BACKGROUND: The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommends the use of 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) as part of screening and diagnosis of hypertension. The optimal ABPM device for population-based surveys is unknown. OBJECTIVE: Among three ABPM devices, we compared the proportion of valid BP readings, mean awake and asleep BP readings, differences between awake ABPM readings and initial standardized BP readings, and sleep experience. RESULTS: The proportions of valid blood pressure readings were not different among the three devices ( p > 0.45). Mean awake and asleep systolic BP were significantly higher for STO device (WA vs. STO vs. SL: 126.65 mmHg, 138.09 mmHg, 127.44 mmHg; 114.34 mmHg, 120.34 mmHg, 113.13 mmHg; p <0.0001 for both). The difference between the initial average standardized mercury systolic BP readings and the ABPM mean awake systolic BP was larger for STO device (WA vs. STO. vs. SL: -5.26 mmHg, -16.24 mmHg, -5.36 mmHg; p <0.0001); diastolic BP mean differences were ~ -6 mmHg for all three devices ( p =0.6). Approximately 55% of participants reported that the devices interfered with sleep; however, there were no sleep differences across the devices (p >0.4 for all). CONCLUSION: Most of the participants met the threshold of 70% valid readings over 24 hours. Sleep disturbance was common but did not interfere with completion of measurement in most of the participants.

Despite benefits to sharing data among public health programs, confidentiality laws are often presumed to obstruct collaboration or data sharing. We present an overview of the use and release of confidential, personally identifiable information as consistent with public health interests and identify opportunities to align data-sharing procedures with use and release provisions in state laws to improve program outcomes. In August 2013, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention staff and legal researchers from the National Nurse-Led Care Consortium conducted a review of state laws regulating state and local health departments in 50 states and the District of Columbia. Nearly all states and the District of Columbia employ provisions for the general use and release of personally identifiable information without patient consent; disease-specific use or release provisions vary by state. Absence of law regarding use and release provisions was noted. Health departments should assess existing state laws to determine whether the use or release of personally identifiable information is permitted. Absence of direction should not prevent data sharing but prompt an analysis of existing provisions in confidentiality laws. (Am J Public Health. Published online ahead of print June 22, 2017: e1-e5. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2017.303862).

OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this article are to determine factors associated with refusal and agreement to provide partner information, and evaluate the effectiveness of referral approaches in offering PCRS. METHODS: Index clients from 5 sites that used 3 different PCRS approaches were interviewed to obtain demographic and risk characteristics and choice of partner referral method for PCRS. Logistic regression was used to assess factors associated with providing partner information. RESULTS: The percentage of index clients who refused to provide partner information varied by site (7% to 88%). Controlling for PCRS approach, index clients who were older than 25 years, male, or reported having male-male sex in the past 12 months were more likely (p <0.01) to refuse to provide partner information. Overall, 72% of named partners referred by index clients were located and offered PCRS. The proportion of partners who were located and offered PCRS differed by referral approach used, ranging from 38% using contract referral (index clients agree to notify their partners within a certain timeframe, else a disease intervention specialist or health care provider will notify them) to 98% using dual referral (index clients notify their partners with a disease intervention specialist or provider present). CONCLUSION: Success in obtaining partner information varied by the PCRS approach used and effectiveness in locating and notifying partners varied by the referral approach selected. These results provide valuable insights for enhancing partner services.

OBJECTIVE: The study aims to assess the acceptability of male circumcision as an HIV prevention intervention and the potential for risk compensation in the continental U.S. METHODS: ConsumerStyles 2008 survey was used to identify correlates of 1) a "likely" or "very likely" response among uncircumcised men to "How likely are you to get circumcised if your health care provider told you that circumcision would reduce your chance of becoming HIV infected?" and 2) agreement or neutrality with a statement indicating that given the protective effects of circumcision for heterosexual men shown by research, men do not have to worry about risks like not wearing condoms during sex or having more sex partners (assessed potential for risk compensation). RESULTS: Response rate was 50.6% (10,108/19,996). Overall, 13.1% of uncircumcised men reported they would be likely to get circumcised if their health care provider told them it would reduce the risk of HIV infection through sex with infected women. Nearly 18% of all men responded in a way indicating a potential for risk compensation if circumcised. CONCLUSIONS: Tailored educational materials about the benefits and risks, including risk compensation, associated with male circumcision as an HIV prevention intervention should be made available to health care providers and specific groups.

OBJECTIVE: Health departments offer partner counseling and referral services (PCRS) to HIV-infected index patients and their partners. Point-of-care rapid HIV testing makes it possible for partners of index patients to learn their HIV serostatus in nonclinical settings. STUDY DESIGN: We assessed costs and effectiveness of PCRS with rapid HIV testing in Colorado and Louisiana (April 2004-January 2006). Colorado provided PCRS to the index patients and partners statewide; Louisiana provided PCRS to those in Baton Rouge and New Orleans. The key effectiveness measures were number of partners tested and number of partners informed of a new HIV diagnosis after rapid testing. We obtained program costs for personnel, travel, utilities, supplies, equipment, and facility space. RESULTS: Colorado identified a yearly average of 328 index patients and 253 partners and tested 43 partners. Louisiana identified a yearly average of 81 index patients and 138 partners and tested 83 partners. The rates of previously undiagnosed HIV infection among partners tested were 6.6% in Colorado and 9.9% in Louisiana. The average costs per partner tested and per partner informed of a new HIV diagnosis were $1459 and $22,243 in Colorado and $714 and $7231 in Louisiana. CONCLUSIONS: Program costs varied substantially by location. Our analysis helps program managers and health care providers to understand the resources needed for implementing the PCRS in diverse settings. Copyright copyright 2009 American Sexually Transmitted Diseases Association All rights reserved.