Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 304
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Tipo de documento
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
J Allergy Clin Immunol ; 149(1): 440-444.e2, 2022 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34118248

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Observational studies have yielded inconsistent findings for the relation between vitamin D level and total IgE or allergic sensitization. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether vitamin D supplementation reduces levels of total IgE and IgE to each of 2 common indoor allergens in children with asthma and low vitamin D levels. METHODS: Total IgE, IgE to Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus, and IgE to Blattella germanica were measured at the randomization and exit visits for 174 participants in the Vitamin D Kids Asthma Study, a multicenter, double-blind, randomized placebo-controlled trial of vitamin D3 supplementation (4000 IU/d) to prevent severe exacerbations in children with persistent asthma and vitamin D levels less than 30 ng/mL. Multivariable linear regression was used for the analysis of the effect of vitamin D supplementation on change in each IgE measure. RESULTS: Participants were followed for an average of 316 days. At the exit visit, more subjects in the vitamin D arm achieved a vitamin D level equal to or more than 30 ng/mL compared with those in the placebo arm (87% vs 30%; P < .001). In a multivariable analysis, vitamin D3 supplementation had no significant effect on change in total IgE, IgE to Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus, or IgE to Blattella germanica between the exit and randomization visits (eg, for log10 total IgE, ß = 0.007; 95% CI, -0.061 to 0.074; P = .85). CONCLUSIONS: Vitamin D supplementation, compared with placebo, has no significant effect on serum levels of total IgE, IgE to dust mite, or IgE to cockroach in children with asthma and low vitamin D levels.


Assuntos
Alérgenos/imunologia , Antígenos de Dermatophagoides/imunologia , Proteínas de Artrópodes/imunologia , Asma/tratamento farmacológico , Cisteína Endopeptidases/imunologia , Imunoglobulina E/sangue , Vitamina D/uso terapêutico , Vitaminas/uso terapêutico , Animais , Asma/sangue , Asma/imunologia , Criança , Suplementos Nutricionais , Método Duplo-Cego , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino
2.
JAMA ; 329(17): 1487-1494, 2023 05 02.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37129649

RESUMO

Importance: In the US, tuberculosis remains an important preventable disease, including active tuberculosis, which may be infectious, and latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI), which is asymptomatic and not infectious but can later progress to active disease. The precise prevalence rate of LTBI in the US is difficult to determine; however, estimated prevalence is about 5.0%, or up to 13 million persons. Incidence of tuberculosis varies by geography and living accommodations, suggesting an association with social determinants of health. Objective: To update its 2016 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review on LTBI screening and treatment in asymptomatic adults seen in primary care, as well as the accuracy of LTBI screening tests. Population: Asymptomatic adults 18 years or older at increased risk for tuberculosis. Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that there is a moderate net benefit in preventing active tuberculosis disease by screening for LTBI in persons at increased risk for tuberculosis infection. Recommendation: The USPSTF recommends screening for LTBI in populations at increased risk. (B recommendation).


Assuntos
Tuberculose Latente , Adulto , Humanos , Tuberculose Latente/complicações , Tuberculose Latente/diagnóstico , Tuberculose Latente/epidemiologia , Tuberculose Latente/etiologia , Programas de Rastreamento/efeitos adversos , Programas de Rastreamento/métodos , Medição de Risco , Tuberculose/epidemiologia , Tuberculose/etiologia , Tuberculose/prevenção & controle , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Determinantes Sociais da Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos
3.
JAMA ; 329(6): 502-507, 2023 02 14.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36786784

RESUMO

Importance: Genital herpes is a common sexually transmitted infection caused by 2 related viruses, herpes simplex type 1 (HSV-1) and herpes simplex type 2 (HSV-2). Infection is lifelong; currently, there is no cure for HSV infection. Antiviral medications may provide clinical benefits to symptomatic persons. Transmission of HSV from a pregnant person to their infant can occur, most commonly during delivery; when genital lesions or prodromal symptoms are present, cesarean delivery can reduce the risk of transmission. Neonatal herpes infection is uncommon yet can result in substantial morbidity and mortality. Objective: To reaffirm its 2016 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a reaffirmation evidence update on targeted key questions to systematically evaluate the evidence on accuracy, benefits, and harms of routine serologic screening for HSV-2 infection in asymptomatic adolescents, adults, and pregnant persons. Population: Adolescents and adults, including pregnant persons, without known history, signs, or symptoms of genital HSV infection. Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that the harms outweigh the benefits for population-based screening for genital HSV infection in asymptomatic adolescents and adults, including pregnant persons. Recommendation: The USPSTF recommends against routine serologic screening for genital HSV infection in asymptomatic adolescents and adults, including pregnant persons. (D recommendation).


Assuntos
Herpes Genital , Herpesvirus Humano 1 , Herpesvirus Humano 2 , Programas de Rastreamento , Complicações Infecciosas na Gravidez , Testes Sorológicos , Adolescente , Adulto , Feminino , Humanos , Recém-Nascido , Gravidez , Herpes Genital/diagnóstico , Herpes Genital/tratamento farmacológico , Programas de Rastreamento/efeitos adversos , Programas de Rastreamento/psicologia , Complicações Infecciosas na Gravidez/diagnóstico , Complicações Infecciosas na Gravidez/tratamento farmacológico , Complicações Infecciosas na Gravidez/prevenção & controle , Testes Sorológicos/efeitos adversos , Testes Sorológicos/métodos , Testes Sorológicos/psicologia , Herpes Simples/diagnóstico
4.
JAMA ; 330(11): 1074-1082, 2023 09 19.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37721605

RESUMO

Importance: Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy are among the leading causes of maternal morbidity and mortality in the US. The rate of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy has been increasing from approximately 500 cases per 10 000 deliveries in 1993 to 1021 cases per 10 000 deliveries in 2016 to 2017. Objective: The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the benefits and harms of screening for hypertensive disorders of pregnancy. Population: Pregnant persons without a known diagnosis of a hypertensive disorder of pregnancy or chronic hypertension. Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that screening for hypertensive disorders in pregnancy with blood pressure measurements has substantial net benefit. Recommendation: The USPSTF recommends screening for hypertensive disorders in pregnant persons with blood pressure measurements throughout pregnancy. (B recommendation).


Assuntos
Hipertensão Induzida pela Gravidez , Feminino , Humanos , Gravidez , Comitês Consultivos , Hipertensão Induzida pela Gravidez/diagnóstico , Serviços Preventivos de Saúde , Programas de Rastreamento , Determinação da Pressão Arterial
5.
N Engl J Med ; 381(13): 1227-1239, 2019 09 26.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31553835

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Morbidity from asthma is disproportionately higher among black patients than among white patients, and black patients constitute the minority of participants in trials informing treatment. Data indicate that patients with inadequately controlled asthma benefit more from addition of a long-acting beta-agonist (LABA) than from increased glucocorticoids; however, these data may not be informative for treatment in black patients. METHODS: We conducted two prospective, randomized, double-blind trials: one involving children and the other involving adolescents and adults. In both trials, the patients had at least one grandparent who identified as black and had asthma that was inadequately controlled with low-dose inhaled glucocorticoids. We compared combinations of therapy, which included the addition of a LABA (salmeterol) to an inhaled glucocorticoid (fluticasone propionate), a step-up to double to quintuple the dose of fluticasone, or both. The treatments were compared with the use of a composite measure that evaluated asthma exacerbations, asthma-control days, and lung function; data were stratified according to genotypic African ancestry. RESULTS: When quintupling the dose of fluticasone (to 250 µg twice a day) was compared with adding salmeterol (50 µg twice a day) and doubling the fluticasone (to 100 µg twice a day), a superior response occurred in 46% of the children with quintupling the fluticasone and in 46% of the children with doubling the fluticasone and adding salmeterol (P = 0.99). In contrast, more adolescents and adults had a superior response to added salmeterol than to an increase in fluticasone (salmeterol-low-dose fluticasone vs. medium-dose fluticasone, 49% vs. 28% [P = 0.003]; salmeterol-medium-dose fluticasone vs. high-dose fluticasone, 49% vs. 31% [P = 0.02]). Neither the degree of African ancestry nor baseline biomarkers predicted a superior response to specific treatments. The increased dose of inhaled glucocorticoids was associated with a decrease in the ratio of urinary cortisol to creatinine in children younger than 8 years of age. CONCLUSIONS: In contrast to black adolescents and adults, almost half the black children with poorly controlled asthma had a superior response to an increase in the dose of an inhaled glucocorticoid and almost half had a superior response to the addition of a LABA. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; BARD ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01967173.).


Assuntos
Agonistas de Receptores Adrenérgicos beta 2/administração & dosagem , Asma/tratamento farmacológico , Negro ou Afro-Americano , Broncodilatadores/administração & dosagem , Fluticasona/administração & dosagem , Glucocorticoides/administração & dosagem , Xinafoato de Salmeterol/administração & dosagem , Administração por Inalação , Adolescente , Adulto , Criança , Pré-Escolar , Estudos Cross-Over , Relação Dose-Resposta a Droga , Método Duplo-Cego , Combinação de Medicamentos , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Estudos Prospectivos
6.
N Engl J Med ; 380(21): 2009-2019, 2019 05 23.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31112384

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: In many patients with mild, persistent asthma, the percentage of eosinophils in sputum is less than 2% (low eosinophil level). The appropriate treatment for these patients is unknown. METHODS: In this 42-week, double-blind, crossover trial, we assigned 295 patients who were at least 12 years of age and who had mild, persistent asthma to receive mometasone (an inhaled glucocorticoid), tiotropium (a long-acting muscarinic antagonist), or placebo. The patients were categorized according to the sputum eosinophil level (<2% or ≥2%). The primary outcome was the response to mometasone as compared with placebo and to tiotropium as compared with placebo among patients with a low sputum eosinophil level who had a prespecified differential response to one of the trial agents. The response was determined according to a hierarchical composite outcome that incorporated treatment failure, asthma control days, and the forced expiratory volume in 1 second; a two-sided P value of less than 0.025 denoted statistical significance. A secondary outcome was a comparison of results in patients with a high sputum eosinophil level and those with a low level. RESULTS: A total of 73% of the patients had a low eosinophil level; of these patients, 59% had a differential response to a trial agent. However, there was no significant difference in the response to mometasone or tiotropium, as compared with placebo. Among the patients with a low eosinophil level who had a differential treatment response, 57% (95% confidence interval [CI], 48 to 66) had a better response to mometasone, and 43% (95% CI, 34 to 52) had a better response to placebo (P = 0.14). In contrast 60% (95% CI, 51 to 68) had a better response to tiotropium, whereas 40% (95% CI, 32 to 49) had a better response to placebo (P = 0.029). Among patients with a high eosinophil level, the response to mometasone was significantly better than the response to placebo (74% vs. 26%) but the response to tiotropium was not (57% vs. 43%). CONCLUSIONS: The majority of patients with mild, persistent asthma had a low sputum eosinophil level and had no significant difference in their response to either mometasone or tiotropium as compared with placebo. These data provide equipoise for a clinically directive trial to compare an inhaled glucocorticoid with other treatments in patients with a low eosinophil level. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; SIENA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02066298.).


Assuntos
Asma/tratamento farmacológico , Broncodilatadores/uso terapêutico , Eosinófilos , Glucocorticoides/uso terapêutico , Furoato de Mometasona/uso terapêutico , Escarro/imunologia , Brometo de Tiotrópio/uso terapêutico , Administração por Inalação , Adolescente , Adulto , Asma/imunologia , Estudos Cross-Over , Método Duplo-Cego , Feminino , Humanos , Contagem de Leucócitos , Masculino , Adesão à Medicação , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Adulto Jovem
7.
Eur Respir J ; 59(5)2022 05.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34588198

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Exposure to violence has been associated with lower lung function in cross-sectional studies. METHODS: We examined whether increasing violence-related distress over time is associated with worse lung function and worse asthma control or quality of life in a secondary analysis of a 48-week randomised clinical trial in 98 youth with asthma (aged 9-16 years) treated with low-dose inhaled corticosteroids (Vitamin D Kids Asthma Study (VDKA)). We then replicated our findings for lung function in a prospective study of 232 Puerto Rican youth followed for an average of 5.4 years. Violence-related distress was assessed using the Checklist of Children's Distress Symptoms (CCDS) scale. Our outcomes of interest were percent predicted lung function measures and (in VDKA only) asthma control (assessed using the Asthma Control Test) and asthma-related quality of life (assessed using the Pediatric Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (PAQLQ)). RESULTS: In a multivariable analysis in VDKA, each 1-point increment in CCDS score was associated with decrements of 3.27% in forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) % pred (95% CI -6.44- -0.22%; p=0.04), 2.65% in forced vital capacity (FVC) % pred (95% CI -4.86- -0.45%; p=0.02) and 0.30 points in the overall PAQLQ score (95% CI -0.50- -0.10 points; p<0.01). Similar findings for FEV1 and FVC were obtained in the prospective study of Puerto Rican youth. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that violence-related distress may worsen lung function and quality of life in youth with asthma (even those treated with low-dose inhaled corticosteroids), and further support policies to reduce exposure to violence among children in the USA and Puerto Rico.


Assuntos
Asma , Qualidade de Vida , Adolescente , Corticosteroides/uso terapêutico , Asma/tratamento farmacológico , Criança , Estudos Transversais , Volume Expiratório Forçado , Humanos , Estudos Longitudinais , Pulmão , Estudos Prospectivos , Violência , Vitamina D
8.
JAMA ; 327(18): 1806-1811, 2022 05 10.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35536260

RESUMO

Importance: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is an irreversible reduction of airflow in the lungs. Progression to severe disease can prevent participation in normal activities because of deterioration of lung function. In 2020 it was estimated that approximately 6% of US adults had been diagnosed with COPD. Chronic lower respiratory disease, composed mainly of COPD, is the sixth leading cause of death in the US. Objective: To update its 2016 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a reaffirmation evidence update that focused on targeted key questions for benefits and harms of screening for COPD in asymptomatic adults and treatment in screen-detected or screen-relevant adults. Population: Asymptomatic adults who do not recognize or report respiratory symptoms. Evidence Assessment: Using a reaffirmation process, the USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that screening for COPD in asymptomatic adults has no net benefit. Recommendation: The USPSTF recommends against screening for COPD in asymptomatic adults. (D recommendation).


Assuntos
Programas de Rastreamento , Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica , Adulto , Comitês Consultivos , Humanos , Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica/diagnóstico , Medição de Risco , Estados Unidos
9.
JAMA ; 327(20): 1992-1997, 2022 05 24.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35608574

RESUMO

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 Unidos
10.
JAMA ; 327(21): 2123-2128, 2022 06 07.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35608838

RESUMO

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 760 000. 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 Visual
11.
JAMA ; 327(16): 1577-1584, 2022 04 26.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35471505

RESUMO

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 605 000 people in the US have a first myocardial infarction and an estimated 610 000 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 & controle
12.
JAMA ; 328(4): 367-374, 2022 07 26.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35881115

RESUMO

Importance: Cardiovascular disease (CVD), which includes heart disease, myocardial infarction, and stroke, is the leading cause of death in the US. A large proportion of CVD cases can be prevented by addressing modifiable risk factors, including smoking, obesity, diabetes, elevated blood pressure or hypertension, dyslipidemia, lack of physical activity, and unhealthy diet. Adults who adhere to national guidelines for a healthy diet and physical activity have lower rates of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality than those who do not; however, most US adults do not consume healthy diets or engage in physical activity at recommended levels. Objective: To update its 2017 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a review of the evidence on the benefits and harms of behavioral counseling interventions to promote healthy behaviors in adults without CVD risk factors. Population: Adults 18 years or older without known CVD risk factors, which include hypertension or elevated blood pressure, dyslipidemia, impaired fasting glucose or glucose tolerance, or mixed or multiple risk factors such as metabolic syndrome or an estimated 10-year CVD risk of 7.5% or greater. Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that behavioral counseling interventions have a small net benefit on CVD risk in adults without CVD risk factors. Recommendation: The USPSTF recommends that clinicians individualize the decision to offer or refer adults without CVD risk factors to behavioral counseling interventions to promote a healthy diet and physical activity. (C recommendation).


Assuntos
Terapia Comportamental , Doenças Cardiovasculares , Dieta Saudável , Exercício Físico , Promoção da Saúde , Adulto , Comitês Consultivos , Doenças Cardiovasculares/prevenção & controle , Tomada de Decisão Clínica , Aconselhamento , Dislipidemias/terapia , Glucose , Humanos , Hipertensão , Medicina de Precisão , Intervenção Psicossocial , Fatores de Risco , Estados Unidos
13.
JAMA ; 327(23): 2326-2333, 2022 06 21.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35727271

RESUMO

Importance: According to National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey data, 52% of surveyed US adults reported using at least 1 dietary supplement in the prior 30 days and 31% reported using a multivitamin-mineral supplement. The most commonly cited reason for using supplements is for overall health and wellness and to fill nutrient gaps in the diet. Cardiovascular disease and cancer are the 2 leading causes of death and combined account for approximately half of all deaths in the US annually. Inflammation and oxidative stress have been shown to have a role in both cardiovascular disease and cancer, and dietary supplements may have anti-inflammatory and antioxidative effects. Objective: To update its 2014 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a review of the evidence on the efficacy of supplementation with single nutrients, functionally related nutrient pairs, or multivitamins for reducing the risk of cardiovascular disease, cancer, and mortality in the general adult population, as well as the harms of supplementation. Population: Community-dwelling, nonpregnant adults. Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that the harms of beta carotene supplementation outweigh the benefits for the prevention of cardiovascular disease or cancer. The USPSTF also concludes with moderate certainty that there is no net benefit of supplementation with vitamin E for the prevention of cardiovascular disease or cancer. The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient to determine the balance of benefits and harms of supplementation with multivitamins for the prevention of cardiovascular disease or cancer. Evidence is lacking and the balance of benefits and harms cannot be determined. The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient to determine the balance of benefits and harms of supplementation with single or paired nutrients (other than beta carotene and vitamin E) for the prevention of cardiovascular disease or cancer. Evidence is lacking and the balance of benefits and harms cannot be determined. Recommendation: The USPSTF recommends against the use of beta carotene or vitamin E supplements for the prevention of cardiovascular disease or cancer. (D recommendation) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of the use of multivitamin supplements for the prevention of cardiovascular disease or cancer. (I statement) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of the use of single- or paired-nutrient supplements (other than beta carotene and vitamin E) for the prevention of cardiovascular disease or cancer. (I statement).


Assuntos
Doenças Cardiovasculares , Suplementos Nutricionais , Minerais , Neoplasias , Vitaminas , Adulto , Humanos , Comitês Consultivos , beta Caroteno/efeitos adversos , Doenças Cardiovasculares/prevenção & controle , Suplementos Nutricionais/efeitos adversos , Programas de Rastreamento , Minerais/efeitos adversos , Minerais/uso terapêutico , Neoplasias/prevenção & controle , Inquéritos Nutricionais , Medição de Risco , Vitamina E/efeitos adversos , Vitaminas/efeitos adversos , Vitaminas/uso terapêutico
14.
JAMA ; 327(11): 1061-1067, 2022 03 15.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35289876

RESUMO

Importance: Eating disorders (eg, binge eating disorder, bulimia nervosa, and anorexia nervosa) are a group of psychiatric conditions defined as a disturbance in eating or eating-related behaviors that impair physical or psychosocial functioning. According to large US cohort studies, estimated lifetime prevalences for anorexia nervosa, bulimia nervosa, and binge eating disorder in adult women are 1.42%, 0.46%, and 1.25%, respectively, and are lower in adult men (anorexia nervosa, 0.12%; bulimia nervosa, 0.08%; binge eating disorder, 0.42%). Eating disorder prevalence ranges from 0.3% to 2.3% in adolescent females and 0.3% to 1.3% in adolescent males. Eating disorders are associated with short-term and long-term adverse health outcomes, including physical, psychological, and social problems. Objective: The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the benefits and harms of screening for eating disorders in adolescents and adults with a normal or high body mass index. Evidence limited to populations who are underweight or have other physical signs or symptoms of eating disorders was not considered. The USPSTF has not previously made a recommendation on this topic. Population: Adolescents and adults (10 years or older) who have no signs or symptoms of eating disorders (eg, rapid weight loss, weight gain, or pronounced deviation from growth trajectory; pubertal delay; bradycardia; oligomenorrhea; and amenorrhea). Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for eating disorders in adolescents and adults. The evidence is limited and the balance of benefits and harms cannot be determined. Recommendation: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for eating disorders in adolescents and adults. (I statement).


Assuntos
Transtornos da Alimentação e da Ingestão de Alimentos/diagnóstico , Transtornos da Alimentação e da Ingestão de Alimentos/prevenção & controle , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Programas de Rastreamento
15.
JAMA ; 327(12): 1171-1176, 2022 Mar 22.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35315879

RESUMO

The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) works to improve the health of people nationwide by making evidence-based recommendations for preventive services. Patient-centered care is a core value in US health care. Shared decision-making (SDM), in which patients and clinicians make health decisions together, ensures patients' rights to be informed and involved in preventive care decisions and that these decisions are patient-centered. SDM has a role across the spectrum of USPSTF recommendations. For A or B recommendations (judged by the USPSTF to have high or moderate certainty of a moderate or substantial net benefit at the population level), SDM allows individual patients to decide whether to accept such services based on their personal values and preferences. For C recommendations (indicating at least moderate certainty of a small net benefit at the population level), SDM is critical for individual patients to decide whether the net benefit for them is worthwhile. For D recommendations (reflecting at least moderate certainty of a zero or negative net benefit) or I statements (low certainty of net benefit), clinicians should be prepared to discuss these services if patients ask. More evidence is needed to determine if, in addition to promoting patient-centeredness, SDM reduces inequities in preventive care, as well as to define new strategies to find time for discussion of preventive services in primary care.


Assuntos
Tomada de Decisão Compartilhada , Serviços Preventivos de Saúde , Humanos
16.
JAMA ; 328(14): 1438-1444, 2022 10 11.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36219403

RESUMO

Importance: Anxiety disorder, a common mental health condition in the US, comprises a group of related conditions characterized by excessive fear or worry that present as emotional and physical symptoms. The 2018-2019 National Survey of Children's Health found that 7.8% of children and adolescents aged 3 to 17 years had a current anxiety disorder. Anxiety disorders in childhood and adolescence are associated with an increased likelihood of a future anxiety disorder or depression. Objective: The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the benefits and harms of screening for anxiety disorders in children and adolescents. This is a new recommendation. Population: Children and adolescents 18 years or younger who do not have a diagnosed anxiety disorder or are not showing recognized signs or symptoms of anxiety. Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that screening for anxiety in children and adolescents aged 8 to 18 years has a moderate net benefit. The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient on screening for anxiety in children 7 years or younger. Recommendation: The USPSTF recommends screening for anxiety in children and adolescents aged 8 to 18 years. (B recommendation) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for anxiety in children 7 years or younger. (I statement).


Assuntos
Transtornos de Ansiedade , Programas de Rastreamento , Adolescente , Comitês Consultivos , Transtornos de Ansiedade/diagnóstico , Criança , Humanos , Programas de Rastreamento/métodos , Serviços Preventivos de Saúde , Medição de Risco , Estados Unidos
17.
JAMA ; 328(15): 1534-1542, 2022 10 18.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36219440

RESUMO

Importance: Depression is a leading cause of disability in the US. Children and adolescents with depression typically have functional impairments in their performance at school or work as well as in their interactions with their families and peers. Depression can also negatively affect the developmental trajectories of affected youth. Major depressive disorder (MDD) in children and adolescents is strongly associated with recurrent depression in adulthood; other mental disorders; and increased risk for suicidal ideation, suicide attempts, and suicide completion. Suicide is the second-leading cause of death among youth aged 10 to 19 years. Psychiatric disorders and previous suicide attempts increase suicide risk. Objective: To update its 2014 and 2016 recommendations, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the benefits and harms of screening, accuracy of screening, and benefits and harms of treatment of MDD and suicide risk in children and adolescents that would be applicable to primary care settings. Population: Children and adolescents who do not have a diagnosed mental health condition or are not showing recognized signs or symptoms of depression or suicide risk. Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that screening for MDD in adolescents aged 12 to 18 years has a moderate net benefit. The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient on screening for MDD in children 11 years or younger. The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient on the benefit and harms of screening for suicide risk in children and adolescents owing to a lack of evidence. Recommendation: The USPSTF recommends screening for MDD in adolescents aged 12 to 18 years. (B recommendation) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for MDD in children 11 years or younger. (I statement) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for suicide risk in children and adolescents. (I statement).


Assuntos
Transtorno Depressivo Maior , Prevenção do Suicídio , Adolescente , Criança , Humanos , Comitês Consultivos , Depressão/diagnóstico , Transtorno Depressivo Maior/diagnóstico , Transtorno Depressivo Maior/etiologia , Suscetibilidade a Doenças , Programas de Rastreamento/efeitos adversos , Programas de Rastreamento/normas
18.
JAMA ; 328(19): 1945-1950, 2022 11 15.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36378202

RESUMO

Importance: Current prevalence of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) in the US is not well established; however, based on cohort and survey data, in 2007-2010 the estimated prevalence of at least mild OSA (defined as an apnea-hypoxia index [AHI] ≥5) plus symptoms of daytime sleepiness among adults aged 30 to 70 years was 14% for men and 5% for women, and the estimated prevalence of moderate to severe OSA (defined as AHI ≥15) was 13% for men and 6% for women. Severe OSA is associated with increased all-cause mortality. Other adverse health outcomes associated with untreated OSA include cardiovascular disease and cerebrovascular events, type 2 diabetes, cognitive impairment, decreased quality of life, and motor vehicle crashes. Objective: To update its 2017 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the benefits and harms of screening for OSA in adults. Population: Asymptomatic adults (18 years or older) and adults with unrecognized symptoms of OSA. Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for OSA in the general adult population. Recommendation: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for OSA in the general adult population. (I statement).


Assuntos
Programas de Rastreamento , Apneia Obstrutiva do Sono , Adulto , Idoso , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Comitês Consultivos , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/etiologia , Programas de Rastreamento/efeitos adversos , Programas de Rastreamento/métodos , Prevalência , Qualidade de Vida , Medição de Risco , Apneia Obstrutiva do Sono/complicações , Apneia Obstrutiva do Sono/diagnóstico , Apneia Obstrutiva do Sono/epidemiologia , Apneia Obstrutiva do Sono/mortalidade , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia
19.
JAMA ; 328(10): 963-967, 2022 09 13.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36098719

RESUMO

Importance: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that 210 000 children and adolescents younger than 20 years had diabetes as of 2018; of these, approximately 23 000 had type 2 diabetes. Youth with type 2 diabetes have an increased prevalence of associated chronic comorbid conditions, including hypertension, dyslipidemia, and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Data indicate that the incidence of type 2 diabetes is rising; from 2002-2003 to 2014-2015, incidence increased from 9.0 cases per 100 000 children and adolescents to 13.8 cases per 100 000 children and adolescents. Objective: The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a review of the evidence on screening for prediabetes and type 2 diabetes in asymptomatic, nonpregnant persons younger than 18 years. This is a new recommendation. Population: Children and adolescents younger than 18 years without known diabetes or prediabetes or symptoms of diabetes or prediabetes. Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for type 2 diabetes in children and adolescents. There is a lack of evidence on the effect of screening for, and early detection and treatment of, type 2 diabetes on health outcomes in youth, and the balance of benefits and harms cannot be determined. Recommendation: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for type 2 diabetes in children and adolescents. (I statement).


Assuntos
Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2 , Programas de Rastreamento , Estado Pré-Diabético , Adolescente , Comitês Consultivos , Criança , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/diagnóstico , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/epidemiologia , Humanos , Programas de Rastreamento/efeitos adversos , Programas de Rastreamento/métodos , Estado Pré-Diabético/diagnóstico , Estado Pré-Diabético/epidemiologia , Serviços Preventivos de Saúde , Medição de Risco
20.
JAMA ; 328(8): 746-753, 2022 08 23.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35997723

RESUMO

Importance: Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of morbidity and death in the US and is the cause of more than 1 of every 4 deaths. Coronary heart disease is the single leading cause of death and accounts for 43% of deaths attributable to CVD in the US. In 2019, an estimated 558 000 deaths were caused by coronary heart disease and 109 000 deaths were caused by ischemic stroke. Objective: To update its 2016 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a review of the evidence on the benefits and harms of statins for reducing CVD-related morbidity or mortality or all-cause mortality. Population: Adults 40 years or older without a history of known CVD and who do not have signs and symptoms of CVD. Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that statin use for the prevention of CVD events and all-cause mortality in adults aged 40 to 75 years with no history of CVD and who have 1 or more CVD risk factors (ie, dyslipidemia, diabetes, hypertension, or smoking) and an estimated 10-year CVD event risk of 10% or greater has at least a moderate net benefit. The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that statin use for the prevention of CVD events and all-cause mortality in adults aged 40 to 75 years with no history of CVD and who have 1 or more of these CVD risk factors and an estimated 10-year CVD event risk of 7.5% to less than 10% has at least a small net benefit. The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient to determine the balance of benefits and harms of statin use for the primary prevention of CVD events and mortality in adults 76 years or older with no history of CVD. Recommendation: The USPSTF recommends that clinicians prescribe a statin for the primary prevention of CVD for adults aged 40 to 75 years who have 1 or more CVD risk factors (ie, dyslipidemia, diabetes, hypertension, or smoking) and an estimated 10-year CVD risk of 10% or greater. (B recommendation) The USPSTF recommends that clinicians selectively offer a statin for the primary prevention of CVD for adults aged 40 to 75 years who have 1 or more of these CVD risk factors and an estimated 10-year CVD risk of 7.5% to less than 10%. The likelihood of benefit is smaller in this group than in persons with a 10-year risk of 10% or greater. (C recommendation) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of initiating a statin for the primary prevention of CVD events and mortality in adults 76 years or older. (I statement).


Assuntos
Doenças Cardiovasculares , Dislipidemias , Inibidores de Hidroximetilglutaril-CoA Redutases , Prevenção Primária , Adulto , Comitês Consultivos , Idoso , Doenças Cardiovasculares/etiologia , Doenças Cardiovasculares/prevenção & controle , Dislipidemias/complicações , Dislipidemias/tratamento farmacológico , Humanos , Inibidores de Hidroximetilglutaril-CoA Redutases/efeitos adversos , Inibidores de Hidroximetilglutaril-CoA Redutases/uso terapêutico , Hipertensão/complicações , Hipertensão/diagnóstico , Programas de Rastreamento , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Serviços Preventivos de Saúde , Medição de Risco , Estados Unidos
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA