 | ||
   | ||
Email
Glossary |
|
Testing at 1 year - necessary? Jan 3, 2002 Dr. Pavia, I have read some experts believe in order to be 100 sure one is not infected they must test at 1 year post exposure. I tested negative at 6 months and my 12 month date is fast approaching. What is your recommendation? Test again for re-assurance or is it unnecessary? |
||||||||
 |
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
 |
| Response from Dr. Pavia
 Actually being infected after a negative test at 3 months and 6 months is vanishingly, vanishingly rare. It has been documented in the setting of a very high risk exposure to blood where the patient also contracted hepatis C. There may be a second similar case in a health care worker. Bottom line, testing at 12 months is not necessary except in very unusual circumstances, like transfusion or injection with a significant amount of HIV and hep C positive blood. You could need the test for your psychological health, but it is not really necessary. Good luck ATP | ||||||||
 Get Email Notifications When This Forum Updates or Subscribe With RSS
|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
Q&A TERMS OF USE
This forum is designed for educational purposes only, and experts are not rendering medical, mental health, legal or other professional advice or services. If you have or suspect you may have a medical, mental health, legal or other problem that requires advice, consult your own caregiver, attorney or other qualified professional.
Experts appearing on this page are independent and are solely responsible for editing and fact-checking their material. Neither TheBody.com nor any advertiser is the publisher or speaker of posted visitors' questions or the experts' material.
Review our complete terms of use and copyright notice.
