RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The ability of latent class models to identify clinically distinct groups among high-risk patients has been demonstrated, but it is unclear how healthcare data can inform group-specific intervention design. OBJECTIVE: Examine how utilization patterns across latent groups of high-risk patients provide actionable information to guide group-specific intervention design. DESIGN: Cohort study using data from 2012 to 2015. PATIENTS: Participants were 934,787 patients receiving primary care in the Veterans Health Administration, with predicted probability of 12-month hospitalization in the top 10th percentile during 2014. MAIN MEASURES: Patients were assigned to latent groups via mixture-item response theory models based on 28 chronic conditions. We modeled odds of all-cause mortality, hospitalizations, and 30-day re-hospitalizations by group membership. Detailed outpatient and inpatient utilization patterns were compared between groups. KEY RESULTS: A total of 764,257 (81.8%) of patients were matched with a comorbidity group. Groups were characterized by substance use disorders (14.0% of patients assigned), cardiometabolic conditions (25.7%), mental health conditions (17.6%), pain/arthritis (19.1%), cancer (15.3%), and liver disease (8.3%). One-year mortality ranged from 2.7% in the Mental Health group to 14.9% in the Cancer group, compared to 8.5% overall. In adjusted models, group assignment predicted significantly different odds of each outcome. Groups differed in their utilization of multiple types of care. For example, patients in the Pain group had the highest utilization of in-person primary care, with a mean (SD) of 5.3 (5.0) visits in the year of follow-up, while the Substance Use Disorder group had the lowest, with 3.9 (4.1) visits. The Substance Use Disorder group also had the highest rates of using services for housing instability (25.1%), followed by the Liver group (10.1%). CONCLUSIONS: Latent groups of high-risk patients had distinct hospitalization and utilization profiles, despite having comparable levels of predicted baseline risk. Utilization profiles pointed towards system-specific care needs that could inform tailored interventions.
Assuntos
Hospitalização , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Substâncias , Estudos de Coortes , Humanos , Pacientes Internados , Dor , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Substâncias/epidemiologia , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Substâncias/terapiaRESUMO
DESCRIPTION: The American College of Physicians (ACP) developed this guideline to provide clinical recommendations on the appropriate use of point-of-care ultrasonography (POCUS) in patients with acute dyspnea in emergency department (ED) or inpatient settings to improve the diagnostic, treatment, and health outcomes of those with suspected congestive heart failure, pneumonia, pulmonary embolism, pleural effusion, or pneumothorax. METHODS: The ACP Clinical Guidelines Committee based this guideline on a systematic review on the benefits, harms, and diagnostic test accuracy of POCUS; patient values and preferences; and costs of POCUS. The systematic review evaluated health outcomes, diagnostic timeliness, treatment decisions, and test accuracy. The critical health, diagnostic, and treatment outcomes evaluated were in-hospital mortality, time to diagnosis, and time to treatment. The important outcomes evaluated were intensive care unit admissions, correctness of diagnosis, disease-specific outcomes, hospital readmissions, length of hospital stay, and quality of life. The critical test accuracy outcomes included false-positive results for suspected pneumonia, pneumothorax, and pulmonary embolism and false-negative results for suspected congestive heart failure, pneumonia, pneumothorax, and pulmonary embolism. Important test accuracy outcomes included false-positive results for suspected congestive heart failure and false-negative and false-positive results for suspected pleural effusion. This guideline was developed using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) method. TARGET AUDIENCE AND PATIENT POPULATION: The target audience is all clinicians, and the target patient population is adult patients with acute dyspnea in ED or inpatient settings. RECOMMENDATION: ACP suggests that clinicians may use point-of-care ultrasonography in addition to the standard diagnostic pathway when there is diagnostic uncertainty in patients with acute dyspnea in emergency department or inpatient settings (conditional recommendation; low-certainty evidence).
Assuntos
Dispneia/diagnóstico por imagem , Dispneia/etiologia , Testes Imediatos , Ultrassonografia , Doença Aguda , Procedimentos Clínicos , Mortalidade Hospitalar , Humanos , Tempo de Internação , Readmissão do Paciente , Sensibilidade e Especificidade , Ultrassonografia/efeitos adversosRESUMO
DESCRIPTION: The American College of Physicians (ACP) developed this guideline to provide clinical recommendations on the appropriate use of high-flow nasal oxygen (HFNO) in hospitalized patients for initial or postextubation management of acute respiratory failure. It is based on the best available evidence on the benefits and harms of HFNO, taken in the context of costs and patient values and preferences. METHODS: The ACP Clinical Guidelines Committee based these recommendations on a systematic review on the efficacy and safety of HFNO. The patient-centered health outcomes evaluated included all-cause mortality, hospital length of stay, 30-day hospital readmissions, hospital-acquired pneumonia, days of intubation or reintubation, intensive care unit (ICU) admission and ICU transfers, patient comfort, dyspnea, delirium, barotrauma, compromised nutrition, gastric dysfunction, functional independence at discharge, discharge disposition, and skin breakdown. This guideline was developed using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) method. TARGET AUDIENCE AND PATIENT POPULATION: The target audience is all clinicians, and the target patient population is adult patients with acute respiratory failure treated in a hospital setting (including emergency departments, hospital wards, intermediate or step-down units, and ICUs). RECOMMENDATION 1A: ACP suggests that clinicians use high-flow nasal oxygen rather than noninvasive ventilation in hospitalized adults for the management of acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (conditional recommendation; low-certainty evidence). RECOMMENDATION 1B: ACP suggests that clinicians use high-flow nasal oxygen rather than conventional oxygen therapy for hospitalized adults with postextubation acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (conditional recommendation; low-certainty evidence).
Assuntos
Oxigenoterapia/métodos , Insuficiência Respiratória/terapia , Doença Aguda , Extubação , Pressão Positiva Contínua nas Vias Aéreas , Hospitalização , Humanos , Respiração com Pressão Positiva Intermitente , Ventilação não Invasiva/economia , Avaliação de Resultados em Cuidados de Saúde , Oxigenoterapia/efeitos adversos , Oxigenoterapia/economia , Preferência do PacienteRESUMO
Description: The American College of Physicians (ACP) developed this guideline to provide clinical recommendations based on the current evidence of the benefits and harms of testosterone treatment in adult men with age-related low testosterone. This guideline is endorsed by the American Academy of Family Physicians. Methods: The ACP Clinical Guidelines Committee based these recommendations on a systematic review on the efficacy and safety of testosterone treatment in adult men with age-related low testosterone. Clinical outcomes were evaluated by using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) system and included sexual function, physical function, quality of life, energy and vitality, depression, cognition, serious adverse events, major adverse cardiovascular events, and other adverse events. Target Audience and Patient Population: The target audience includes all clinicians, and the target patient population includes adult men with age-related low testosterone. Recommendation 1a: ACP suggests that clinicians discuss whether to initiate testosterone treatment in men with age-related low testosterone with sexual dysfunction who want to improve sexual function (conditional recommendation; low-certainty evidence). The discussion should include the potential benefits, harms, costs, and patient's preferences. Recommendation 1b: ACP suggests that clinicians should reevaluate symptoms within 12 months and periodically thereafter. Clinicians should discontinue testosterone treatment in men with age-related low testosterone with sexual dysfunction in whom there is no improvement in sexual function (conditional recommendation; low-certainty evidence). Recommendation 1c: ACP suggests that clinicians consider intramuscular rather than transdermal formulations when initiating testosterone treatment to improve sexual function in men with age-related low testosterone, as costs are considerably lower for the intramuscular formulation and clinical effectiveness and harms are similar. Recommendation 2: ACP suggests that clinicians not initiate testosterone treatment in men with age-related low testosterone to improve energy, vitality, physical function, or cognition (conditional recommendation; low-certainty evidence).
Assuntos
Hipogonadismo/tratamento farmacológico , Testosterona/uso terapêutico , Adulto , Humanos , Masculino , Qualidade de Vida , Estados UnidosRESUMO
DESCRIPTION: The American College of Physicians (ACP) and American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP) developed this guideline to provide clinical recommendations on nonpharmacologic and pharmacologic management of acute pain from non-low back, musculoskeletal injuries in adults in the outpatient setting. The guidance is based on current best available evidence about benefits and harms, taken in the context of costs and patient values and preferences. This guideline does not address noninvasive treatment of low back pain, which is covered by a separate ACP guideline that has also been endorsed by AAFP. METHODS: This guideline is based on a systematic evidence review on the comparative efficacy and safety of nonpharmacologic and pharmacologic management of acute pain from non-low back, musculoskeletal injuries in adults in the outpatient setting and a systematic review on the predictors of prolonged opioid use. We evaluated the following clinical outcomes using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) system: pain (at ≤2 hours and at 1 to 7 days), physical function, symptom relief, treatment satisfaction, and adverse events. TARGET AUDIENCE AND PATIENT POPULATION: The target audience is all clinicians, and the target patient population is adults with acute pain from non-low back, musculoskeletal injuries. RECOMMENDATION 1: ACP and AAFP recommend that clinicians treat patients with acute pain from non-low back, musculoskeletal injuries with topical nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) with or without menthol gel as first-line therapy to reduce or relieve symptoms, including pain; improve physical function; and improve the patient's treatment satisfaction (Grade: strong recommendation; moderate-certainty evidence). RECOMMENDATION 2A: ACP and AAFP suggest that clinicians treat patients with acute pain from non-low back, musculoskeletal injuries with oral NSAIDs to reduce or relieve symptoms, including pain, and to improve physical function, or with oral acetaminophen to reduce pain (Grade: conditional recommendation; moderate-certainty evidence). RECOMMENDATION 2B: ACP and AAFP suggest that clinicians treat patients with acute pain from non-low back, musculoskeletal injuries with specific acupressure to reduce pain and improve physical function, or with transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation to reduce pain (Grade: conditional recommendation; low-certainty evidence). RECOMMENDATION 3: ACP and AAFP suggest against clinicians treating patients with acute pain from non-low back, musculoskeletal injuries with opioids, including tramadol (Grade: conditional recommendation; low-certainty evidence).
Assuntos
Dor Aguda/terapia , Sistema Musculoesquelético/lesões , Acupressão , Dor Aguda/tratamento farmacológico , Dor Aguda/etiologia , Adulto , Analgésicos Opioides/efeitos adversos , Analgésicos Opioides/uso terapêutico , Anti-Inflamatórios não Esteroides/efeitos adversos , Anti-Inflamatórios não Esteroides/uso terapêutico , Humanos , Estimulação Elétrica Nervosa Transcutânea , Estados UnidosRESUMO
STUDY OBJECTIVE: We evaluated a strategy to increase use of the test (Dix-Hallpike's test [DHT]) and treatment (canalith repositioning maneuver [CRM]) for benign paroxysmal positional vertigo in emergency department (ED) dizziness visits. METHODS: We conducted a stepped-wedge randomized trial in 6 EDs. The population was visits with dizziness as a principal reason for the visit. The intervention included educational sessions and decision aid materials. Outcomes were DHT or CRM documentation (primary), head computed tomography (CT) use, length of stay, admission, and 90-day stroke events. The analysis was multilevel logistic regression with intervention, month, and hospital as fixed effects and provider as a random effect. We assessed fidelity with monitoring intervention use and semistructured interviews. RESULTS: We identified 7,635 dizziness visits during 18 months. The DHT or CRM was documented in 1.5% of control visits (45/3,077; 95% confidence interval 1% to 1.9%) and 3.5% of intervention visits (159/4,558; 95% confidence interval 3% to 4%; difference 2%, 95% confidence interval 1.3% to 2.7%). Head CT use was lower in intervention visits compared with control visits (44.0% [1,352/3,077] versus 36.9% [1,682/4,558]). No differences were observed in admission or 90-day subsequent stroke risk. In fidelity evaluations, providers who used the materials typically reported positive clinical experiences but provider engagement was low at facilities without an emergency medicine residency program. CONCLUSION: These findings provide evidence that an implementation strategy of a benign paroxysmal positional vertigo-focused approach to ED dizziness visits can be successful and safe in promoting evidence-based care. Absolute rates of DHT and CRM use, however, were still low, which relates in part to our broad inclusion criteria for dizziness visits.
Assuntos
Vertigem Posicional Paroxística Benigna/diagnóstico , Vertigem Posicional Paroxística Benigna/terapia , Serviço Hospitalar de Emergência , Prática Clínica Baseada em Evidências , Posicionamento do Paciente , Adulto , Vertigem Posicional Paroxística Benigna/diagnóstico por imagem , Tontura/etiologia , Tontura/terapia , Feminino , Fidelidade a Diretrizes , Humanos , Incidência , Estimativa de Kaplan-Meier , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Posicionamento do Paciente/efeitos adversos , Posicionamento do Paciente/métodos , Modelos de Riscos Proporcionais , Acidente Vascular Cerebral/epidemiologiaRESUMO
Type 2 diabetes is a prevalent illness that causes major vascular, renal, and neurologic complications. Prevention and treatment of diabetes and its complications are of paramount importance. Many new treatments have emerged over the past 5-10 years. Recent evidence shows that newer treatments may substantially reduce risk for cardiac and renal disease, suggesting that it may be necessary to change existing treatment paradigms. This review summarizes the evidence supporting diabetes prevention and treatment, focusing on aspects that are commonly in the purview of primary care physicians.
Assuntos
Doenças Cardiovasculares/etiologia , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2 , Gerenciamento Clínico , Nefropatias/etiologia , Programas de Rastreamento/métodos , Doenças Cardiovasculares/epidemiologia , Doenças Cardiovasculares/prevenção & controle , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/complicações , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/epidemiologia , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/terapia , Saúde Global , Humanos , Nefropatias/epidemiologia , Nefropatias/prevenção & controle , Morbidade/tendências , Fatores de RiscoRESUMO
Background: Most guidelines for major depressive disorder recommend initial treatment with either a second-generation antidepressant (SGA) or cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT). Although most trials suggest that these treatments have similar efficacy, their health economic implications are uncertain. Objective: To quantify the cost-effectiveness of CBT versus SGA for initial treatment of depression. Design: Decision analytic model. Data Sources: Relative effectiveness data from a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials; additional clinical and economic data from other publications. Target Population: Adults with newly diagnosed major depressive disorder in the United States. Time Horizon: 1 to 5 years. Perspectives: Health care sector and societal. Intervention: Initial treatment with either an SGA or group and individual CBT. Outcome Measures: Costs in 2014 U.S. dollars, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. Results of Base-Case Analysis: In model projections, CBT produced higher QALYs (3 days more at 1 year and 20 days more at 5 years) with higher costs at 1 year (health care sector, $900; societal, $1500) but lower costs at 5 years (health care sector, -$1800; societal, -$2500). Results of Sensitivity Analysis: In probabilistic sensitivity analyses, SGA had a 64% to 77% likelihood of having an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $100 000 or less per QALY at 1 year; CBT had a 73% to 77% likelihood at 5 years. Uncertainty in the relative risk for relapse of depression contributed the most to overall uncertainty in the optimal treatment. Limitation: Long-term trials comparing CBT and SGA are lacking. Conclusion: Neither SGAs nor CBT provides consistently superior cost-effectiveness relative to the other. Given many patients' preference for psychotherapy over pharmacotherapy, increasing patient access to CBT may be warranted. Primary Funding Source: Department of Veterans Affairs, National Institute of Mental Health.
Assuntos
Antidepressivos de Segunda Geração/economia , Terapia Cognitivo-Comportamental/economia , Análise Custo-Benefício , Transtorno Depressivo Maior/terapia , Adulto , Antidepressivos de Segunda Geração/efeitos adversos , Antidepressivos de Segunda Geração/uso terapêutico , Técnicas de Apoio para a Decisão , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Anos de Vida Ajustados por Qualidade de Vida , Sensibilidade e Especificidade , Incerteza , Estados UnidosRESUMO
One of the hallmarks of a trustworthy clinical guideline or guidance statement is a comprehensive process for disclosure of interests (DOI) and management of conflicts of interest (COIs). The American College of Physicians (ACP) Clinical Guidelines Committee (CGC) aims to disclose all health care-related interests and manage conflicts in a manner that is transparent, proportional, and consistent. Any person involved in the development of an ACP clinical guideline or guidance statement must disclose all financial and intellectual interests related to health care from the previous 3 years. Persons complete disclosures at the start of their participation and are required to update them over the course of their involvement with the CGC, including before each CGC meeting. A DOI-COI Review and Management Panel reviews the disclosures; flags potential conflicts; grades the COI as low-, moderate-, or high-level; and manages the person's participation accordingly. A high-level COI results in recusal from authorship, voting, and all committee discussions. Participants with a moderate-level COI are recused from authorship and voting for clinically relevant topics but may participate in all discussions. A low-level COI results in no role restrictions. All disclosures and COI management decisions are publicly reported.
Assuntos
Autoria , Conflito de Interesses , Revelação , Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto/normas , Humanos , Editoração/normas , Fatores de TempoRESUMO
Description: The purpose of this guidance statement is to provide advice to clinicians on breast cancer screening in average-risk women based on a review of existing guidelines and the evidence they include. Methods: This guidance statement is derived from an appraisal of selected guidelines from around the world that address breast cancer screening, as well as their included evidence. All national guidelines published in English between 1 January 2013 and 15 November 2017 in the National Guideline Clearinghouse or Guidelines International Network library were included. In addition, the authors selected other guidelines commonly used in clinical practice. Web sites associated with all selected guidelines were checked for updates on 10 December 2018. The AGREE II (Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II) instrument was used to evaluate the quality of guidelines. Target Audience and Patient Population: The target audience is all clinicians, and the target patient population is all asymptomatic women with average risk for breast cancer. Guidance Statement 1: In average-risk women aged 40 to 49 years, clinicians should discuss whether to screen for breast cancer with mammography before age 50 years. Discussion should include the potential benefits and harms and a woman's preferences. The potential harms outweigh the benefits in most women aged 40 to 49 years. Guidance Statement 2: In average-risk women aged 50 to 74 years, clinicians should offer screening for breast cancer with biennial mammography. Guidance Statement 3: In average-risk women aged 75 years or older or in women with a life expectancy of 10 years or less, clinicians should discontinue screening for breast cancer. Guidance Statement 4: In average-risk women of all ages, clinicians should not use clinical breast examination to screen for breast cancer.
Assuntos
Neoplasias da Mama/prevenção & controle , Detecção Precoce de Câncer , Mamografia , Programas de Rastreamento , Adulto , Fatores Etários , Idoso , Densidade da Mama , Neoplasias da Mama/diagnóstico , Neoplasias da Mama/mortalidade , Detecção Precoce de Câncer/efeitos adversos , Detecção Precoce de Câncer/métodos , Feminino , Humanos , Expectativa de Vida , Mamografia/efeitos adversos , Programas de Rastreamento/efeitos adversos , Programas de Rastreamento/métodos , Uso Excessivo dos Serviços de Saúde , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Exame Físico , Medição de Risco , Fatores de RiscoRESUMO
The American College of Physicians (ACP) was one of the first organizations in the United States to develop evidence-based clinical guidelines and has been developing guidelines since 1981. ACP's Clinical Guidelines Committee (CGC), in collaboration with staff from the Clinical Policy department, develops clinical guidelines and guidance statements and continues to refine and enhance its methodology. This article presents an update of the CGC's 2010 paper outlining policies, methods, and presentation format of ACP's clinical guidelines and guidance statements. Updated methods include more stringent policies about disclosure of interests and conflict management; inclusion of public perspective; full adoption of GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) methods; more standardized reporting formats that consider value of care, patient comorbid conditions, patient values and preferences, and costs; and further clarification of guidance statement methods.
Assuntos
Medicina Baseada em Evidências , Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto/normas , Comitês Consultivos/organização & administração , Conflito de Interesses , Revelação , Humanos , Disseminação de Informação , Objetivos Organizacionais , Revisão da Pesquisa por Pares , Políticas , Sociedades Médicas/organização & administração , Estados UnidosRESUMO
High-quality bowel preparation (prep) before colonoscopy is essential for the success of the procedure.1 Bowel preps should be safe, tolerable, efficacious, and allow for visualization of polyps 5 mm or larger.2 Full-volume (4 L) polyethylene glycol-3350 with electrolyte solution (PEG-ELS) has been considered a standard bowel prep regimen, with good safety and efficacy profiles, and is available as a generic.2.
Assuntos
Catárticos/economia , Custos de Medicamentos/tendências , Medicare Part D/economia , Citratos/economia , Colonoscopia , Medicamentos Genéricos/economia , Eletrólitos/economia , Humanos , Compostos Organometálicos/economia , Fosfatos/economia , Picolinas/economia , Polietilenoglicóis/economia , Sulfatos/economia , Estados UnidosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Bridging anticoagulation is commonly prescribed to patients with atrial fibrillation during initiation and interruption of warfarin. Guidelines recommend bridging patients at high risk of stroke, while a recent randomized trial demonstrated overall harm in a population at comparatively low risk of ischemic stroke. Theory suggests that patients at high risk of stroke and low risk of hemorrhage may benefit from bridging, but data informing patient selection are scant. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the utility and cost-effectiveness of bridging anticoagulation among patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation, stratified by thromboembolic and hemorrhagic risk DESIGN: Cost-effectiveness analysis with lifelong time horizon, from the perspective of a third-party payer MAIN MEASURES: Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) per bridged patient; US dollars per QALY gained KEY RESULTS: Unselected patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation may be harmed by bridging anticoagulation. Hospital admission for bridging is almost never cost-effective, and generally harmful. Among patients carefully selected by both thromboembolic and hemorrhagic risks, outpatient bridging can be beneficial and cost-effective. Results were sensitive to how effectively heparin products reduce stroke risk. CONCLUSIONS: Outpatient bridging anticoagulation can be beneficial and cost-effective for a subset of patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation during interruption or initiation of warfarin. Admission for bridging should be avoided.
Assuntos
Anticoagulantes/economia , Fibrilação Atrial/tratamento farmacológico , Anticoagulantes/uso terapêutico , Fibrilação Atrial/economia , Coagulação Sanguínea/efeitos dos fármacos , Análise Custo-Benefício , Bases de Dados Factuais , Humanos , Anos de Vida Ajustados por Qualidade de Vida , Medição de Risco , Acidente Vascular Cerebral/prevenção & controleRESUMO
Description: The American College of Physicians (ACP) developed this guideline to present the evidence and provide clinical recommendations on the management of gout. Methods: Using the ACP grading system, the committee based these recommendations on a systematic review of randomized, controlled trials; systematic reviews; and large observational studies published between January 2010 and March 2016. Clinical outcomes evaluated included pain, joint swelling and tenderness, activities of daily living, patient global assessment, recurrence, intermediate outcomes of serum urate levels, and harms. Target Audience and Patient Population: The target audience for this guideline includes all clinicians, and the target patient population includes adults with acute or recurrent gout. Recommendation 1: ACP recommends that clinicians choose corticosteroids, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), or colchicine to treat patients with acute gout. (Grade: strong recommendation, high-quality evidence). Recommendation 2: ACP recommends that clinicians use low-dose colchicine when using colchicine to treat acute gout. (Grade: strong recommendation, moderate-quality evidence). Recommendation 3: ACP recommends against initiating long-term urate-lowering therapy in most patients after a first gout attack or in patients with infrequent attacks. (Grade: strong recommendation, moderate-quality evidence). Recommendation 4: ACP recommends that clinicians discuss benefits, harms, costs, and individual preferences with patients before initiating urate-lowering therapy, including concomitant prophylaxis, in patients with recurrent gout attacks. (Grade: strong recommendation, moderate-quality evidence).
Assuntos
Gota/tratamento farmacológico , Corticosteroides/efeitos adversos , Corticosteroides/uso terapêutico , Hormônio Adrenocorticotrópico/efeitos adversos , Hormônio Adrenocorticotrópico/uso terapêutico , Adulto , Anti-Inflamatórios não Esteroides/efeitos adversos , Anti-Inflamatórios não Esteroides/uso terapêutico , Colchicina/efeitos adversos , Colchicina/uso terapêutico , Pesquisa Comparativa da Efetividade , Gota/sangue , Gota/dietoterapia , Supressores da Gota/efeitos adversos , Supressores da Gota/uso terapêutico , Humanos , Estilo de Vida , Recidiva , Ácido Úrico/sangue , Suspensão de TratamentoRESUMO
Description: The American College of Physicians (ACP) developed this guideline to present the evidence and provide clinical recommendations on the diagnosis of gout. Methods: This guideline is based on a systematic review of published studies on gout diagnosis, identified using several databases, from database inception to February 2016. Evaluated outcomes included the accuracy of the test results; intermediate outcomes (results of laboratory and radiographic tests, such as serum urate and synovial fluid crystal analysis and radiographic or ultrasonography changes); clinical decision making (additional testing and pharmacologic or dietary management); short-term clinical (patient-centered) outcomes, such as pain and joint swelling and tenderness; and adverse effects of the tests. This guideline grades the evidence and recommendations by using the ACP grading system, which is based on the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) method. Target Audience and Patient Population: The target audience for this guideline includes all clinicians, and the target patient population includes adults with joint inflammation suspected to be gout. Recommendation: ACP recommends that clinicians use synovial fluid analysis when clinical judgment indicates that diagnostic testing is necessary in patients with possible acute gout. (Grade: weak recommendation, low-quality evidence).
Assuntos
Gota/diagnóstico , Adulto , Algoritmos , Gota/classificação , Gota/diagnóstico por imagem , Humanos , Líquido Sinovial/química , Ácido Úrico/análiseRESUMO
Description: The American College of Physicians (ACP) developed this guideline to present the evidence and provide clinical recommendations on noninvasive treatment of low back pain. Methods: Using the ACP grading system, the committee based these recommendations on a systematic review of randomized, controlled trials and systematic reviews published through April 2015 on noninvasive pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatments for low back pain. Updated searches were performed through November 2016. Clinical outcomes evaluated included reduction or elimination of low back pain, improvement in back-specific and overall function, improvement in health-related quality of life, reduction in work disability and return to work, global improvement, number of back pain episodes or time between episodes, patient satisfaction, and adverse effects. Target Audience and Patient Population: The target audience for this guideline includes all clinicians, and the target patient population includes adults with acute, subacute, or chronic low back pain. Recommendation 1: Given that most patients with acute or subacute low back pain improve over time regardless of treatment, clinicians and patients should select nonpharmacologic treatment with superficial heat (moderate-quality evidence), massage, acupuncture, or spinal manipulation (low-quality evidence). If pharmacologic treatment is desired, clinicians and patients should select nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or skeletal muscle relaxants (moderate-quality evidence). (Grade: strong recommendation). Recommendation 2: For patients with chronic low back pain, clinicians and patients should initially select nonpharmacologic treatment with exercise, multidisciplinary rehabilitation, acupuncture, mindfulness-based stress reduction (moderate-quality evidence), tai chi, yoga, motor control exercise, progressive relaxation, electromyography biofeedback, low-level laser therapy, operant therapy, cognitive behavioral therapy, or spinal manipulation (low-quality evidence). (Grade: strong recommendation). Recommendation 3: In patients with chronic low back pain who have had an inadequate response to nonpharmacologic therapy, clinicians and patients should consider pharmacologic treatment with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs as first-line therapy, or tramadol or duloxetine as second-line therapy. Clinicians should only consider opioids as an option in patients who have failed the aforementioned treatments and only if the potential benefits outweigh the risks for individual patients and after a discussion of known risks and realistic benefits with patients. (Grade: weak recommendation, moderate-quality evidence).
Assuntos
Dor Aguda/terapia , Dor Crônica/terapia , Dor Lombar/terapia , Terapia por Acupuntura , Dor Aguda/tratamento farmacológico , Analgésicos/efeitos adversos , Analgésicos/uso terapêutico , Dor Crônica/tratamento farmacológico , Temperatura Alta/uso terapêutico , Humanos , Terapia a Laser , Dor Lombar/tratamento farmacológico , Terapias Mente-Corpo , Modalidades de Fisioterapia , PsicoterapiaRESUMO
OBJECTIVES: Americans undergo â¼7 million esophagogastroduodenoscopies (EGDs) annually, and one-third of Medicare beneficiaries undergo a repeat EGD within 3 years. As many as 43% of these repeat EGDs are inappropriate. We aimed to determine the rate of repeat inappropriate EGD within the Veterans Health Administration (VHA), and identify factors associated with repeat EGD. METHODS: We conducted retrospective analyses of Veterans undergoing an index EGD at 159 VHA facilities between 1 January 2003 and 30 June 2007. We excluded Veterans without regular use of VHA for health care or 5 years of follow-up. Appropriateness of repeat EGDs was classified based on diagnostic and procedure codes into three categories: Likely Appropriate, Possible Overuse, and Probable Overuse. The proportion of repeat EGDs in each category was tabulated. Multilevel logistic regression was performed to estimate the impact of patient-level and site-level factors on the odds of repeat EGD. RESULTS: Of the 235,855 included Veterans, 85,690 (36.3%) underwent a repeat EGD within 5 years. Of the repeat EGDs, 42,412 (49.5%) were Likely Appropriate, 35,503 (41.4%) represented Possible Overuse, and 7,756 (9.1%) represented Probable Overuse. Patients with more frequent encounters with primary care providers and access to facilities performing EGD and with greater complexity of services were more likely to receive repeat EGD, regardless of whether the repeat EGD was appropriate or overuse. Women were slightly more likely to undergo repeat EGD in Probable Overuse situations. CONCLUSIONS: Overuse of repeat EGD is common in VHA despite the absence of financial incentives that promote overuse. Efforts are needed to better understand the motivations for overuse and barriers to appropriate use, and to promote appropriate use of repeat EGD.
Assuntos
Endoscopia do Sistema Digestório/estatística & dados numéricos , Uso Excessivo dos Serviços de Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , United States Department of Veterans Affairs , Idoso , Esôfago de Barrett/diagnóstico , Esôfago de Barrett/cirurgia , Estudos de Coortes , Duodenite/diagnóstico , Fístula Esofágica/diagnóstico , Fístula Esofágica/cirurgia , Neoplasias Esofágicas/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Esofágicas/cirurgia , Estenose Esofágica/diagnóstico , Estenose Esofágica/cirurgia , Esofagite/diagnóstico , Feminino , Gastrite/diagnóstico , Refluxo Gastroesofágico/diagnóstico , Hemorragia Gastrointestinal/diagnóstico , Hemorragia Gastrointestinal/cirurgia , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos Retrospectivos , Estados UnidosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Bridging anticoagulation is commonly prescribed to patients with atrial fibrillation who are initiating warfarin or require interruption of anticoagulation. Current guidelines recommend bridging for patients at high risk of stroke. Among patients with atrial fibrillation and one or more risk factors for ischemic stroke, the recently published BRIDGE trial found forgoing bridging during interruption to be, on average, noninferior to bridging with respect to ischemic complications, with significantly fewer hemorrhagic complications. OBJECTIVE: We sought to examine the benefits and harms of bridging anticoagulation across the spectrum of ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke risk and thereby enable more nuanced, risk-stratified decision-making when bridging is considered during initiation or interruption of vitamin K antagonists. DESIGN: A Monte Carlo simulation, using a combination of literature-derived estimates, registry data, and trial data. MAIN MEASURES: Net clinical benefit, weighting for ischemic strokes, intracranial hemorrhages, and extracranial major hemorrhages. KEY RESULTS: The benefits and harms of bridging anticoagulation vary according to underlying patient risk profiles for both thromboembolic stroke and major intracranial bleeding. Patients at high risk of ischemic stroke and low risk of hemorrhage derive benefit from bridging during initiation or interruption of warfarin therapy. Patients at similarly high or low risk of both outcomes may receive benefit from bridging during initiation and bridging during interruption, but this was sensitive to underlying assumptions. The need for stratification along both axes of risk was robust to a wide range of parameters. CONCLUSIONS: Bridging anticoagulation may provide benefit to patients at high risk of ischemic stroke and low risk of intracranial hemorrhage who are initiating or interrupting warfarin therapy, while patients at high or low risk of both complications may be harmed. The use of bridging anticoagulation in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation should be considered only after stratification by risk of ischemic and hemorrhagic complications.
Assuntos
Anticoagulantes/administração & dosagem , Fibrilação Atrial/tratamento farmacológico , Anticoagulantes/efeitos adversos , Fibrilação Atrial/complicações , Hemorragia Cerebral/induzido quimicamente , Esquema de Medicação , Quimioterapia Combinada , Hemorragia/induzido quimicamente , Humanos , Coeficiente Internacional Normatizado , Método de Monte Carlo , Medição de Risco/métodos , Acidente Vascular Cerebral/etiologia , Acidente Vascular Cerebral/prevenção & controle , Tromboembolia/etiologia , Tromboembolia/prevenção & controle , Varfarina/administração & dosagemRESUMO
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening decisions for elderly individuals are often made primarily on the basis of age, whereas other factors that influence the effectiveness and cost effectiveness of screening are often not considered. We investigated the relative importance of factors that could be used to identify elderly individuals most likely to benefit from CRC screening and determined the maximum ages at which screening remains cost effective based on these factors. METHODS: We used a microsimulation model (Microsimulation Screening Analysis-Colon) calibrated to the incidence of CRC in the United States and the prevalence of adenomas reported in autopsy studies to determine the appropriate age at which to stop colonoscopy screening in 19,200 cohorts (of 10 million individuals), defined by sex, race, screening history, background risk for CRC, and comorbidity status. We applied a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. RESULTS: Less intensive screening history, higher background risk for CRC, and fewer comorbidities were associated with cost-effective screening at older ages. Sex and race had only a small effect on the appropriate age to stop screening. For some individuals likely to be screened in current practice (for example, 74-year-old white women with moderate comorbidities, half the average background risk for CRC, and negative findings from a screening colonoscopy 10 years previously), screening resulted in a loss of QALYs, rather than a gain. For some individuals unlikely to be screened in current practice (for example, 81-year-old black men with no comorbidities, an average background risk for CRC, and no previous screening), screening was highly cost effective. Although screening some previously screened, low-risk individuals was not cost effective even when they were 66 years old, screening some healthy, high-risk individuals remained cost effective until they reached the age of 88 years old. CONCLUSIONS: The current approach to CRC screening in elderly individuals, in which decisions are often based primarily on age, is inefficient, resulting in underuse of screening for some and overuse of screening for others. CRC screening could be more effective and cost effective if individual factors for each patient are considered.
Assuntos
Envelhecimento/patologia , Colonoscopia/estatística & dados numéricos , Neoplasias Colorretais/diagnóstico , Análise Custo-Benefício/estatística & dados numéricos , Detecção Precoce de Câncer/normas , Programas de Rastreamento/normas , Adenoma/epidemiologia , Adenoma/patologia , Fatores Etários , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Colonoscopia/economia , Neoplasias Colorretais/epidemiologia , Neoplasias Colorretais/patologia , Comorbidade , Análise Custo-Benefício/economia , Detecção Precoce de Câncer/economia , Detecção Precoce de Câncer/estatística & dados numéricos , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Programas de Rastreamento/economia , Programas de Rastreamento/métodos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Medicina de Precisão/economia , Medicina de Precisão/métodos , Prevalência , Anos de Vida Ajustados por Qualidade de Vida , Fatores de Risco , Fatores Sexuais , Fatores de Tempo , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Estados Unidos/etnologiaRESUMO
OBJECTIVES: We have shown that, in a randomized trial comparing adherence to different colorectal cancer (CRC) screening strategies, participants assigned to either fecal occult blood testing (FOBT) or given a choice between FOBT and colonoscopy had significantly higher adherence than those assigned to colonoscopy during the first year. However, how adherence to screening changes over time is unknown. METHODS: In this trial, 997 participants were cluster randomized to one of the three screening strategies: (i) FOBT, (ii) colonoscopy, or (iii) a choice between FOBT and colonoscopy. Research assistants helped participants to complete testing only in the first year. Adherence to screening was defined as completion of three FOBT cards in each of 3 years after enrollment or completion of colonoscopy within the first year of enrollment. The primary outcome was adherence to assigned strategy over 3 years. Additional outcomes included identification of sociodemographic factors associated with adherence. RESULTS: Participants assigned to annual FOBT completed screening at a significantly lower rate over 3 years (14%) than those assigned to colonoscopy (38%, P<0.001) or choice (42%, P<0.001); however, completion of any screening test fell precipitously, indicating the strong effect of patient navigation. In multivariable logistic regression analysis, being randomized to the choice or colonoscopy group, Chinese language, homosexuality, being married/partnered, and having a non-nurse practitioner primary care provider were independently associated with greater adherence to screening (P<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In a 3-year follow-up of a randomized trial comparing competing CRC screening strategies, participants offered a choice between FOBT and colonoscopy continued to have relatively high adherence, whereas adherence in the FOBT group fell significantly below that of the choice and colonoscopy groups. Patient navigation is crucial to achieving adherence to CRC screening, and FOBT is especially vulnerable because of the need for annual testing.