RESUMO
The United States is facing a social isolation and loneliness crisis. In response, the US Surgeon General issued an advisory in May 2023 recommending actions that health care, community programs, and social services can take to collaboratively improve social connection. Primary care has a critical role to play in implementing the Surgeon General's recommendations. We present social isolation and loneliness as medical issues and highlight next steps for the primary care sector to combat this epidemic.Annals Early Access article.
Assuntos
Solidão , Atenção Primária à Saúde , Isolamento Social , Humanos , Solidão/psicologia , Isolamento Social/psicologia , Estados Unidos , COVID-19/psicologia , COVID-19/epidemiologia , EpidemiasRESUMO
The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs is actively transitioning away from a disease-centric model of healthcare to one that prioritizes disease prevention and the promotion of overall health and well-being. Described as Whole Health, this initiative aims to provide personalized, values-centered care that optimizes physical, behavioral, spiritual, and socioeconomic well-being. To inform this initiative, we analyzed cross-sectional data from a nationally representative sample of primarily older U.S. military veterans to estimate levels of well-being across these domains, and identify sociodemographic, military, and potentially modifiable health and psychosocial correlates of them. Results revealed that, overall, veterans reported high domain-specific well-being (average scores ranging from 6.7 to 8.3 out of 10), with the highest levels in the socioeconomic domain and lowest in the physical domain. Several modifiable factors, including purpose in life, resilience, and social support, were strongly associated with the examined well-being domains. Interventions targeting these constructs may help promote well-being among U.S. veterans.
RESUMO
PURPOSE: Women and children continue to miss preventive visits. Which neighborhood factors predict inadequate prenatal care (PNC) and well-child visit (WCV) attendance remain unclear. DESCRIPTION: In a retrospective case-control study at Virginia Commonwealth University Health System, mothers with less than 50% adherence or initiation after 5 months gestation were eligible as cases and those with ≥ 80% adherence and initiation before 5 months were eligible as controls. Children in the lowest quintile of adherence were eligible as cases and those with ≥ 80% of adherence were eligible as controls. Cases and controls were randomly selected at a 1:2 ratio and matched on birth month. Covariates were derived from the 2018 American Community Survey. A hotspot was defined as a zip code tabulation area (ZCTA) with a proportion of controls less than 0.66. ZCTAs with fewer than 5 individuals were excluded. Weighted quantile regression was used to determine which covariates were most associated with inadequate attendance. ASSESSMENT: We identified 38 and 35 ZCTAs for the PNC and WCV analyses, respectively. Five of 11 hotspots for WCV were also hotspots for PNC. Education and income predicted 51% and 34% of the variation in missed PNCs, respectively; language, education and transportation difficulties explained 33%, 29%, and 17% of the variation in missed WCVs, respectively. Higher proportions of Black residents lived in hotspots of inadequate PCV and WCV attendance. CONCLUSION: Neighborhood-level factors performed well in predicting inadequate PCV and WCV attendance. The disproportionate impact impact of inadequate PCV and WCV in neighborhoods where higher proportions of Black people lived highlights the potential influence of systemic racism and segregation on healthcare utilization.
Assuntos
Cuidado Pré-Natal , Características de Residência , Humanos , Gravidez , Feminino , Estudos Retrospectivos , Estudos de Casos e Controles , RendaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Antipsychotic prescribing in United States nursing homes (NHs) has decreased since the Center for Medicare & Medicaid Service debuted the National Partnership to Improve Dementia Care in Nursing Homes (NP); however, reductions have stalled. To help explain persistent antipsychotic use despite the NP's reduction efforts, the perspectives of diverse NP stakeholders were qualitatively assessed. This study aimed to re-evaluate these individual perspectives in combined thematic synthesis to discover NP improvement opportunities undetectable in single stakeholder assessments. METHODS: Thematic synthesis. Through immersive crystallisation, original source coding results were organised into related descriptive themes. Similarities and differences were identified, and descriptive themes were regrouped into new, increasingly abstract, analytical themes. This cycle continued until variances were resolved and analytic themes sufficiently described and explained all initial descriptive themes. RESULTS: Three analytic themes emerged regarding NP improvement opportunities. The NP's positive impacts would be augmented by: (i) a deeper and expanded appreciation of stakeholder perspectives; (ii) more urgent and rapid adaptation to unintended adverse outcomes; and (iii) greater recognition of the contextual and environmental factors influencing decisions to prescribe or not prescribe antipsychotic medications. Stakeholder groups described: perspectives they perceived as inadequately considered by the NP; insufficient NP engagement with the stakeholders capable of creating evidenced, affordable, and available non-pharmacologic therapies for dementia symptoms; recognition that dementia interventions effective for a specific individual at a specific time in a specific community may not generalise; and diverse ongoing undesirable outcomes from NP policies that could be mitigated by NP modifications. CONCLUSIONS: The NP has done much to advance dementia care in NHs. Notwithstanding, these results suggest the NP would only be improved through increasingly comprehensive inclusion of stakeholder perspectives, enhanced incorporation of individual contextual factors, and a more decisive mechanism for ongoing and continual adaptation.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVES: Explore the indications for long-stay gabapentin use and elucidate the factors spurring the rapid increase in gabapentin prescribing in nursing homes (NHs). METHODS: National cross-sectional survey of NH prescribers distributed anonymously using SurveyMonkey. Sampling for convenience was obtained through crowdsourcing, leveraging collaborations with NH clinician organizations. Developed by a multidisciplinary team, pilot data/existing literature informed survey content. RESULTS: A total of 131 surveys completed. Participants: 71% white, 52% female, 71% physicians. Off-label gabapentin prescribing was ubiquitous. Nearly every clinician used gabapentin for neuropathic pain, most for any form of pain. Many clinicians also prescribe gabapentin to moderate psychiatric symptoms and behaviors. Clinicians' prescribing was influenced by opioid, antipsychotic, and anxiolytic reduction policies because gabapentin was perceived as an unmonitored and safer alternative. CONCLUSIONS: Off-label gabapentin increases are closely linked to opioid reduction efforts as more NH clinicians utilize gabapentin as an unmonitored opioid alternative. Our results highlight, however, the less recognized significance of long-stay prescribing for psychiatric symptoms and the similar contribution of psychotropic reduction initiatives, a phenomenon warranting further scrutiny. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Clinicians perceive gabapentin as safer than the drugs it is replacing. Whether this is true remains unclear; the individual- and population-level risks of increased gabapentin use are largely unknown.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Electronic health records (EHRs) have been connected to excessive workload and physician burnout. Little is known about variation in physician experience with different EHRs, however. OBJECTIVE: To analyze variation in reported usability and satisfaction across EHRs. DESIGN: Internet-based survey available between December 2021 and October 2022 integrated into American Board of Family Medicine (ABFM) certification process. PARTICIPANTS: ABFM-certified family physicians who use an EHR with at least 50 total responding physicians. MEASUREMENTS: Self-reported experience of EHR usability and satisfaction. KEY RESULTS: We analyzed the responses of 3358 physicians who used one of nine EHRs. Epic, athenahealth, and Practice Fusion were rated significantly higher across six measures of usability. Overall, between 10 and 30% reported being very satisfied with their EHR, and another 32 to 40% report being somewhat satisfied. Physicians who use athenahealth or Epic were most likely to be very satisfied, while physicians using Allscripts, Cerner, or Greenway were the least likely to be very satisfied. EHR-specific factors were the greatest overall influence on variation in satisfaction: they explained 48% of variation in the probability of being very satisfied with Epic, 46% with eClinical Works, 14% with athenahealth, and 49% with Cerner. CONCLUSIONS: Meaningful differences exist in physician-reported usability and overall satisfaction with EHRs, largely explained by EHR-specific factors. User-centric design and implementation, and robust ongoing evaluation are needed to reduce physician burden and ensure excellent experience with EHRs.
RESUMO
Context: Patients with multiple chronic conditions (MCC) may have unmet behavioral, mental, and social needs which can be difficult to address in primary care. Care planning provides a framework for patients to be screened, collaborate on a care plan, and access a patient navigator who can support them achieving their personal health goals. Objective: To compare patients' progress and confidence in addressing personal care plans for different topics. Study Design and Analysis: Clinician level randomized control trial and descriptive analyses. Dataset: My Own Health Report (MOHR) study and navigator field notes. Population Studied: As part of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) to evaluate a feasible approach to patient care planning, 24 clinicians from 12 practices in the Virginia Ambulatory Care Outcomes Research Network (ACORN) in the Greater Richmond metro and the Northern Virginia areas participated in a care planning intervention. 91 patients in the intervention arm received support from a patient navigator for making and working on a goal. We focused on patients with uncontrolled chronic conditions that have complex needs. Intervention/Instrument: Community-clinical linkage support and navigator field notes in My Own Health Report (MOHR). Outcome Measures: We determined confidence and progress ratings (ranked by patients on 1-10 point scale), health risk assessment responses, and care plan topics selected by patients. Results: Patients feel more confident addressing nutrition than weight loss (mean = 8.07 vs 6.31, p=0.0031). Patients tended to report better prior progress on nutrition care plans (mean = 3.80) than physical activity (mean =2.95, p=0.0024) and weight loss (mean=2.93, p=0.004). Conclusions: Helping patients create care plans on topics they feel most comfortable addressing may better address root causes of poor health associated with chronic conditions. Connecting them with a patient navigator for the short-term may have long-term benefits for patients and care teams.
Assuntos
Emoções , Múltiplas Afecções Crônicas , Humanos , Assistência Ambulatorial , Redução de Peso , Atenção Primária à SaúdeRESUMO
PURPOSE: The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) is an independent body that makes evidence-based recommendations regarding preventive services to improve health for people nationwide. Here, we summarize current USPSTF methods, describe how methods are evolving to address preventive health equity, and define evidence gaps for future research. METHODS: We summarize current USPSTF methods as well as ongoing methods development. RESULTS: The USPSTF prioritizes topics on the basis of disease burden, extent of new evidence, and whether the service can be provided in primary care and going forward will increasingly consider health equity. Analytic frameworks specify the key questions and linkages connecting the preventive service to health outcomes. Contextual questions provide information on natural history, current practice, health outcomes in high-risk groups, and health equity. The USPSTF assigns a level of certainty to the estimate of net benefit of a preventive service (high, moderate, or low). The magnitude of net benefit is also judged (substantial, moderate, small, or zero/negative). The USPSTF uses these assessments to assign a letter grade from A (recommend) to D (recommend against). I statements are issued when evidence is insufficient. CONCLUSIONS: The USPSTF will continue to evolve its methods for simulation modeling and to use evidence to address conditions for which there are limited data for population groups who bear a disproportionate burden of disease. Additional pilot work is underway to better understand the relations of the social constructs of race, ethnicity, and gender with health outcomes to inform the development of a USPSTF health equity framework.
Assuntos
Medicina Baseada em Evidências , Equidade em Saúde , Humanos , Estados Unidos , Comitês Consultivos , Serviços Preventivos de Saúde , PrevisõesRESUMO
To contribute to the national effort to combat the opioid crisis, the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a scoping review to describe the state of evidence for the primary prevention of opioid misuse or use disorder in persons not yet prescribed opioids or not yet misusing opioids. (Patnode et al., 2021) As found by the scoping review, sparse direct evidence focusing on primary care-relevant prevention interventions exists. The purpose of the current commentary is to describe the relevant research needed to effectively inform primary care providers and patients about how to reduce the risk for future opioid use disorder and opioid misuse and improve health outcomes in those not yet exposed to or misusing opioid medications.
Assuntos
Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Opioides , Uso Indevido de Medicamentos sob Prescrição , Analgésicos Opioides/efeitos adversos , Humanos , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Opioides/tratamento farmacológico , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Opioides/prevenção & controle , Uso Indevido de Medicamentos sob Prescrição/prevenção & controle , Atenção Primária à Saúde , Prevenção Primária , Estados UnidosRESUMO
Context: There were 50,000 U.S. opioid overdose deaths in 2019. Millions suffer from opioid addiction. Identifying protective factors for low community opioid mortality may have important implications for addressing the opioid epidemic. This study was funded through the Virginia (VA) Department of Medical Assistance Services (DMAS) through a SUPPORT Act Grant. Objective: To identify "Bright Spot" communities in Virginia with protective factors associated with reduced opioid mortality and morbidity. Study Design: Ecologic study. Dataset: Virginia All Payer Claims Database (APCD), Virginia Department of Health (VDH) statewide medical examiner registry, and American Community Survey (ACS). Time Period: 2016-2019; 2019 data cited here. Population Studied: APCD includes VA residents with medical claims through commercial, Medicaid, and Medicare coverage. VDH data includes fatal drug overdoses. ACS surveys all VA residents. Outcome Measures: Primary outcome: fatal opioid overdoses. Secondary outcomes: emergency room visits for overdoses and opioid-related diagnoses, outpatient diagnoses for opioid-related disorder, prescription rate for opioids, and prescription rate for buprenorphine. Results: Opioid mortality was associated with higher rates of community poverty (r=.38, p<.0001) and disability (r=.52, r<.0001). Opioid mortality was associated with inequality, with higher Gini index associated with higher opioid mortality (r=.23, p<.0001). A higher percentage of black residents was associated with increased fatal opioid overdoses (r=.37, p<.0001) and ED visits for overdoses (r=.30, p<.0001). A higher percentage of white residents correlated with increased outpatient visits for opioid use disorder (r=.24, p<.0001) and higher rates of buprenorphine (r=.34, p<.0001) and opioid prescriptions (r=.31, p <.0001). Conclusions: These findings suggest significant racial disparities in opioid outcomes. Communities with a higher percentage of black residents are more likely to have higher opioid mortality and a lower rate of outpatient treatment. This association may be affected by the time period used in the analysis (2015-2019), as nationally there has been an increasing rate of synthetic opioid deaths in Black communities. These measures have been incorporated into a multivariate analysis to identify Bright Spot communities, which will be discussed during the presentation.
Assuntos
Buprenorfina , Overdose de Drogas , Overdose de Opiáceos , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Opioides , Idoso , Analgésicos Opioides/uso terapêutico , Buprenorfina/uso terapêutico , Atenção à Saúde , Overdose de Drogas/epidemiologia , Humanos , Medicare , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Opioides/tratamento farmacológico , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Recursos HumanosRESUMO
Our objective was to externally validate 2 simple risk scores for mortality among a mostly inpatient population with COVID-19 in Canada (588 patients for COVID-NoLab and 479 patients for COVID-SimpleLab). The mortality rates in the low-, moderate-, and high-risk groups for COVID-NoLab were 1.1%, 9.6%, and 21.2%, respectively. The mortality rates for COVID-SimpleLab were 0.0%, 9.8%, and 20.0%, respectively. These values were similar to those in the original derivation cohort. The 2 simple risk scores, now successfully externally validated, offer clinicians a reliable way to quickly identify low-risk inpatients who could potentially be managed as outpatients in the event of a bed shortage. Both are available online (https://ebell-projects.shinyapps.io/covid_nolab/ and https://ebell-projects.shinyapps.io/COVID-SimpleLab/).
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Humanos , Prognóstico , Canadá/epidemiologia , Pacientes Internados , Pacientes AmbulatoriaisRESUMO
PURPOSE: Primary care is the foundation of the health care workforce and the only part that extends life and improves health equity. Previous research on the geographic and specialty distribution of physicians has relied on the American Medical Association's Masterfile, but these data have limitations that overestimate the workforce. METHODS: We present a pragmatic, systematic, and more accurate method for identifying primary care physicians using the National Plan and Provider Enumeration System (NPPES) and the Virginia All-Payer Claims Database (VA-APCD). Between 2015 and 2019, we identified all Virginia physicians and their specialty through the NPPES. Active physicians were defined by at least 1 claim in the VA-APCD. Specialty was determined hierarchically by the NPPES. Wellness visits were used to identify non-family medicine physicians who were providing primary care. RESULTS: In 2019, there were 20,976 active physicians in Virginia, of whom 5,899 (28.1%) were classified as providing primary care. Of this primary care physician workforce, 52.4% were family medicine physicians; the remaining were internal medicine physicians (18.5%), pediatricians (16.8%), obstetricians and gynecologists (11.8%), and other specialists (0.5%). Over 5 years, the counts and relative percentages of the workforce made up by primary care physicians remained relatively stable. CONCLUSIONS: Our novel method of identifying active physicians with a primary care scope provides a realistic size of the primary care workforce in Virginia, smaller than some previous estimates. Although the method should be expanded to include advanced practice clinicians and to further delineate the scope of practice, this simple approach can be used by policy makers, payers, and planners to ensure adequate primary care capacity.
Assuntos
Medicina , Especialização , Humanos , Atenção Primária à Saúde , Estados Unidos , Virginia , Recursos HumanosRESUMO
Importance: Impairment of visual acuity is a serious public health problem in older adults. The number of persons 60 years or older with impaired visual acuity (defined as best corrected visual acuity worse than 20/40 but better than 20/200) was estimated at 2.91 million in 2015, and the number who are blind (defined as best corrected visual acuity of 20/200 or worse) was estimated at 760â¯000. Impaired visual acuity is consistently associated with decreased quality of life in older persons, including reduced ability to perform activities of daily living, work, and drive safely, as well as increased risk of falls and other unintentional injuries. Objective: To update its 2016 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the benefits and harms of screening for impaired visual acuity in older adults. Population: Asymptomatic adults 65 years or older who present in primary care without known impaired visual acuity and are not seeking care for vision problems. Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for impaired visual acuity in asymptomatic older adults. The evidence is lacking, and the balance of benefits and harms cannot be determined. More research is needed. Recommendation: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for impaired visual acuity in older adults. (I statement).
Assuntos
Transtornos da Visão , Seleção Visual , Atividades Cotidianas , Comitês Consultivos , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Humanos , Programas de Rastreamento/métodos , Atenção Primária à Saúde/métodos , Qualidade de Vida , Medição de Risco , Transtornos da Visão/diagnóstico , Transtornos da Visão/etiologia , Transtornos da Visão/terapia , Seleção Visual/métodos , Acuidade VisualRESUMO
Importance: Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of mortality in the US, accounting for more than 1 in 4 deaths. Each year, an estimated 605â¯000 people in the US have a first myocardial infarction and an estimated 610â¯000 experience a first stroke. Objective: To update its 2016 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review on the effectiveness of aspirin to reduce the risk of CVD events (myocardial infarction and stroke), cardiovascular mortality, and all-cause mortality in persons without a history of CVD. The systematic review also investigated the effect of aspirin use on colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality in primary CVD prevention populations, as well as the harms (particularly bleeding) associated with aspirin use. The USPSTF also commissioned a microsimulation modeling study to assess the net balance of benefits and harms from aspirin use for primary prevention of CVD and CRC, stratified by age, sex, and CVD risk level. Population: Adults 40 years or older without signs or symptoms of CVD or known CVD (including history of myocardial infarction or stroke) who are not at increased risk for bleeding (eg, no history of gastrointestinal ulcers, recent bleeding, other medical conditions, or use of medications that increase bleeding risk). Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that aspirin use for the primary prevention of CVD events in adults aged 40 to 59 years who have a 10% or greater 10-year CVD risk has a small net benefit. The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that initiating aspirin use for the primary prevention of CVD events in adults 60 years or older has no net benefit. Recommendation: The decision to initiate low-dose aspirin use for the primary prevention of CVD in adults aged 40 to 59 years who have a 10% or greater 10-year CVD risk should be an individual one. Evidence indicates that the net benefit of aspirin use in this group is small. Persons who are not at increased risk for bleeding and are willing to take low-dose aspirin daily are more likely to benefit. (C recommendation) The USPSTF recommends against initiating low-dose aspirin use for the primary prevention of CVD in adults 60 years or older. (D recommendation).
Assuntos
Aspirina , Doenças Cardiovasculares , Adulto , Aspirina/efeitos adversos , Aspirina/uso terapêutico , Doenças Cardiovasculares/diagnóstico , Doenças Cardiovasculares/mortalidade , Doenças Cardiovasculares/prevenção & controle , Neoplasias Colorretais/mortalidade , Neoplasias Colorretais/prevenção & controle , Simulação por Computador , Hemorragia/induzido quimicamente , Humanos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Infarto do Miocárdio/tratamento farmacológico , Infarto do Miocárdio/prevenção & controle , Prevenção Primária , Medição de Risco , Acidente Vascular Cerebral/tratamento farmacológico , Acidente Vascular Cerebral/prevenção & controleRESUMO
Importance: Glaucoma affects an estimated 2.7 million people in the US. It is the second-leading cause of irreversible blindness in the US and the leading cause of blindness in Black and Hispanic/Latino persons. Objective: To update its 2013 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the benefits and harms of screening for glaucoma in adults. Population: Adults 40 years or older who present in primary care and do not have signs or symptoms of open-angle glaucoma. Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for glaucoma in adults. The benefits and harms of screening for glaucoma in adults are uncertain. More research is needed. Recommendation: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for primary open-angle glaucoma in adults. (I statement).
Assuntos
Glaucoma de Ângulo Aberto , Programas de Rastreamento , Adulto , Comitês Consultivos , Cegueira , Glaucoma de Ângulo Aberto/diagnóstico , Glaucoma de Ângulo Aberto/terapia , Humanos , Programas de Rastreamento/métodos , Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto , Serviços Preventivos de Saúde , Medição de Risco , Estados UnidosRESUMO
The purpose of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) is to provide evidence-based recommendations on primary care screening, behavioral counseling, and preventive medications. A person's health is strongly influenced by social determinants of health, such as economic and social conditions; therefore, preventive recommendations that address these determinants would be ideal. However, differing social determinants have been proposed by a wide range of agencies and organizations, little prevention evidence is available, and responsible parties are in competition, all of which make the creation of evidence-based prevention recommendations for social determinants of health challenging. This article highlights social determinants already included in USPSTF recommendations and proposes a process by which others may be considered for primary care preventive recommendations. In many ways, incorporating social determinants of health into evidence-based recommendations is an evolving area. By reviewing the evidence on the effects of screening and interventions on social determinants relevant to primary care, the USPSTF will continue to provide recommendations on clinical preventive services to improve the health of all Americans.
Assuntos
Serviços Preventivos de Saúde/normas , Atenção Primária à Saúde/normas , Determinantes Sociais da Saúde/normas , Comitês Consultivos , Pesquisa Biomédica , Humanos , Programas de Rastreamento/normas , Medição de Risco/métodos , Medição de Risco/normas , Estados UnidosRESUMO
IMPORTANCE: In its mission to improve health, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recognizes the strong relationship between a person's health and social and economic circumstances as well as persistent inequities in health care delivery. OBJECTIVE: To assess how social risks have been considered in USPSTF recommendation statements and identify current gaps in evidence needed to expand the systematic inclusion of social risks in future recommendations. EVIDENCE: The USPSTF commissioned a technical brief that reviewed existing literature on screening and interventions for social risk factors and also audited the 85 USPSTF recommendation statements active as of December 2019 to determine how social risks were addressed in clinical preventive services recommendations. FINDINGS: Among the 85 USPSTF recommendation statements reviewed, 14 were focused on preventive services that considered health-related social risks. Social risks were commonly referenced in parts of USPSTF recommendations, with 57 of 85 recommendations including some comment on social risks within the recommendation statement, although many comments were not separate prevention services. Social risks were commented on in USPSTF recommendations as part of risk assessment, as a marker of worse health outcomes from the condition of focus, as a consideration for clinicians when implementing the preventive service, and as a research need or gap on the topic. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This report identified how social risks have been considered in the USPSTF recommendation statements. It serves as a benchmark and foundation for ongoing work to advance the goal of ensuring that health equity and social risks are incorporated in USPSTF methods and recommendations.
Assuntos
Serviços Preventivos de Saúde , Atenção Primária à Saúde , Determinantes Sociais da Saúde , Comitês Consultivos , Insegurança Alimentar , Guias como Assunto , Habitação , Humanos , Fatores de Risco , Fatores Socioeconômicos , Estados UnidosRESUMO
Clinical preventive service recommendations from the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) are based on transparent, systematic, and rigorous methods that consider the certainty of the evidence and magnitude of net benefit. These guidelines aim to address the needs of diverse populations. Biological sex and gender identity are sources of diversity that are not often considered in studies of clinical preventive services that inform the recommendations, resulting in challenges when evaluating the evidence and communicating recommendations for persons in specific gender identification categories (man/woman/gender nonbinary/gender nonconforming/transgender). To advance its methods, the USPSTF reviewed its past recommendations that included the use of sex and gender terms, reviewed the approaches of other guideline-making bodies, and pilot tested strategies to address sex and gender diversity. Based on the findings, the USPSTF intends to use an inclusive approach to identify issues related to sex and gender at the start of the guideline development process; assess the applicability, variability, and quality of evidence as a function of sex and gender; ensure clarity in the use of language regarding sex and gender; and identify evidence gaps related to sex and gender. Evidence reviews will identify the limitations of applying findings to diverse groups from underlying studies that used unclear terminology regarding sex and gender. The USPSTF will use gender-neutral language when appropriate to communicate that recommendations are inclusive of people of any gender and will clearly state when recommendations apply to individuals with specific anatomy associated with biological sex (male/female) or to specific categories of gender identity. The USPSTF recognizes limited evidence to inform the preventive care of populations based on gender identity.
Assuntos
Identidade de Gênero , Serviços Preventivos de Saúde , Sexo , Comitês Consultivos , Medicina Baseada em Evidências , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Serviços Preventivos de Saúde/normas , Pessoas Transgênero , Estados UnidosRESUMO
Importance: The prevalence of overweight and obesity is increasing among persons of childbearing age and pregnant persons. In 2015, almost half of all persons began pregnancy with overweight (24%) or obesity (24%). Reported rates of overweight and obesity are higher among Black, Alaska Native/American Indian, and Hispanic women and lower among White and Asian women. Excess weight at the beginning of pregnancy and excess gestational weight gain have been associated with adverse maternal and infant health outcomes such as a large for gestational age infant, cesarean delivery, or preterm birth. Objective: The USPSTF commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the benefits and harms of behavioral counseling interventions to prevent adverse health outcomes associated with obesity during pregnancy and to evaluate intermediate outcomes, including excess gestational weight gain. This is a new recommendation. Population: Pregnant adolescents and adults in primary care settings. Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that behavioral counseling interventions aimed at promoting healthy weight gain and preventing excess gestational weight gain in pregnancy have a moderate net benefit for pregnant persons. Recommendation: The USPSTF recommends that clinicians offer pregnant persons effective behavioral counseling interventions aimed at promoting healthy weight gain and preventing excess gestational weight gain in pregnancy. (B recommendation).
Assuntos
Terapia Comportamental , Aconselhamento , Ganho de Peso na Gestação , Adolescente , Adulto , Feminino , Macrossomia Fetal/prevenção & controle , Comportamentos Relacionados com a Saúde , Humanos , Obesidade/prevenção & controle , Obesidade/terapia , Gravidez , Complicações na Gravidez/prevenção & controleRESUMO
Importance: Hypertension is a prevalent condition that affects approximately 45% of the adult US population and is the most commonly diagnosed condition at outpatient office visits. Hypertension is a major contributing risk factor for heart failure, myocardial infarction, stroke, and chronic kidney disease. Objective: To reaffirm its 2015 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the benefits and harms of screening for hypertension in adults, the accuracy of office blood pressure measurement for initial screening, and the accuracy of various confirmatory blood pressure measurement methods. Population: Adults 18 years or older without known hypertension. Evidence Assessment: Using a reaffirmation deliberation process, the USPSTF concludes with high certainty that screening for hypertension in adults has substantial net benefit. Recommendation: The USPSTF recommends screening for hypertension in adults 18 years or older with office blood pressure measurement. The USPSTF recommends obtaining blood pressure measurements outside of the clinical setting for diagnostic confirmation before starting treatment. (A recommendation).