2002 (Volume 14). Accessed athttp://www.cdc.gov/hiv/stats/hasr1402.htmon 2 December 2004.
 
Peterman TA, Todd KA, Mupanduki I.  Opportunities for targeting publicly funded human immunodeficiency virus counseling and testing. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr Hum Retrovirol. 1996; 12:69-74. PubMed
 
Fehrs LJ, Fleming D, Foster LR, McAlister RO, Fox V, Modesitt S. et al.  Trial of anonymous versus confidential human immunodeficiency virus testing. Lancet. 1988; 2:379-82. PubMed
 
Barbacci MB, Dalabetta GA, Repke JT, Talbot BL, Charache P, Polk BF. et al.  Human immunodeficiency virus infection in women attending an inner-city prenatal clinic: ineffectiveness of targeted screening. Sex Transm Dis. 1990; 17:122-6. PubMed
 
Pulver WP, Glebatis D, Wade N, Birkhead GS, Smith P.  Trends from an HIV seroprevalence study among childbearing women in New York State from 1988 through 2000: a valuable epidemiologic tool. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2004; 158:443-8. PubMed
 
Hawken J, Chard T, Jeffries DJ, Costeloe K, Grant K, Ward F. et al.  Evaluation of an antenatal HIV testing programme in an inner London health district. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1994; 101:960-4. PubMed
 
Ellerbrock TV, Lieb S, Harrington PE, Bush TJ, Schoenfisch SA, Oxtoby MJ. et al.  Heterosexually transmitted human immunodeficiency virus infection among pregnant women in a rural Florida community. N Engl J Med. 1992; 327:1704-9. PubMed
 
Lindsay MK, Peterson HB, Feng TI, Slade BA, Willis S, Klein L.  Routine antepartum human immunodeficiency virus infection screening in an inner-city population. Obstet Gynecol. 1989; 74:289-94. PubMed
 
Fehrs LJ, Hill D, Kerndt PR, Rose TP, Henneman C.  Targeted HIV screening at a Los Angeles prenatal/family planning health center. Am J Public Health. 1991; 81:619-22. PubMed
 
Landesman S, Minkoff H, Holman S, McCalla S, Sijin O.  Serosurvey of human immunodeficiency virus infection in parturients. Implications for human immunodeficiency virus testing programs of pregnant women. JAMA. 1987; 258:2701-3. PubMed
 
.  U.S. Public Health Service recommendations for human immunodeficiency virus counseling and voluntary testing for pregnant women. MMWR Recomm Rep. 1995; 44:1-15. PubMed
 
.  Perinatal human immunodeficiency virus testing. Provisional Committee on Pediatric AIDS, American Academy of Pediatrics. Pediatrics. 1995; 95:303-7. PubMed
 
Wortley PM, Lindegren ML, Fleming PL.  Successful implementation of perinatal HIV prevention guidelines: a multistate surveillance evaluation. MMWR Recomm Rep. 2001; 50: (RR-6) 17-28. PubMed
 
Lewis R, O'Brien JM, Ray DT, Sibai BM.  The impact of initiating a human immunodeficiency virus screening program in an urban obstetric population. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1995; 173:1329-33. PubMed
 
Mercey D, Helps BA, Copas A, Petruckevitch A, Johnson AM, Spencer J.  Voluntary universal antenatal HIV testing. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1996; 103:1129-33. PubMed
 
.  From the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Interpretation and use of the western blot assay for serodiagnosis of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 infections. JAMA. 1989; 262:3395-7. PubMed
 
.  Update: serologic testing for HIV-1 antibody—United States, 1988 and 1989. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 1990; 39:380-3. PubMed
 
Kleinman S, Busch MP, Hall L, Thomson R, Glynn S, Gallahan D. et al.  False-positive HIV-1 test results in a low-risk screening setting of voluntary blood donation. Retrovirus Epidemiology Donor Study. JAMA. 1998; 280:1080-5. PubMed
 
Celum CL, Coombs RW, Jones M, Murphy V, Fisher L, Grant C. et al.  Risk factors for repeatedly reactive HIV-1 EIA and indeterminate western blots. A population-based case–control study. Arch Intern Med. 1994; 154:1129-37. PubMed
 
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.  Rapid HIV antibody testing during labor and delivery for women of unknown HIV status. 2004. Accessed athttp://www.cdc.gov/hiv/rapid_testing/materials/Labor&DeliveryRapidTesting.pdfon 20 July 2004.
 
.  Update: HIV counseling and testing using rapid tests—United States, 1995. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 1998; 47:211-5. PubMed
 
Bulterys M, Jamieson DJ, O'Sullivan MJ, Cohen MH, Maupin R, Nesheim S. et al.  Rapid HIV-1 testing during labor: a multicenter study. JAMA. 2004; 292:219-23. PubMed
 
Webber MP, Demas P, Enriquez E, Shanker R, Oleszko W, Beatrice ST. et al.  Pilot study of expedited HIV-1 testing of women in labor at an inner-city hospital in New York City. Am J Perinatol. 2001; 18:49-57. PubMed
 
Ramalingam S, Kannangai R, Raj AA, Jesudason MV, Sridharan G.  Rapid particle agglutination test for human immunodeficiency virus: hospital-based evaluation. J Clin Microbiol. 2002; 40:1553-4. PubMed
 
Chalermchockcharoenkit A, Louisirirotchnakul S, Roongpisuthipong A, Sirimai K, Sutchritpongsa P, Wasi C.  Rapid human immunodeficiency virus diagnostic test during the intrapartum period in pregnant women who did not receive antenatal care. J Med Assoc Thai. 2002; 85:703-8. PubMed
 
Lien TX, Tien NT, Chanpong GF, Cuc CT, Yen VT, Soderquist R. et al.  Evaluation of rapid diagnostic tests for the detection of human immunodeficiency virus types 1 and 2, hepatitis B surface antigen, and syphilis in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2000; 62:301-9. PubMed
 
Mashu A, Mbizvo MT, Makura E, Bopoto R, Madzime S, Chipato T. et al.  Evaluation of rapid on-site clinic HIV test, combined with counselling [Letter]. AIDS. 1997; 11:932-3. PubMed
 
Koblavi-Deme S, Maurice C, Yavo D, Sibailly TS, N'guessan K, Kamelan-Tano Y. et al.  Sensitivity and specificity of human immunodeficiency virus rapid serologic assays and testing algorithms in an antenatal clinic in Abidjan, Ivory Coast. J Clin Microbiol. 2001; 39:1808-12. PubMed
 
O'Connell RJ, Merritt TM, Malia JA, VanCott TC, Dolan MJ, Zahwa H. et al.  Performance of the OraQuick rapid antibody test for diagnosis of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 infection in patients with various levels of exposure to highly active antiretroviral therapy. J Clin Microbiol. 2003; 41:2153-5. PubMed
 
Uni-Gold Recombigen HIV. [Package insert, #045-138]. Bray, Ireland: Trinity Biotech; rev. 03/04.
 
Reveal Rapid HIV-1 Antibody Test. [Package insert, #FDAINS0065]. Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada: MedMira Laboratories; rev. 0/4.
 
Reynolds SJ, Ndongala LM, Luo CC, Mwandagalirwa K, Losoma AJ, Mwamba KJ. et al.  Evaluation of a rapid test for the detection of antibodies to human immunodeficiency virus type 1 and 2 in the setting of multiple transmitted viral subtypes. Int J STD AIDS. 2002; 13:171-3. PubMed
 
OraQuick Rapid HIV-1 Antibody Test [Package insert, #3001-0951]. Bethlehem, PA: OraSure Technologies; rev. 10/03.
 
Bhore AV, Sastry J, Patke D, Gupte N, Bulakh PM, Lele S. et al.  Sensitivity and specificity of rapid HIV testing of pregnant women in India. Int J STD AIDS. 2003; 14:37-41. PubMed
 
Sansom SL, Jamieson DJ, Farnham PG, Bulterys M, Fowler MG.  Human immunodeficiency virus retesting during pregnancy: costs and effectiveness in preventing perinatal transmission. Obstet Gynecol. 2003; 102:782-90. PubMed
 
Sheon AR, Fox HE, Alexander G, Buck A, Higgins A, McDermott SM. et al.  Misdiagnosed HIV infection in pregnant women: implications for clinical care. Public Health Rep. 1994; 109:694-9. PubMed
 
Doran TI, Parra E.  False-positive and indeterminate human immunodeficiency virus test results in pregnant women. Arch Fam Med. 2000; 9:924-9. PubMed
 
Samson L, King S.  Evidence-based guidelines for universal counselling and offering of HIV testing in pregnancy in Canada. CMAJ. 1998; 158:1449-57. PubMed
 
Lester P, Partridge JC, Chesney MA, Cooke M.  The consequences of a positive prenatal HIV antibody test for women. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr Hum Retrovirol. 1995; 10:341-9. PubMed
 
Koenig LJ, Whitaker DJ, Royce RA, Wilson TE, Callahan MR, Fernandez MI. et al.  Violence during pregnancy among women with or at risk for HIV infection. Am J Public Health. 2002; 92:367-70. PubMed
 
Green L, Ardron C, Catalan J.  HIV, childbirth and suicidal behaviour: a review. Hosp Med. 2000; 61:311-4. PubMed
 
Nakchbandi IA, Longenecker JC, Ricksecker MA, Latta RA, Healton C, Smith DG.  A decision analysis of mandatory compared with voluntary HIV testing in pregnant women. Ann Intern Med. 1998; 128:760-7. PubMed
 
Irwin KL, Valdiserri RO, Holmberg SD.  The acceptability of voluntary HIV antibody testing in the United States: a decade of lessons learned. AIDS. 1996; 10:1707-17. PubMed
 
.  HIV testing among pregnant women—United States and Canada, 1998-2001. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2002; 51:1013-6. PubMed
 
Lansky A, Jones JL, Frey RL, Lindegren ML.  Trends in HIV testing among pregnant women: United States, 1994-1999. Am J Public Health. 2001; 91:1291-3. PubMed
 
Simpson WM, Johnstone FD, Boyd FM, Goldberg DJ, Hart GJ, Gormley SM. et al.  A randomised controlled trial of different approaches to universal antenatal HIV testing: uptake and acceptability and Annex: Antenatal HIV testing—assessment of a routine voluntary approach. Health Technol Assess. 1999; 3:1-112. PubMed
 
Lindsay MK, Adefris W, Peterson HB, Williams H, Johnson J, Klein L.  Determinants of acceptance of routine voluntary human immunodeficiency virus testing in an inner-city prenatal population. Obstet Gynecol. 1991; 78:678-80. PubMed
 
Royce RA, Walter EB, Fernandez MI, Wilson TE, Ickovics JR, Simonds RJ. et al.  Barriers to universal prenatal HIV testing in 4 US locations in 1997. Am J Public Health. 2001; 91:727-33. PubMed
 
Stringer EM, Stringer JS, Cliver SP, Goldenberg RL, Goepfert AR.  Evaluation of a new testing policy for human immunodeficiency virus to improve screening rates. Obstet Gynecol. 2001; 98:1104-8. PubMed
 
Jayaraman GC, Preiksaitis JK, Larke B.  Mandatory reporting of HIV infection and opt-out prenatal screening for HIV infection: effect on testing rates. CMAJ. 2003; 168:679-82. PubMed
 
Joo E, Carmack A, Garcia-Buñuel E, Kelly CJ.  Implementation of guidelines for HIV counseling and voluntary HIV testing of pregnant women. Am J Public Health. 2000; 90:273-6. PubMed
 
Malonza IM, Richardson BA, Kreiss JK, Bwayo JJ, Stewart GC.  The effect of rapid HIV-1 testing on uptake of perinatal HIV-1 interventions: a randomized clinical trial. AIDS. 2003; 17:113-8. PubMed
 
.  Prenatal HIV testing and antiretroviral prophylaxis at an urban hospital—Atlanta, Georgia, 1997-2000. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2004; 52:1245-8. PubMed
 
.  Progress toward elimination of perinatal HIV infection—Michigan, 1993-2000. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2002; 51:93-7. PubMed
 
Wade NA, Zielinski MA, Butsashvili M, McNutt LA, Warren BL, Glaros R. et al.  Decline in perinatal HIV transmission in New York state (1997–2000). J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2004; 36:1075-1082. PubMed
 
Fiscus SA, Adimora AA, Funk ML, Schoenbach VJ, Tristram D, Lim W. et al.  Trends in interventions to reduce perinatal human immunodeficiency virus type 1 transmission in North Carolina. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2002; 21:664-8. PubMed
 
Cooper ER, Charurat M, Mofenson L, Hanson IC, Pitt J, Diaz C. et al.  Combination antiretroviral strategies for the treatment of pregnant HIV-1-infected women and prevention of perinatal HIV-1 transmission. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2002; 29:484-94. PubMed
 
Dominguez KL, Lindegren ML, D'Almada PJ, Peters VB, Frederick T, Rakusan TA. et al.  Increasing trend of Cesarean deliveries in HIV-infected women in the United States from 1994 to 2000. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2003; 33:232-8. PubMed
 
Working Group on Mother-to-Child Transmission of HIV.  Rates of mother-to-child transmission of HIV-1 in Africa, America, and Europe: results from 13 perinatal studies. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr Hum Retrovirol. 1995; 8:506-10. PubMed
 
Connor EM, Sperling RS, Gelber R, Kiselev P, Scott G, O'Sullivan MJ. et al.  Reduction of maternal-infant transmission of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 with zidovudine treatment. Pediatric AIDS Clinical Trials Group Protocol 076 Study Group. N Engl J Med. 1994; 331:1173-80. PubMed
 
Brocklehurst P.  Interventions for reducing the risk of mother-to-child transmission of HIV infection. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2002; 1:CD000102. PubMed
 
Hitti J, Frenkel LM, Stek AM. et al.  Maternal toxicity with continuous nevirapine in pregnancy: results from PACTG 1022. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2004; 36:772-776. PubMed
 
.  Determinants of mother-to-infant human immunodeficiency virus 1 transmission before and after the introduction of zidovudine prophylaxis. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2002; 156:915-21. PubMed
 
.  Mother-to-child transmission of HIV infection in the era of highly active antiretroviral therapy. Clin Infect Dis. 2005; 40:458-65. PubMed
 
Mandelbrot L, Landreau-Mascaro A, Rekacewicz C, Berrebi A, Benifla JL, Burgard M. et al.  Lamivudine-zidovudine combination for prevention of maternal-infant transmission of HIV-1. JAMA. 2001; 285:2083-93. PubMed
 
Dorenbaum A, Cunningham CK, Gelber RD, Culnane M, Mofenson L, Britto P. et al.  Two-dose intrapartum/newborn nevirapine and standard antiretroviral therapy to reduce perinatal HIV transmission: a randomized trial. JAMA. 2002; 288:189-98. PubMed
 
Lallemant M, Jourdain G, Le Coeur S, Mary JY, Ngo-Giang-Huong N, Koetsawang S. et al.  Single-dose perinatal nevirapine plus standard zidovudine to prevent mother-to-child transmission of HIV-1 in Thailand. N Engl J Med. 2004; 351:217-28. PubMed
 
Lallemant M, Jourdain G, Le Coeur S, Kim S, Koetsawang S, Comeau AM. et al.  A trial of shortened zidovudine regimens to prevent mother-to-child transmission of human immunodeficiency virus type 1. Perinatal HIV Prevention Trial (Thailand) Investigators. N Engl J Med. 2000; 343:982-91. PubMed
 
Shaffer N, Chuachoowong R, Mock PA, Bhadrakom C, Siriwasin W, Young NL. et al.  Short-course zidovudine for perinatal HIV-1 transmission in Bangkok, Thailand: a randomised controlled trial. Bangkok Collaborative Perinatal HIV Transmission Study Group. Lancet. 1999; 353:773-80. PubMed
 
.  Efficacy of three short-course regimens of zidovudine and lamivudine in preventing early and late transmission of HIV-1 from mother to child in Tanzania, South Africa, and Uganda (Petra study): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Lancet. 2002; 359:1178-86. PubMed
 
Wiktor SZ, Ekpini E, Karon JM, Nkengasong J, Maurice C, Severin ST. et al.  Short-course oral zidovudine for prevention of mother-to-child transmission of HIV-1 in Abidjan, Cote d'Ivoire: a randomised trial. Lancet. 1999; 353:781-5. PubMed
 
Dabis F, Msellati P, Meda N, Welffens-Ekra C, You B, Manigart O. et al.  6-month efficacy, tolerance, and acceptability of a short regimen of oral zidovudine to reduce vertical transmission of HIV in breastfed children in Cote d'Ivoire and Burkina Faso: a double-blind placebo-controlled multicentre trial. DITRAME Study Group. Diminution de la Transmission Mere-Enfant. Lancet. 1999; 353:786-92. PubMed
 
Moodley D, Moodley J, Coovadia H, Gray G, McIntyre J, Hofmyer J. et al.  A multicenter randomized, controlled trial of nevirapine versus a combination of zidovudine and lamivudine to reduce intrapartum and early postpartum mother-to-child transmission of human immunodeficiency virus type 1. J Infect Dis. 2003; 187:725-35. PubMed
 
Taha TE, Kumwenda NI, Gibbons A, Broadhead RL, Fiscus S, Lema V. et al.  Short postexposure prophylaxis in newborn babies to reduce mother-to-child transmission of HIV-1: NVAZ randomised clinical trial. Lancet. 2003; 362:1171-7. PubMed
 
Jackson JB, Musoke P, Fleming T, Guay LA, Bagenda D, Allen M. et al.  Intrapartum and neonatal single-dose nevirapine compared with zidovudine for prevention of mother-to-child transmission of HIV-1 in Kampala, Uganda: 18-month follow-up of the HIVNET 012 randomised trial. Lancet. 2003; 362:859-68. PubMed
 
Taha TE, Kumwenda NI, Hoover DR, Fiscus SA, Kafulafula G, Nkhoma C. et al.  Nevirapine and zidovudine at birth to reduce perinatal transmission of HIV in an African setting: a randomized, controlled trial. JAMA. 2004; 292:202-9. PubMed
 
Guay LA, Musoke P, Fleming T, Bagenda D, Allen M, Nakabiito C. et al.  Intrapartum and neonatal single-dose nevirapine compared with zidovudine for prevention of mother-to-child transmission of HIV-1 in Kampala, Uganda: HIVNET 012 randomised trial. Lancet. 1999; 354:795-802. PubMed
 
John GC, Richardson BA, Nduati RW, Mbori-Ngacha D, Kreiss JK.  Timing of breast milk HIV-1 transmission: a meta-analysis. East Afr Med J. 2001; 78:75-9. PubMed
 
Coutsoudis A, Dabis F, Fawzi W, Gaillard P, Haverkamp G, Harris DR. et al.  Late postnatal transmission of HIV-1 in breast-fed children: an individual patient data meta-analysis. J Infect Dis. 2004; 189:2154-66. PubMed
 
Nduati R, John G, Mbori-Ngacha D, Richardson B, Overbaugh J, Mwatha A. et al.  Effect of breastfeeding and formula feeding on transmission of HIV-1: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2000; 283:1167-74. PubMed
 
.  Elective caesarean-section versus vaginal delivery in prevention of vertical HIV-1 transmission: a randomised clinical trial. The European Mode of Delivery Collaboration. Lancet. 1999; 353:1035-9. PubMed
 
.  The mode of delivery and the risk for vertical transmission of human immunodeficiency virus type 1—a meta-analysis of 15 prospective cohort studies. The International Perinatal HIV Group. N Engl J Med. 1999; 340:977-87. PubMed
 
Ioannidis JP, Abrams EJ, Ammann A, Bulterys M, Goedert JJ, Gray L. et al.  Perinatal transmission of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 by pregnant women with RNA virus loads <1000 copies/mL. J Infect Dis. 2001; 183:539-45. PubMed
 
Massad LS, Springer G, Jacobson L, Watts H, Anastos K, Korn A. et al.  Pregnancy rates and predictors of conception, miscarriage and abortion in US women with HIV. AIDS. 2004; 18:281-6. PubMed
 
Lindsay MK, Grant J, Peterson HB, Willis S, Nelson P, Klein L.  The impact of knowledge of human immunodeficiency virus serostatus on contraceptive choice and repeat pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol. 1995; 85:675-9. PubMed
 
Blair JM, Hanson DL, Jones JL, Dworkin MS.  Trends in pregnancy rates among women with human immunodeficiency virus. Obstet Gynecol. 2004; 103:663-8. PubMed
 
Bedimo AL, Bessinger R, Kissinger P.  Reproductive choices among HIV-positive women. Soc Sci Med. 1998; 46:171-9. PubMed
 
Temmerman M, Moses S, Kiragu D, Fusallah S, Wamola IA, Piot P.  Impact of single session postpartum counselling of HIV infected women on their subsequent reproductive behaviour. AIDS Care. 1990; 2:247-52. PubMed
 
Selwyn PA, Carter RJ, Schoenbaum EE, Robertson VJ, Klein RS, Rogers MF.  Knowledge of HIV antibody status and decisions to continue or terminate pregnancy among intravenous drug users. JAMA. 1989; 261:3567-71. PubMed
 
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.  Safety and toxicity of individual antiretroviral agents in pregnancy. 2005. Accessed athttp://aidsinfo.nih.gov/guidelines/perinatal/ST_022405.pdfon 9 March 2005.
 
Watts DH, Balasubramanian R, Maupin RT Jr, Delke I, Dorenbaum A, Fiore S. et al.  Maternal toxicity and pregnancy complications in human immunodeficiency virus-infected women receiving antiretroviral therapy: PACTG 316. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004; 190:506-16. PubMed
 
Morris AB, Cu-Uvin S, Harwell JI, Garb J, Zorrilla C, Vajaranant M. et al.  Multicenter review of protease inhibitors in 89 pregnancies. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2000; 25:306-11. PubMed
 
Edwards SG, Larbalestier N, Hay P, de Ruiter A, Welch J, Taylor GP. et al.  Experience of nevirapine use in a London cohort of HIV-infected pregnant women. HIV Med. 2001; 2:89-91. PubMed
 
Lyons F, Hopkins S, McGeary A, Sheehan G, Bergin C, Mulcahy F.  Nevirapine tolerability in HIV infected women in pregnancy—a word of caution [Abstract]. 2nd IAS Conference on HIV Pathogenesis and Treatment, Paris, 13–17 July 2003. Accessed athttp://www.iasociety.org/abstract/show.asp?abstract_id=11081on 3 May 2005.
 
Eastman PS, Shapiro DE, Coombs RW, Frenkel LM, McSherry GD, Britto P. et al.  Maternal viral genotypic zidovudine resistance and infrequent failure of zidovudine therapy to prevent perinatal transmission of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 in pediatric AIDS Clinical Trials Group Protocol 076. J Infect Dis. 1998; 177:557-64. PubMed
 
Minkoff H, Hershow R, Watts DH, Frederick M, Cheng I, Tuomala R. et al.  The relationship of pregnancy to human immunodeficiency virus disease progression. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2003; 189:552-9. PubMed
 
Bardeguez AD, Shapiro DE, Mofenson LM, Coombs R, Frenkel LM, Fowler MG. et al.  Effect of cessation of zidovudine prophylaxis to reduce vertical transmission on maternal HIV disease progression and survival. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2003; 32:170-81. PubMed
 
Sperling RS, Shapiro DE, McSherry GD, Britto P, Cunningham BE, Culnane M. et al.  Safety of the maternal-infant zidovudine regimen utilized in the Pediatric AIDS Clinical Trial Group 076 Study. AIDS. 1998; 12:1805-13. PubMed
 
Watts DH, Lambert J, Stiehm ER, Harris DR, Bethel J, Mofenson L. et al.  Progression of HIV disease among women following delivery. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2003; 33:585-93. PubMed
 
Cunningham CK, Chaix ML, Rekacewicz C, Britto P, Rouzioux C, Gelber RD. et al.  Development of resistance mutations in women receiving standard antiretroviral therapy who received intrapartum nevirapine to prevent perinatal human immunodeficiency virus type 1 transmission: a substudy of pediatric AIDS clinical trials group protocol 316. J Infect Dis. 2002; 186:181-8. PubMed
 
Eshleman SH, Mracna M, Guay LA, Deseyve M, Cunningham S, Mirochnick M. et al.  Selection and fading of resistance mutations in women and infants receiving nevirapine to prevent HIV-1 vertical transmission (HIVNET 012). AIDS. 2001; 15:1951-7. PubMed
 
Morris L, Pillay C, Chezzi C, Lupondwana P, Ntsala M, Levin L. et al.  Low frequency of the V106M mutation among HIV-1 subtype C-infected pregnant women exposed to nevirapine [Letter]. AIDS. 2003; 17:1698-700. PubMed
 
Jourdain G, Ngo-Giang-Huong N, Le Coeur S, Bowonwatanuwong C, Kantipong P, Leechanachai P. et al.  Intrapartum exposure to nevirapine and subsequent maternal responses to nevirapine-based antiretroviral therapy. N Engl J Med. 2004; 351:229-40. PubMed
 
Marcollet A, Goffinet F, Firtion G, Pannier E, Le Bret T, Brival ML. et al.  Differences in postpartum morbidity in women who are infected with the human immunodeficiency virus after elective cesarean delivery, emergency cesarean delivery, or vaginal delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2002; 186:784-9. PubMed
 
Rodriguez EJ, Spann C, Jamieson D, Lindsay M.  Postoperative morbidity associated with cesarean delivery among human immunodeficiency virus-seropositive women. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2001; 184:1108-11. PubMed
 
Semprini AE, Castagna C, Ravizza M, Fiore S, Savasi V, Muggiasca ML. et al.  The incidence of complications after caesarean section in 156 HIV-positive women. AIDS. 1995; 9:913-7. PubMed
 
Read JS, Tuomala R, Kpamegan E, Zorrilla C, Landesman S, Brown G. et al.  Mode of delivery and postpartum morbidity among HIV-infected women: the women and infants transmission study. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2001; 26:236-45. PubMed
 
Watts DH, Lambert JS, Stiehm ER, Bethel J, Whitehouse J, Fowler MG. et al.  Complications according to mode of delivery among human immunodeficiency virus-infected women with CD4 lymphocyte counts of < or = 500/microL. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2000; 183:100-7. PubMed
 
Taylor GP, Low-Beer N.  Antiretroviral therapy in pregnancy: a focus on safety. Drug Saf. 2001; 24:683-702. PubMed
 
Tuomala RE, Shapiro DE, Mofenson LM, Bryson Y, Culnane M, Hughes MD. et al.  Antiretroviral therapy during pregnancy and the risk for an adverse outcome. N Engl J Med. 2002; 346:1863-70. PubMed
 
.  Exposure to antiretroviral therapy in utero or early life: the health of uninfected children born to HIV-infected women. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2003; 32:380-7. PubMed
 
Alimenti A, Burdge DR, Ogilvie GS, Money DM, Forbes JC.  Lactic acidemia in human immunodeficiency virus-uninfected infants exposed to perinatal antiretroviral therapy. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2003; 22:782-9. PubMed
 
Poirier MC, Divi RL, Al-Harthi L, Olivero OA, Nguyen V, Walker B. et al.  Long-term mitochondrial toxicity in HIV-uninfected infants born to HIV-infected mothers. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2003; 33:175-83. PubMed
 
Divi RL, Walker VE, Wade NA, Nagashima K, Seilkop SK, Adams ME. et al.  Mitochondrial damage and DNA depletion in cord blood and umbilical cord from infants exposed in utero to Combivir. AIDS. 2004; 18:1013-21. PubMed
 
Blanche S, Tardieu M, Rustin P, Slama A, Barret B, Firtion G. et al.  Persistent mitochondrial dysfunction and perinatal exposure to antiretroviral nucleoside analogues. Lancet. 1999; 354:1084-9. PubMed
 
Barret B, Tardieu M, Rustin P, Lacroix C, Chabrol B, Desguerre I. et al.  Persistent mitochondrial dysfunction in HIV-1-exposed but uninfected infants: clinical screening in a large prospective cohort. AIDS. 2003; 17:1769-85. PubMed
 
.  Nucleoside exposure in the children of HIV-infected women receiving antiretroviral drugs: absence of clear evidence for mitochondrial disease in children who died before 5 years of age in five United States cohorts. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2000; 25:261-8. PubMed
 
Lindegren ML, Rhodes P, Gordon L, Fleming P.  Drug safety during pregnancy and in infants. Lack of mortality related to mitochondrial dysfunction among perinatally HIV-exposed children in pediatric HIV surveillance. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2000; 918:222-35. PubMed
 
Bulterys M, Nesheim S, Abrams EJ, Palumbo P, Farley J, Lampe M. et al.  Lack of evidence of mitochondrial dysfunction in the offspring of HIV-infected women. Retrospective review of perinatal exposure to antiretroviral drugs in the Perinatal AIDS Collaborative Transmission Study. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2000; 918:212-21. PubMed
 
Dominguez K, Bertolli J, Fowler M, Peters V, Ortiz I, Melville S. et al.  Lack of definitive severe mitochondrial signs and symptoms among deceased HIV-uninfected and HIV-indeterminate children < or = 5 years of age, Pediatric Spectrum of HIV Disease project (PSD), USA. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2000; 918:236-46. PubMed
 
Culnane M, Fowler M, Lee SS, McSherry G, Brady M, O'Donnell K. et al.  Lack of long-term effects of in utero exposure to zidovudine among uninfected children born to HIV-infected women. Pediatric AIDS Clinical Trials Group Protocol 219/076 Teams. JAMA. 1999; 281:151-7. PubMed
 
Hanson IC, Antonelli TA, Sperling RS, Oleske JM, Cooper E, Culnane M. et al.  Lack of tumors in infants with perinatal HIV-1 exposure and fetal/neonatal exposure to zidovudine. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr Hum Retrovirol. 1999; 20:463-7. PubMed
 
.  Human immunodeficiency virus screening. Joint statement of the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Pediatrics. 1999; 104: (1 Pt 1) 128. PubMed
 
. Stoto MA, Almario DA, McCormick MC Reducing the Odds: Preventing Perinatal Transmission of HIV in the United States. Washington, DC: National Academy Pr; 1999.
 
.  Analysis of HIV-1 clinical trials: statistical magic? The AVANTI Steering Committee. Lancet. 1999; 353:2061-4. PubMed
 
Fowler MG, Mofenson L, McConnell M.  The interface of perinatal HIV prevention, antiretroviral drug resistance, and antiretroviral treatment: what do we really know? [Editorial]. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2003; 34:308-11. PubMed
 
Nolan M, Fowler MG, Mofenson LM.  Antiretroviral prophylaxis of perinatal HIV-1 transmission and the potential impact of antiretroviral resistance. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2002; 30:216-29. PubMed
 
.  Public Health Service Task Force recommendations for the use of antiretroviral drugs in pregnant women infected with HIV-1 for maternal health and for reducing perinatal HIV-1 transmission in the United States. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. MMWR Recomm Rep. 1998; 47:1-30. PubMed
 
Ihaka R, Gentleman R.  R: A language for data analysis and graphics. Journal of Computational Graphic Statistics. 1996; 5:299-314.
 

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure.
Screening for HIV—analytic framework for pregnant women.(19)

Key question (KQ) 1: Does screening for HIV in pregnant women reduce mother-to-child transmission or premature death and disability? KQ 2: Can clinical or demographic characteristics (including specific settings) identify subgroups of asymptomatic pregnant women at increased risk for HIV infection compared to the general population of pregnant women? KQ 3: What are the test characteristics of HIV antibody (HIV ab) test strategies in pregnant women? KQ 4: What are the harms (including labeling and anxiety) associated with screening? Is screening acceptable to pregnant women? KQ 5: How many HIV-infected pregnant women who meet criteria for interventions receive them? KQ 6: What are the harms associated with the work-up for HIV infection in pregnant women? KQ 7: a) How effective are interventions (antiretroviral prophylaxis [to prevent mother-to-child transmission] or treatment [to improve maternal outcomes]; avoidance of breastfeeding, elective cesarean section [in selected patients], or other labor management practices; counseling on risky behaviors; immunizations; routine monitoring and follow-up; or prophylaxis against opportunistic infections) in reducing mother-to-child transmission rates or improving clinical outcomes (mortality, functional status, quality of life, symptoms, or opportunistic infections) in pregnant women with HIV infection? b) Does immediate antiretroviral treatment in HIV-infected pregnant women result in improvements in clinical outcomes compared to delayed treatment until the infected woman becomes symptomatic? c) How well do interventions reduce the rate of viremia, improve CD4 cell counts, or reduce risky behaviors? How does identification of HIV infection in pregnant women affect future reproductive choices? KQ 8: What are the harms (including adverse effects from in utero exposure) associated with antiretroviral drugs and elective cesarean section? KQ 9: Have improvements in intermediate outcomes (CD4 cell counts, viremia, or risky behaviors) in HIV-infected pregnant women been shown to improve clinical outcomes or reduce mother-to-child transmission? A separate report reviews KQs 6, 7b, 9, and parts of 7a (counseling, immunizations, labor management practices other than elective cesarean section, routine monitoring and follow-up, and prophylaxis against opportunistic infections); 7c (effects on viral loads, CD4 counts, and risky behaviors); and 9.

Grahic Jump Location

Tables

Table Jump PlaceholderTable 1.  Large Observational Cohort Studies of the Effect of Combination Antiretroviral Regimens on Risk for Mother-to Child Transmission of HIV Infection
Table Jump PlaceholderTable 2.  Number of Drugs in Full-Course Antiretroviral Regimens and Risk for Mother-to-Child Transmission of HIV Infection
Table Jump PlaceholderTable 3.  Randomized, Controlled Trials of Antiretroviral Prophylaxis for Reduction of Mother-to-Child Transmission of HIV Infection
Table Jump PlaceholderTable 4.  Outcomes of Screening for HIV Infection in 3 Hypothetical Cohorts of 10 000 Asymptomatic Pregnant Women
Table Jump PlaceholderTable 5.  Summary of Findings of Systematic Evidence Review
Table Jump PlaceholderAppendix Table.  Base-Case Assumptions for Outcomes Table (Table 4) of Counseling and One-Time Screening for HIV Infection in Pregnant Women

References

Wortley PM, Fleming PL.  AIDS in women in the United States. Recent trends. JAMA. 1997; 278:911-6. PubMed
CrossRef
 
Lee LM, Fleming PL.  Trends in human immunodeficiency virus diagnoses among women in the United States, 1994-1998. J Am Med Womens Assoc. 2001; 56:94-9. PubMed
 
Lindegren ML, Byers RH Jr, Thomas P, Davis SF, Caldwell B, Rogers M. et al.  Trends in perinatal transmission of HIV/AIDS in the United States. JAMA. 1999; 282:531-8. PubMed
 
Bulterys M, Nolan ML, Jamieson DJ, Dominguez K, Fowler MG.  Advances in the prevention of mother-to-child HIV-1 transmission: current issues, future challenges. AIDScience. 2002. Accessed athttp://www.aidscience.org/Articles/aidscience017.aspon 22 March 2005.
 
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.  Reducing obstetrician barriers to offering HIV testing. 2002. Accessed athttp://www.cdc.gov/hiv/projects/perinatal/materials/ps_oig.pdfon 22 March 2005.
 
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.  HIV/AIDS Surveillance Report. 2003 (Volume 15). Accessed athttp://www.cdc.gov/hiv/stats/2003SurveillanceReport.pdfon 22 March 2005.
 
.  Revised recommendations for HIV screening of pregnant women. MMWR Recomm Rep. 2001; 50:63-85; quiz CE1-19a2-CE6-19a2. PubMed
 
Mandelbrot L, Mayaux MJ, Bongain A, Berrebi A, Moudoub-Jeanpetit Y, Benifla JL. et al.  Obstetric factors and mother-to-child transmission of human immunodeficiency virus type 1: the French perinatal cohorts. SEROGEST French Pediatric HIV Infection Study Group. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1996; 175:661-7. PubMed
 
Dunn DT, Newell ML, Ades AE, Peckham CS.  Risk of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 transmission through breastfeeding. Lancet. 1992; 340:585-8. PubMed
 
Nduati R.  Breastfeeding and HIV-1 infection. A review of current literature. Adv Exp Med Biol. 2000; 478:201-10. PubMed
 
Mofenson LM, Lambert JS, Stiehm ER, Bethel J, Meyer WA 3rd, Whitehouse J. et al.  Risk factors for perinatal transmission of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 in women treated with zidovudine. Pediatric AIDS Clinical Trials Group Study 185 Team. N Engl J Med. 1999; 341:385-93. PubMed
 
Shapiro DE, Sperling RS, Mandelbrot L, Britto P, Cunningham BE.  Risk factors for perinatal human immunodeficiency virus transmission in patients receiving zidovudine prophylaxis. Pediatric AIDS Clinical Trials Group protocol 076 Study Group. Obstet Gynecol. 1999; 94:897-908. PubMed
 
Garcia PM, Kalish LA, Pitt J, Minkoff H, Quinn TC, Burchett SK. et al.  Maternal levels of plasma human immunodeficiency virus type 1 RNA and the risk for perinatal transmission. Women and Infants Transmission Study Group. N Engl J Med. 1999; 341:394-402. PubMed
 
.  Mother-to-child transmission of human immunodeficiency virus in Italy: temporal trends and determinants of infection. The Italian Collaborative Study on HIV infection in pregnancy. Hum Reprod. 1999; 14:242-6. PubMed
 
.  HIV-infected pregnant women and vertical transmission in Europe since 1986. European collaborative study. AIDS. 2001; 15:761-70. PubMed
 
Mofenson LM.  Advances in the prevention of vertical transmission of human immunodeficiency virus. Semin Pediatr Infect Dis. 2003; 14:295-308. PubMed
 
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.  Public Health Service Task Force recommendations for use of antiretroviral drugs in pregnant HIV-1-infected women for maternal health and interventions to reduce perinatal HIV-1 transmission in the United States. 2005. Accessed athttp://aidsinfo.nih.gov/guidelines/perinatal/PER_022405.pdfon 22 March 2005.
 
U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.  Guide to Clinical Preventive Services. 2nd ed. Alexandria, VA: International Medical Publishing; 1996.
 
Chou R, Smits AK, Huffman LH, Fu R, Korthuis PT.  Screening for human immunodeficiency virus in pregnant women: systematic evidence synthesis. Available athttp://www.ahrq.gov/clinic.
 
ACOG committee opinion.  Scheduled cesarean delivery and the prevention of vertical transmission of HIV infection. Number 219, August 1999. Committee on Obstetric Practice. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 1999; 66:305-6. PubMed
 
Kaplan JE, Masur H, Holmes KK.  Guidelines for preventing opportunistic infections among HIV-infected persons—2002. Recommendations of the U.S. Public Health Service and the Infectious Diseases Society of America. MMWR Recomm Rep. 2002; 51:1-52. PubMed
 
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.  Recommended adult immunization schedule by age group and medical conditions. United States, 2003-2004. 2003. Accessed athttp://www.cdc.gov/nip/recs/adult-schedule.pdfon 28 June 2004.
 
.  Revised guidelines for HIV counseling, testing, and referral. MMWR Recomm Rep. 2001; 50:1-57; quiz CE1-19a1-CE6-19a1. PubMed
 
Harris RP, Helfand M, Woolf SH, Lohr KN, Mulrow CD, Teutsch SM. et al.  Current methods of the US Preventive Services Task Force: a review of the process. Am J Prev Med. 2001; 20:21-35. PubMed
 
U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.  Screening for human immunodeficiency virus infection. In: Guide to Clinical Preventive Services. Accessed athttp://www.ahrq.gov/clinic/2ndcps/hiv.pdfon 11 March 2005.
 
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.  AIDS cases, deaths, and persons living with AIDS by year, 1985-2002—United States. HIV/AIDS Surveillance Report. 2002 (Volume 14). Accessed athttp://www.cdc.gov/hiv/stats/hasr1402.htmon 2 December 2004.
 
Peterman TA, Todd KA, Mupanduki I.  Opportunities for targeting publicly funded human immunodeficiency virus counseling and testing. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr Hum Retrovirol. 1996; 12:69-74. PubMed
 
Fehrs LJ, Fleming D, Foster LR, McAlister RO, Fox V, Modesitt S. et al.  Trial of anonymous versus confidential human immunodeficiency virus testing. Lancet. 1988; 2:379-82. PubMed
 
Barbacci MB, Dalabetta GA, Repke JT, Talbot BL, Charache P, Polk BF. et al.  Human immunodeficiency virus infection in women attending an inner-city prenatal clinic: ineffectiveness of targeted screening. Sex Transm Dis. 1990; 17:122-6. PubMed
 
Pulver WP, Glebatis D, Wade N, Birkhead GS, Smith P.  Trends from an HIV seroprevalence study among childbearing women in New York State from 1988 through 2000: a valuable epidemiologic tool. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2004; 158:443-8. PubMed
 
Hawken J, Chard T, Jeffries DJ, Costeloe K, Grant K, Ward F. et al.  Evaluation of an antenatal HIV testing programme in an inner London health district. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1994; 101:960-4. PubMed
 
Ellerbrock TV, Lieb S, Harrington PE, Bush TJ, Schoenfisch SA, Oxtoby MJ. et al.  Heterosexually transmitted human immunodeficiency virus infection among pregnant women in a rural Florida community. N Engl J Med. 1992; 327:1704-9. PubMed
 
Lindsay MK, Peterson HB, Feng TI, Slade BA, Willis S, Klein L.  Routine antepartum human immunodeficiency virus infection screening in an inner-city population. Obstet Gynecol. 1989; 74:289-94. PubMed
 
Fehrs LJ, Hill D, Kerndt PR, Rose TP, Henneman C.  Targeted HIV screening at a Los Angeles prenatal/family planning health center. Am J Public Health. 1991; 81:619-22. PubMed
 
Landesman S, Minkoff H, Holman S, McCalla S, Sijin O.  Serosurvey of human immunodeficiency virus infection in parturients. Implications for human immunodeficiency virus testing programs of pregnant women. JAMA. 1987; 258:2701-3. PubMed
 
.  U.S. Public Health Service recommendations for human immunodeficiency virus counseling and voluntary testing for pregnant women. MMWR Recomm Rep. 1995; 44:1-15. PubMed
 
.  Perinatal human immunodeficiency virus testing. Provisional Committee on Pediatric AIDS, American Academy of Pediatrics. Pediatrics. 1995; 95:303-7. PubMed
 
Wortley PM, Lindegren ML, Fleming PL.  Successful implementation of perinatal HIV prevention guidelines: a multistate surveillance evaluation. MMWR Recomm Rep. 2001; 50: (RR-6) 17-28. PubMed
 
Lewis R, O'Brien JM, Ray DT, Sibai BM.  The impact of initiating a human immunodeficiency virus screening program in an urban obstetric population. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1995; 173:1329-33. PubMed
 
Mercey D, Helps BA, Copas A, Petruckevitch A, Johnson AM, Spencer J.  Voluntary universal antenatal HIV testing. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1996; 103:1129-33. PubMed
 
.  From the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Interpretation and use of the western blot assay for serodiagnosis of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 infections. JAMA. 1989; 262:3395-7. PubMed
 
.  Update: serologic testing for HIV-1 antibody—United States, 1988 and 1989. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 1990; 39:380-3. PubMed
 
Kleinman S, Busch MP, Hall L, Thomson R, Glynn S, Gallahan D. et al.  False-positive HIV-1 test results in a low-risk screening setting of voluntary blood donation. Retrovirus Epidemiology Donor Study. JAMA. 1998; 280:1080-5. PubMed
 
Celum CL, Coombs RW, Jones M, Murphy V, Fisher L, Grant C. et al.  Risk factors for repeatedly reactive HIV-1 EIA and indeterminate western blots. A population-based case–control study. Arch Intern Med. 1994; 154:1129-37. PubMed
 
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.  Rapid HIV antibody testing during labor and delivery for women of unknown HIV status. 2004. Accessed athttp://www.cdc.gov/hiv/rapid_testing/materials/Labor&DeliveryRapidTesting.pdfon 20 July 2004.
 
.  Update: HIV counseling and testing using rapid tests—United States, 1995. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 1998; 47:211-5. PubMed
 
Bulterys M, Jamieson DJ, O'Sullivan MJ, Cohen MH, Maupin R, Nesheim S. et al.  Rapid HIV-1 testing during labor: a multicenter study. JAMA. 2004; 292:219-23. PubMed
 
Webber MP, Demas P, Enriquez E, Shanker R, Oleszko W, Beatrice ST. et al.  Pilot study of expedited HIV-1 testing of women in labor at an inner-city hospital in New York City. Am J Perinatol. 2001; 18:49-57. PubMed
 
Ramalingam S, Kannangai R, Raj AA, Jesudason MV, Sridharan G.  Rapid particle agglutination test for human immunodeficiency virus: hospital-based evaluation. J Clin Microbiol. 2002; 40:1553-4. PubMed
 
Chalermchockcharoenkit A, Louisirirotchnakul S, Roongpisuthipong A, Sirimai K, Sutchritpongsa P, Wasi C.  Rapid human immunodeficiency virus diagnostic test during the intrapartum period in pregnant women who did not receive antenatal care. J Med Assoc Thai. 2002; 85:703-8. PubMed
 
Lien TX, Tien NT, Chanpong GF, Cuc CT, Yen VT, Soderquist R. et al.  Evaluation of rapid diagnostic tests for the detection of human immunodeficiency virus types 1 and 2, hepatitis B surface antigen, and syphilis in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2000; 62:301-9. PubMed
 
Mashu A, Mbizvo MT, Makura E, Bopoto R, Madzime S, Chipato T. et al.  Evaluation of rapid on-site clinic HIV test, combined with counselling [Letter]. AIDS. 1997; 11:932-3. PubMed
 
Koblavi-Deme S, Maurice C, Yavo D, Sibailly TS, N'guessan K, Kamelan-Tano Y. et al.  Sensitivity and specificity of human immunodeficiency virus rapid serologic assays and testing algorithms in an antenatal clinic in Abidjan, Ivory Coast. J Clin Microbiol. 2001; 39:1808-12. PubMed
 
O'Connell RJ, Merritt TM, Malia JA, VanCott TC, Dolan MJ, Zahwa H. et al.  Performance of the OraQuick rapid antibody test for diagnosis of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 infection in patients with various levels of exposure to highly active antiretroviral therapy. J Clin Microbiol. 2003; 41:2153-5. PubMed
 
Uni-Gold Recombigen HIV. [Package insert, #045-138]. Bray, Ireland: Trinity Biotech; rev. 03/04.
 
Reveal Rapid HIV-1 Antibody Test. [Package insert, #FDAINS0065]. Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada: MedMira Laboratories; rev. 0/4.
 
Reynolds SJ, Ndongala LM, Luo CC, Mwandagalirwa K, Losoma AJ, Mwamba KJ. et al.  Evaluation of a rapid test for the detection of antibodies to human immunodeficiency virus type 1 and 2 in the setting of multiple transmitted viral subtypes. Int J STD AIDS. 2002; 13:171-3. PubMed
 
OraQuick Rapid HIV-1 Antibody Test [Package insert, #3001-0951]. Bethlehem, PA: OraSure Technologies; rev. 10/03.
 
Bhore AV, Sastry J, Patke D, Gupte N, Bulakh PM, Lele S. et al.  Sensitivity and specificity of rapid HIV testing of pregnant women in India. Int J STD AIDS. 2003; 14:37-41. PubMed
 
Sansom SL, Jamieson DJ, Farnham PG, Bulterys M, Fowler MG.  Human immunodeficiency virus retesting during pregnancy: costs and effectiveness in preventing perinatal transmission. Obstet Gynecol. 2003; 102:782-90. PubMed
 
Sheon AR, Fox HE, Alexander G, Buck A, Higgins A, McDermott SM. et al.  Misdiagnosed HIV infection in pregnant women: implications for clinical care. Public Health Rep. 1994; 109:694-9. PubMed
 
Doran TI, Parra E.  False-positive and indeterminate human immunodeficiency virus test results in pregnant women. Arch Fam Med. 2000; 9:924-9. PubMed
 
Samson L, King S.  Evidence-based guidelines for universal counselling and offering of HIV testing in pregnancy in Canada. CMAJ. 1998; 158:1449-57. PubMed
 
Lester P, Partridge JC, Chesney MA, Cooke M.  The consequences of a positive prenatal HIV antibody test for women. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr Hum Retrovirol. 1995; 10:341-9. PubMed
 
Koenig LJ, Whitaker DJ, Royce RA, Wilson TE, Callahan MR, Fernandez MI. et al.  Violence during pregnancy among women with or at risk for HIV infection. Am J Public Health. 2002; 92:367-70. PubMed
 
Green L, Ardron C, Catalan J.  HIV, childbirth and suicidal behaviour: a review. Hosp Med. 2000; 61:311-4. PubMed
 
Nakchbandi IA, Longenecker JC, Ricksecker MA, Latta RA, Healton C, Smith DG.  A decision analysis of mandatory compared with voluntary HIV testing in pregnant women. Ann Intern Med. 1998; 128:760-7. PubMed
 
Irwin KL, Valdiserri RO, Holmberg SD.  The acceptability of voluntary HIV antibody testing in the United States: a decade of lessons learned. AIDS. 1996; 10:1707-17. PubMed
 
.  HIV testing among pregnant women—United States and Canada, 1998-2001. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2002; 51:1013-6. PubMed
 
Lansky A, Jones JL, Frey RL, Lindegren ML.  Trends in HIV testing among pregnant women: United States, 1994-1999. Am J Public Health. 2001; 91:1291-3. PubMed
 
Simpson WM, Johnstone FD, Boyd FM, Goldberg DJ, Hart GJ, Gormley SM. et al.  A randomised controlled trial of different approaches to universal antenatal HIV testing: uptake and acceptability and Annex: Antenatal HIV testing—assessment of a routine voluntary approach. Health Technol Assess. 1999; 3:1-112. PubMed
 
Lindsay MK, Adefris W, Peterson HB, Williams H, Johnson J, Klein L.  Determinants of acceptance of routine voluntary human immunodeficiency virus testing in an inner-city prenatal population. Obstet Gynecol. 1991; 78:678-80. PubMed
 
Royce RA, Walter EB, Fernandez MI, Wilson TE, Ickovics JR, Simonds RJ. et al.  Barriers to universal prenatal HIV testing in 4 US locations in 1997. Am J Public Health. 2001; 91:727-33. PubMed
 
Stringer EM, Stringer JS, Cliver SP, Goldenberg RL, Goepfert AR.  Evaluation of a new testing policy for human immunodeficiency virus to improve screening rates. Obstet Gynecol. 2001; 98:1104-8. PubMed
 
Jayaraman GC, Preiksaitis JK, Larke B.  Mandatory reporting of HIV infection and opt-out prenatal screening for HIV infection: effect on testing rates. CMAJ. 2003; 168:679-82. PubMed
 
Joo E, Carmack A, Garcia-Buñuel E, Kelly CJ.  Implementation of guidelines for HIV counseling and voluntary HIV testing of pregnant women. Am J Public Health. 2000; 90:273-6. PubMed
 
Malonza IM, Richardson BA, Kreiss JK, Bwayo JJ, Stewart GC.  The effect of rapid HIV-1 testing on uptake of perinatal HIV-1 interventions: a randomized clinical trial. AIDS. 2003; 17:113-8. PubMed
 
.  Prenatal HIV testing and antiretroviral prophylaxis at an urban hospital—Atlanta, Georgia, 1997-2000. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2004; 52:1245-8. PubMed
 
.  Progress toward elimination of perinatal HIV infection—Michigan, 1993-2000. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2002; 51:93-7. PubMed
 
Wade NA, Zielinski MA, Butsashvili M, McNutt LA, Warren BL, Glaros R. et al.  Decline in perinatal HIV transmission in New York state (1997–2000). J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2004; 36:1075-1082. PubMed
 
Fiscus SA, Adimora AA, Funk ML, Schoenbach VJ, Tristram D, Lim W. et al.  Trends in interventions to reduce perinatal human immunodeficiency virus type 1 transmission in North Carolina. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2002; 21:664-8. PubMed
 
Cooper ER, Charurat M, Mofenson L, Hanson IC, Pitt J, Diaz C. et al.  Combination antiretroviral strategies for the treatment of pregnant HIV-1-infected women and prevention of perinatal HIV-1 transmission. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2002; 29:484-94. PubMed
 
Dominguez KL, Lindegren ML, D'Almada PJ, Peters VB, Frederick T, Rakusan TA. et al.  Increasing trend of Cesarean deliveries in HIV-infected women in the United States from 1994 to 2000. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2003; 33:232-8. PubMed
 
Working Group on Mother-to-Child Transmission of HIV.  Rates of mother-to-child transmission of HIV-1 in Africa, America, and Europe: results from 13 perinatal studies. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr Hum Retrovirol. 1995; 8:506-10. PubMed
 
Connor EM, Sperling RS, Gelber R, Kiselev P, Scott G, O'Sullivan MJ. et al.  Reduction of maternal-infant transmission of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 with zidovudine treatment. Pediatric AIDS Clinical Trials Group Protocol 076 Study Group. N Engl J Med. 1994; 331:1173-80. PubMed
 
Brocklehurst P.  Interventions for reducing the risk of mother-to-child transmission of HIV infection. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2002; 1:CD000102. PubMed
 
Hitti J, Frenkel LM, Stek AM. et al.  Maternal toxicity with continuous nevirapine in pregnancy: results from PACTG 1022. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2004; 36:772-776. PubMed
 
.  Determinants of mother-to-infant human immunodeficiency virus 1 transmission before and after the introduction of zidovudine prophylaxis. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2002; 156:915-21. PubMed
 
.  Mother-to-child transmission of HIV infection in the era of highly active antiretroviral therapy. Clin Infect Dis. 2005; 40:458-65. PubMed
 
Mandelbrot L, Landreau-Mascaro A, Rekacewicz C, Berrebi A, Benifla JL, Burgard M. et al.  Lamivudine-zidovudine combination for prevention of maternal-infant transmission of HIV-1. JAMA. 2001; 285:2083-93. PubMed
 
Dorenbaum A, Cunningham CK, Gelber RD, Culnane M, Mofenson L, Britto P. et al.  Two-dose intrapartum/newborn nevirapine and standard antiretroviral therapy to reduce perinatal HIV transmission: a randomized trial. JAMA. 2002; 288:189-98. PubMed
 
Lallemant M, Jourdain G, Le Coeur S, Mary JY, Ngo-Giang-Huong N, Koetsawang S. et al.  Single-dose perinatal nevirapine plus standard zidovudine to prevent mother-to-child transmission of HIV-1 in Thailand. N Engl J Med. 2004; 351:217-28. PubMed
 
Lallemant M, Jourdain G, Le Coeur S, Kim S, Koetsawang S, Comeau AM. et al.  A trial of shortened zidovudine regimens to prevent mother-to-child transmission of human immunodeficiency virus type 1. Perinatal HIV Prevention Trial (Thailand) Investigators. N Engl J Med. 2000; 343:982-91. PubMed
 
Shaffer N, Chuachoowong R, Mock PA, Bhadrakom C, Siriwasin W, Young NL. et al.  Short-course zidovudine for perinatal HIV-1 transmission in Bangkok, Thailand: a randomised controlled trial. Bangkok Collaborative Perinatal HIV Transmission Study Group. Lancet. 1999; 353:773-80. PubMed
 
.  Efficacy of three short-course regimens of zidovudine and lamivudine in preventing early and late transmission of HIV-1 from mother to child in Tanzania, South Africa, and Uganda (Petra study): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Lancet. 2002; 359:1178-86. PubMed
 
Wiktor SZ, Ekpini E, Karon JM, Nkengasong J, Maurice C, Severin ST. et al.  Short-course oral zidovudine for prevention of mother-to-child transmission of HIV-1 in Abidjan, Cote d'Ivoire: a randomised trial. Lancet. 1999; 353:781-5. PubMed
 
Dabis F, Msellati P, Meda N, Welffens-Ekra C, You B, Manigart O. et al.  6-month efficacy, tolerance, and acceptability of a short regimen of oral zidovudine to reduce vertical transmission of HIV in breastfed children in Cote d'Ivoire and Burkina Faso: a double-blind placebo-controlled multicentre trial. DITRAME Study Group. Diminution de la Transmission Mere-Enfant. Lancet. 1999; 353:786-92. PubMed
 
Moodley D, Moodley J, Coovadia H, Gray G, McIntyre J, Hofmyer J. et al.  A multicenter randomized, controlled trial of nevirapine versus a combination of zidovudine and lamivudine to reduce intrapartum and early postpartum mother-to-child transmission of human immunodeficiency virus type 1. J Infect Dis. 2003; 187:725-35. PubMed
 
Taha TE, Kumwenda NI, Gibbons A, Broadhead RL, Fiscus S, Lema V. et al.  Short postexposure prophylaxis in newborn babies to reduce mother-to-child transmission of HIV-1: NVAZ randomised clinical trial. Lancet. 2003; 362:1171-7. PubMed
 
Jackson JB, Musoke P, Fleming T, Guay LA, Bagenda D, Allen M. et al.  Intrapartum and neonatal single-dose nevirapine compared with zidovudine for prevention of mother-to-child transmission of HIV-1 in Kampala, Uganda: 18-month follow-up of the HIVNET 012 randomised trial. Lancet. 2003; 362:859-68. PubMed
 
Taha TE, Kumwenda NI, Hoover DR, Fiscus SA, Kafulafula G, Nkhoma C. et al.  Nevirapine and zidovudine at birth to reduce perinatal transmission of HIV in an African setting: a randomized, controlled trial. JAMA. 2004; 292:202-9. PubMed
 
Guay LA, Musoke P, Fleming T, Bagenda D, Allen M, Nakabiito C. et al.  Intrapartum and neonatal single-dose nevirapine compared with zidovudine for prevention of mother-to-child transmission of HIV-1 in Kampala, Uganda: HIVNET 012 randomised trial. Lancet. 1999; 354:795-802. PubMed
 
John GC, Richardson BA, Nduati RW, Mbori-Ngacha D, Kreiss JK.  Timing of breast milk HIV-1 transmission: a meta-analysis. East Afr Med J. 2001; 78:75-9. PubMed
 
Coutsoudis A, Dabis F, Fawzi W, Gaillard P, Haverkamp G, Harris DR. et al.  Late postnatal transmission of HIV-1 in breast-fed children: an individual patient data meta-analysis. J Infect Dis. 2004; 189:2154-66. PubMed
 
Nduati R, John G, Mbori-Ngacha D, Richardson B, Overbaugh J, Mwatha A. et al.  Effect of breastfeeding and formula feeding on transmission of HIV-1: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2000; 283:1167-74. PubMed
 
.  Elective caesarean-section versus vaginal delivery in prevention of vertical HIV-1 transmission: a randomised clinical trial. The European Mode of Delivery Collaboration. Lancet. 1999; 353:1035-9. PubMed
 
.  The mode of delivery and the risk for vertical transmission of human immunodeficiency virus type 1—a meta-analysis of 15 prospective cohort studies. The International Perinatal HIV Group. N Engl J Med. 1999; 340:977-87. PubMed
 
Ioannidis JP, Abrams EJ, Ammann A, Bulterys M, Goedert JJ, Gray L. et al.  Perinatal transmission of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 by pregnant women with RNA virus loads <1000 copies/mL. J Infect Dis. 2001; 183:539-45. PubMed
 
Massad LS, Springer G, Jacobson L, Watts H, Anastos K, Korn A. et al.  Pregnancy rates and predictors of conception, miscarriage and abortion in US women with HIV. AIDS. 2004; 18:281-6. PubMed
 
Lindsay MK, Grant J, Peterson HB, Willis S, Nelson P, Klein L.  The impact of knowledge of human immunodeficiency virus serostatus on contraceptive choice and repeat pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol. 1995; 85:675-9. PubMed
 
Blair JM, Hanson DL, Jones JL, Dworkin MS.  Trends in pregnancy rates among women with human immunodeficiency virus. Obstet Gynecol. 2004; 103:663-8. PubMed
 
Bedimo AL, Bessinger R, Kissinger P.  Reproductive choices among HIV-positive women. Soc Sci Med. 1998; 46:171-9. PubMed
 
Temmerman M, Moses S, Kiragu D, Fusallah S, Wamola IA, Piot P.  Impact of single session postpartum counselling of HIV infected women on their subsequent reproductive behaviour. AIDS Care. 1990; 2:247-52. PubMed
 
Selwyn PA, Carter RJ, Schoenbaum EE, Robertson VJ, Klein RS, Rogers MF.  Knowledge of HIV antibody status and decisions to continue or terminate pregnancy among intravenous drug users. JAMA. 1989; 261:3567-71. PubMed
 
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.  Safety and toxicity of individual antiretroviral agents in pregnancy. 2005. Accessed athttp://aidsinfo.nih.gov/guidelines/perinatal/ST_022405.pdfon 9 March 2005.
 
Watts DH, Balasubramanian R, Maupin RT Jr, Delke I, Dorenbaum A, Fiore S. et al.  Maternal toxicity and pregnancy complications in human immunodeficiency virus-infected women receiving antiretroviral therapy: PACTG 316. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004; 190:506-16. PubMed
 
Morris AB, Cu-Uvin S, Harwell JI, Garb J, Zorrilla C, Vajaranant M. et al.  Multicenter review of protease inhibitors in 89 pregnancies. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2000; 25:306-11. PubMed
 
Edwards SG, Larbalestier N, Hay P, de Ruiter A, Welch J, Taylor GP. et al.  Experience of nevirapine use in a London cohort of HIV-infected pregnant women. HIV Med. 2001; 2:89-91. PubMed
 
Lyons F, Hopkins S, McGeary A, Sheehan G, Bergin C, Mulcahy F.  Nevirapine tolerability in HIV infected women in pregnancy—a word of caution [Abstract]. 2nd IAS Conference on HIV Pathogenesis and Treatment, Paris, 13–17 July 2003. Accessed athttp://www.iasociety.org/abstract/show.asp?abstract_id=11081on 3 May 2005.
 
Eastman PS, Shapiro DE, Coombs RW, Frenkel LM, McSherry GD, Britto P. et al.  Maternal viral genotypic zidovudine resistance and infrequent failure of zidovudine therapy to prevent perinatal transmission of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 in pediatric AIDS Clinical Trials Group Protocol 076. J Infect Dis. 1998; 177:557-64. PubMed
 
Minkoff H, Hershow R, Watts DH, Frederick M, Cheng I, Tuomala R. et al.  The relationship of pregnancy to human immunodeficiency virus disease progression. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2003; 189:552-9. PubMed
 
Bardeguez AD, Shapiro DE, Mofenson LM, Coombs R, Frenkel LM, Fowler MG. et al.  Effect of cessation of zidovudine prophylaxis to reduce vertical transmission on maternal HIV disease progression and survival. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2003; 32:170-81. PubMed
 
Sperling RS, Shapiro DE, McSherry GD, Britto P, Cunningham BE, Culnane M. et al.  Safety of the maternal-infant zidovudine regimen utilized in the Pediatric AIDS Clinical Trial Group 076 Study. AIDS. 1998; 12:1805-13. PubMed
 
Watts DH, Lambert J, Stiehm ER, Harris DR, Bethel J, Mofenson L. et al.  Progression of HIV disease among women following delivery. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2003; 33:585-93. PubMed
 
Cunningham CK, Chaix ML, Rekacewicz C, Britto P, Rouzioux C, Gelber RD. et al.  Development of resistance mutations in women receiving standard antiretroviral therapy who received intrapartum nevirapine to prevent perinatal human immunodeficiency virus type 1 transmission: a substudy of pediatric AIDS clinical trials group protocol 316. J Infect Dis. 2002; 186:181-8. PubMed
 
Eshleman SH, Mracna M, Guay LA, Deseyve M, Cunningham S, Mirochnick M. et al.  Selection and fading of resistance mutations in women and infants receiving nevirapine to prevent HIV-1 vertical transmission (HIVNET 012). AIDS. 2001; 15:1951-7. PubMed
 
Morris L, Pillay C, Chezzi C, Lupondwana P, Ntsala M, Levin L. et al.  Low frequency of the V106M mutation among HIV-1 subtype C-infected pregnant women exposed to nevirapine [Letter]. AIDS. 2003; 17:1698-700. PubMed
 
Jourdain G, Ngo-Giang-Huong N, Le Coeur S, Bowonwatanuwong C, Kantipong P, Leechanachai P. et al.  Intrapartum exposure to nevirapine and subsequent maternal responses to nevirapine-based antiretroviral therapy. N Engl J Med. 2004; 351:229-40. PubMed
 
Marcollet A, Goffinet F, Firtion G, Pannier E, Le Bret T, Brival ML. et al.  Differences in postpartum morbidity in women who are infected with the human immunodeficiency virus after elective cesarean delivery, emergency cesarean delivery, or vaginal delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2002; 186:784-9. PubMed
 
Rodriguez EJ, Spann C, Jamieson D, Lindsay M.  Postoperative morbidity associated with cesarean delivery among human immunodeficiency virus-seropositive women. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2001; 184:1108-11. PubMed
 
Semprini AE, Castagna C, Ravizza M, Fiore S, Savasi V, Muggiasca ML. et al.  The incidence of complications after caesarean section in 156 HIV-positive women. AIDS. 1995; 9:913-7. PubMed
 
Read JS, Tuomala R, Kpamegan E, Zorrilla C, Landesman S, Brown G. et al.  Mode of delivery and postpartum morbidity among HIV-infected women: the women and infants transmission study. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2001; 26:236-45. PubMed
 
Watts DH, Lambert JS, Stiehm ER, Bethel J, Whitehouse J, Fowler MG. et al.  Complications according to mode of delivery among human immunodeficiency virus-infected women with CD4 lymphocyte counts of < or = 500/microL. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2000; 183:100-7. PubMed
 
Taylor GP, Low-Beer N.  Antiretroviral therapy in pregnancy: a focus on safety. Drug Saf. 2001; 24:683-702. PubMed
 
Tuomala RE, Shapiro DE, Mofenson LM, Bryson Y, Culnane M, Hughes MD. et al.  Antiretroviral therapy during pregnancy and the risk for an adverse outcome. N Engl J Med. 2002; 346:1863-70. PubMed
 
.  Exposure to antiretroviral therapy in utero or early life: the health of uninfected children born to HIV-infected women. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2003; 32:380-7. PubMed
 
Alimenti A, Burdge DR, Ogilvie GS, Money DM, Forbes JC.  Lactic acidemia in human immunodeficiency virus-uninfected infants exposed to perinatal antiretroviral therapy. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2003; 22:782-9. PubMed
 
Poirier MC, Divi RL, Al-Harthi L, Olivero OA, Nguyen V, Walker B. et al.  Long-term mitochondrial toxicity in HIV-uninfected infants born to HIV-infected mothers. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2003; 33:175-83. PubMed
 
Divi RL, Walker VE, Wade NA, Nagashima K, Seilkop SK, Adams ME. et al.  Mitochondrial damage and DNA depletion in cord blood and umbilical cord from infants exposed in utero to Combivir. AIDS. 2004; 18:1013-21. PubMed
 
Blanche S, Tardieu M, Rustin P, Slama A, Barret B, Firtion G. et al.  Persistent mitochondrial dysfunction and perinatal exposure to antiretroviral nucleoside analogues. Lancet. 1999; 354:1084-9. PubMed
 
Barret B, Tardieu M, Rustin P, Lacroix C, Chabrol B, Desguerre I. et al.  Persistent mitochondrial dysfunction in HIV-1-exposed but uninfected infants: clinical screening in a large prospective cohort. AIDS. 2003; 17:1769-85. PubMed
 
.  Nucleoside exposure in the children of HIV-infected women receiving antiretroviral drugs: absence of clear evidence for mitochondrial disease in children who died before 5 years of age in five United States cohorts. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2000; 25:261-8. PubMed
 
Lindegren ML, Rhodes P, Gordon L, Fleming P.  Drug safety during pregnancy and in infants. Lack of mortality related to mitochondrial dysfunction among perinatally HIV-exposed children in pediatric HIV surveillance. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2000; 918:222-35. PubMed
 
Bulterys M, Nesheim S, Abrams EJ, Palumbo P, Farley J, Lampe M. et al.  Lack of evidence of mitochondrial dysfunction in the offspring of HIV-infected women. Retrospective review of perinatal exposure to antiretroviral drugs in the Perinatal AIDS Collaborative Transmission Study. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2000; 918:212-21. PubMed
 
Dominguez K, Bertolli J, Fowler M, Peters V, Ortiz I, Melville S. et al.  Lack of definitive severe mitochondrial signs and symptoms among deceased HIV-uninfected and HIV-indeterminate children < or = 5 years of age, Pediatric Spectrum of HIV Disease project (PSD), USA. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2000; 918:236-46. PubMed
 
Culnane M, Fowler M, Lee SS, McSherry G, Brady M, O'Donnell K. et al.  Lack of long-term effects of in utero exposure to zidovudine among uninfected children born to HIV-infected women. Pediatric AIDS Clinical Trials Group Protocol 219/076 Teams. JAMA. 1999; 281:151-7. PubMed
 
Hanson IC, Antonelli TA, Sperling RS, Oleske JM, Cooper E, Culnane M. et al.  Lack of tumors in infants with perinatal HIV-1 exposure and fetal/neonatal exposure to zidovudine. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr Hum Retrovirol. 1999; 20:463-7. PubMed
 
.  Human immunodeficiency virus screening. Joint statement of the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Pediatrics. 1999; 104: (1 Pt 1) 128. PubMed
 
. Stoto MA, Almario DA, McCormick MC Reducing the Odds: Preventing Perinatal Transmission of HIV in the United States. Washington, DC: National Academy Pr; 1999.
 
.  Analysis of HIV-1 clinical trials: statistical magic? The AVANTI Steering Committee. Lancet. 1999; 353:2061-4. PubMed
 
Fowler MG, Mofenson L, McConnell M.  The interface of perinatal HIV prevention, antiretroviral drug resistance, and antiretroviral treatment: what do we really know? [Editorial]. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2003; 34:308-11. PubMed
 
Nolan M, Fowler MG, Mofenson LM.  Antiretroviral prophylaxis of perinatal HIV-1 transmission and the potential impact of antiretroviral resistance. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2002; 30:216-29. PubMed
 
.  Public Health Service Task Force recommendations for the use of antiretroviral drugs in pregnant women infected with HIV-1 for maternal health and for reducing perinatal HIV-1 transmission in the United States. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. MMWR Recomm Rep. 1998; 47:1-30. PubMed
 
Ihaka R, Gentleman R.  R: A language for data analysis and graphics. Journal of Computational Graphic Statistics. 1996; 5:299-314.
 

Letters

NOTE:
Citing articles are presented as examples only. In non-demo SCM6 implementation, integration with CrossRef’s "Cited By" API will populate this tab (http://www.crossref.org/citedby.html).

Comments

Submit a Comment
Submit a Comment

Summary for Patients

Screening for HIV: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Recommendations

The summary below is from the full reports titled “Screening for HIV: Recommendation Statement,” “Prenatal Screening for HIV: A Review of the Evidence for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force,” and “Screening for HIV: A Review of the Evidence for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.” They are in the 5 July 2005 issue of Annals of Internal Medicine (volume 143, pages 32-37, 38-54, and 55-73). The first report was written by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force; the second and third reports were written by R. Chou, A.K. Smits, L.H. Huffman, R. Fu, and P.T. Korthuis.

Read More...

Clinical Slide Sets

Terms of Use

The In the Clinic® slide sets are owned and copyrighted by the American College of Physicians (ACP). All text, graphics, trademarks, and other intellectual property incorporated into the slide sets remain the sole and exclusive property of the ACP. The slide sets may be used only by the person who downloads or purchases them and only for the purpose of presenting them during not-for-profit educational activities. Users may incorporate the entire slide set or selected individual slides into their own teaching presentations but may not alter the content of the slides in any way or remove the ACP copyright notice. Users may make print copies for use as hand-outs for the audience the user is personally addressing but may not otherwise reproduce or distribute the slides by any means or media, including but not limited to sending them as e-mail attachments, posting them on Internet or Intranet sites, publishing them in meeting proceedings, or making them available for sale or distribution in any unauthorized form, without the express written permission of the ACP. Unauthorized use of the In the Clinic slide sets will constitute copyright infringement.

Toolkit

Want to Subscribe?

Learn more about subscription options

Advertisement
Related Articles
Related Point of Care