Acute Coronary Syndrome: Diagnosis and Initial Management.

Acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is defined as reduced blood flow to the coronary myocardium manifesting as ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction or non-ST-segment elevation ACS, which includes unstable angina and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Common risk factors include being at least 65 years of age or a current smoker or having hypertension, diabetes mellitus, hyperlipidemia, a body mass index greater than 25 kg per m2, or a family history of premature coronary artery disease. Symptoms most predictive of ACS include chest discomfort that is substernal or spreading to the arms or jaw. However, chest pain that can be reproduced with palpation or varies with breathing or position is less likely to signify ACS. Having a prior abnormal cardiac stress test result indicates increased risk. Electrocardiography changes that predict ACS include ST depression, ST elevation, T-wave inversion, or presence of Q waves. No validated clinical decision tool is available to rule out ACS in the outpatient setting. Elevated troponin levels without ST-segment elevation on electrocardiography suggest non-ST-segment elevation ACS. Patients with ACS should receive coronary angiography with percutaneous or surgical revascularization. Other important management considerations include initiation of dual antiplatelet therapy and parenteral anticoagulation, statin therapy, beta-blocker therapy, and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor therapy. Additional interventions shown to reduce mortality in patients who have had a recent myocardial infarction include smoking cessation, annual influenza vaccination, and cardiac rehabilitation.

Association of cancer with the risk of developing hypertension.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Although the importance of hypertension in patients with cancer is widely recognized, little is known about the risk of developing hypertension in patients with a history of cancer. METHODS: This retrospective observational cohort study analyzed data from the JMDC Claims Database between 2005 and 2022, including 78,162 patients with a history of cancer and 3,692,654 individuals without cancer. The primary endpoint was the incidence of hypertension. RESULTS: During a mean follow-up period of 1,208 ± 966 days, 311,197 participants developed hypertension. The incidence of hypertension was 364.6 (95% CI 357.0-372.2) per 10000 person-years among those with a history of cancer, and 247.2 (95% CI 246.3-248.1) per 10000 person-years in those without cancer. Individuals with a history of cancer had an elevated risk of developing hypertension according to multivariable Cox regression analyses (HR 1.17, 95% CI 1.15-1.20). Both cancer patients requiring active antineoplastic therapy (HR 2.01, 95% CI 1.85-2.20), and those who did not require active antineoplastic therapy (HR 1.14, 95% CI 1.12-1.17) had an increased risk of hypertension. A multitude of sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the relationship between cancer and incident hypertension. Patients with certain types of cancer were found to have a higher risk of developing hypertension than those without cancer, with varying risks dependent on the type of cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis of a nationwide epidemiological database revealed that individuals with a history of cancer have a higher risk of developing hypertension, and that this finding applies to both cancer patients who require active antineoplastic therapy and those who do not.

Cardiovascular Disease Prevention: Risk Assessment.

As part of the approach to primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD), adults should have their CVD risk estimated using a population-appropriate risk equation. In the United States, the atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) pooled cohort equations are recommended by the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) to estimate risk in patients ages 40 to 79 years. A 10-year ASCVD risk estimate of 20% or higher is considered high, and patients having this level of risk should be offered and counseled to receive statin therapy. A 10-year risk estimate of 7.5% to less than 20% is considered intermediate, and clinicians should discuss the potential benefits of statin therapy for primary prevention in the context of the patient's preferences and values. In some situations, use of CVD risk enhancers, particularly coronary artery calcium assessed by computed tomography, may help inform the clinician-patient discussion. All patients should be counseled about healthy lifestyle modifications to reduce CVD risk. The AHA's Life's Simple 7 defines ideal cardiovascular health as no tobacco use; ideal blood pressure, blood glucose, and cholesterol levels; adequate physical activity; weight management; and healthy diet. An 8th component (sleep) was very recently added and 4 of the original components have been updated. These metrics provide goals that can drive efforts toward primordial prevention (ie, keeping risk factors themselves from developing).

Cardiovascular Disease Prevention: Pharmacologic Prevention.

Several drugs have shown benefits in primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD). Aspirin should be used routinely for the secondary prevention of CVD. Low-dose aspirin should not be used for the primary prevention of CVD in adults ages 60 years and older. Aspirin can be considered for primary prevention in adults ages 40 to 59 years with a 10% or greater 10-year CVD risk. Moderate- to high-intensity statin therapy should be prescribed for most patients with known atherosclerotic CVD, those with a low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol level of 190 mg/dL or higher, and those ages 40 to 75 years with diabetes or with a 10-year risk of CVD of 7.5% or greater. Newer lipid-lowering drugs have shown benefits in lowering LDL cholesterol levels, but at high cost and with limited evidence of reduction of CVD outcomes. Polypills provide a method to deliver multiple proven drugs at lower cost and to a broader population. Sodium-dependent glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors or glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists should be added to metformin as the preferred second-line drug in the management of diabetes because of their proven ability to improve cardiovascular outcomes. No supplements have proven benefits in CVD prevention. Omega-3 fatty acids and folic acid have shown benefits when consumed in food.

Cardiovascular Disease Prevention: Prevention Through Control of Medical Risks.

Diabetes, hypertension, tobacco use, and obesity each substantially increases the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and must be controlled as part of CVD prevention. Among patients with diabetes, the reduction of CVD risk from lower A1c goals must be balanced against the risks of hypoglycemia. The American Diabetes Association (ADA) recommends an A1c goal for adults of less than 7% if hypoglycemia can be avoided. A less stringent goal of less than 8% is appropriate in patients with limited life expectancy. A blood pressure (BP) goal of less than 140/90 mm Hg is prudent for all adults younger than 60 years. A goal of less than 140/90 mm Hg also is advised for initiating or intensifying pharmacotherapy in adults 60 years and older with a history of stroke or who are at high cardiovascular risk. BP targets should be individualized to balance the known benefits of lowering BP to 120/80 mm Hg with the risks of morbidity because of hypotension and adverse effects. Varenicline is the most effective drug for smoking cessation, and abstinence rates are increased by combining it with nicotine replacement therapy. Bariatric surgery is the most effective management for long-term weight loss and reduction of obesity-related comorbidities. Social drivers of health are the primary cause of CVD outcomes differences among races and ethnicities.

Medication-Naïve Blood Pressure and Incident Cancers: Analysis of 2 Nationwide Population-Based Databases.

BACKGROUND: Results of preceding studies on the relationship between blood pressure (BP) and cancers have been confounded due to individuals taking antihypertensive medications or shared risk factors. We assessed whether medication-naïve high BP is a risk factor for incident cancers. METHODS: This retrospective observational study included 1,388,331 individuals without a prior history of cancer and not taking antihypertensive medications enrolled in the JMDC Claims Database between 2005 and 2018. The primary outcome was 16 cancers. RESULTS: The median [interquartile range] age was 45 [40-52] years and 56.2% were men. Mean systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP) were 117.7 ± 15.8 and 72.8 ± 11.6 mm Hg. Multivariate Cox regression analysis demonstrated that SBP per 1-SD was associated with a higher incidence of thyroid (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.09, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.03-1.16), esophageal (HR: 1.15, 95% CI: 1.07-1.24), colorectal (HR: 1.04, 95% CI: 1.01-1.07), liver (HR: 1.11, 95% CI: 1.03-1.20), and kidney (HR: 1.22, 95% CI: 1.14-1.31) cancers, but with a lower incidence of stomach cancer (HR: 0.94, 95% CI: 0.91-0.98). These associations remained significant after adjustment for multiple testing. DBP was associated with higher incidences of thyroid, esophageal, colorectal, kidney, and corpus uteri cancers, but with a lower incidence of stomach cancer. The associations between SBP and incidences of thyroid, esophageal, colorectal, liver, and kidney cancers were confirmed in the Korean National Health Insurance Service database. CONCLUSIONS: Medication-naïve BP was associated with higher incidences of thyroid, esophageal, colorectal, liver, and kidney cancers. Uncovering the underlying mechanisms for our results may help identify novel therapeutic approach for hypertension and cancer.

Untreated Hypertension and Subsequent Incidence of Colorectal Cancer: Analysis of a Nationwide Epidemiological Database.

Background Studies of the association of hypertension with incident colorectal cancer (CRC) may have been confounded by including individuals taking antihypertensive medication, at high risk for CRC (ie, colorectal polyps and inflammatory bowel disease), or with shared risk factors (eg, obesity and diabetes). We assessed whether adults with untreated hypertension are at higher risk for incident CRC compared with those with normal blood pressure (BP), and whether any association is evident among individuals without obesity or metabolic abnormalities. Methods and Results Analyses were conducted using a nationwide health claims database collected in the JMDC Claims Database between 2005 and 2018 (n=2 220 112; mean age, 44.1±11.0 years; 58.4% men). Participants who were taking antihypertensive medications or had a history of CRC, colorectal polyps, or inflammatory bowel disease were excluded. Each participant was categorized as having normal BP (systolic BP [SBP]<120 mm Hg and diastolic BP [DBP] <80 mm Hg, n=1 164 807), elevated BP (SBP 120-129 mm Hg and DBP <80 mm Hg, n=341 273), stage 1 hypertension (SBP 130-139 mm Hg or DBP 80-89 mm Hg, n=466 298), or stage 2 hypertension (SBP ≥140 mm Hg or DBP ≥90 mm Hg, n=247 734). Over a mean follow-up of 1112±854 days, 6899 incident CRC diagnoses occurred. After multivariable adjustment, compared with normal BP, hazard ratios for incident CRC were 0.93 (95% CI, 0.85-1.01) for elevated BP, 1.07 (95% CI, 0.99-1.15) for stage 1 hypertension, and 1.17 (95% CI, 1.08-1.28) for stage 2 hypertension. The hazard ratios for incident CRC for each 10-mm Hg-higher SBP or DBP were 1.04 (95% CI, 1.02-1.06) and 1.06 (95% CI, 1.03-1.09), respectively. These associations were present among adults who did not have obesity, high waist circumference, diabetes, or dyslipidemia. Conclusions Higher SBP and DBP, and stage 2 hypertension are associated with a higher risk for incident CRC, even among those without shared risk factors for CRC. BP measurement could identify individuals at increased risk for subsequent CRC.

A Primary Care Agenda for Brain Health: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.

A healthy brain is critical for living a longer and fuller life. The projected aging of the population, however, raises new challenges in maintaining quality of life. As we age, there is increasing compromise of neuronal activity that affects functions such as cognition, also making the brain vulnerable to disease. Once pathology-induced decline begins, few therapeutic options are available. Prevention is therefore paramount, and primary care can play a critical role. The purpose of this American Heart Association scientific statement is to provide an up-to-date summary for primary care providers in the assessment and modification of risk factors at the individual level that maintain brain health and prevent cognitive impairment. Building on the 2017 American Heart Association/American Stroke Association presidential advisory on defining brain health that included "Life's Simple 7," we describe here modifiable risk factors for cognitive decline, including depression, hypertension, physical inactivity, diabetes, obesity, hyperlipidemia, poor diet, smoking, social isolation, excessive alcohol use, sleep disorders, and hearing loss. These risk factors include behaviors, conditions, and lifestyles that can emerge before adulthood and can be routinely identified and managed by primary care clinicians.

Physical activity calorie expenditure (PACE) labels in worksite cafeterias: effects on physical activity.

BACKGROUND: Regular physical activity is an important component of healthy living and wellbeing. Current guidelines recommend that adults participate in at least 150 min of moderate or vigorous-intensity physical activity weekly. In spite of the benefits, just over half of U.S. adults meet these recommendations. Calorie-only food labels at points of food purchase have had limited success in motivating people to change eating behaviors and increase physical activity. One new point of purchase approach to promote healthy behaviors is the addition of food labels that display the physical activity requirement needed to burn the calories in a food item (e.g. walk 15 min). METHODS: The Physical Activity Calorie Expenditure (PACE) Study compared activity-based calorie-expenditure food labels with calorie-only labels at three Blue Cross and Blue Shield of North Carolina worksite cafeterias. After 1 year of baseline data collection, one cafeteria had food items labeled with PACE labels, two others had calorie-only food labels. Cohort participants were asked to wear an accelerometer and complete a self-report activity questionnaire on two occasions during the baseline year and twice during the intervention year. RESULTS: A total of 366 study participants were included in the analysis. In the PACE-label group, self-reported physical activity increased by 13-26% compared to the calorie-only label group. Moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) increased by 24 min per week in the PACE-label group compared to the calorie-label group (p = 0.06). Changes in accelerometer measured steps, sedentary time, and MVPA had modest increases. Change ranged from 1 to 12% with effect size values from 0.08 to 0.15. Baseline physical activity level significantly moderated the intervention effects for all physical activity outcomes. Participants in both label groups starting in the lowest tertile of activity saw the largest increase in their physical activity. CONCLUSION: Results suggest small positive effects for the PACE labels on self-reported and objective physical activity measures. Minutes of weekly MVPA, strength training, and exercise activities showed modest increases. These results suggest that calorie-expenditure food labels may result in some limited increases in physical activity.

Effect of calories-only vs physical activity calorie expenditure labeling on lunch calories purchased in worksite cafeterias.

BACKGROUND: Calorie labeling on restaurant menus is a public health strategy to guide consumer ordering behaviors, but effects on calories purchased have been minimal. Displaying labels communicating the physical activity required to burn calories may be a more effective approach, but real-world comparisons are needed. METHODS: In a quasi-experimental study, we examined the effect of physical activity calorie expenditure (PACE) food labels compared to calorie-only labels on point-of-decision food purchasing in three worksite cafeterias in North Carolina. After a year of quarterly baseline data collection, one cafeteria prominently displayed PACE labels, and two cafeterias prominently displayed calorie-only labels. Calories from foods purchased in the cafeteria during lunch were assessed over 2 weeks every 3 months for 2 years by photographs of meals. We compared differences in purchased calorie estimates before and after the labeling intervention was introduced using longitudinal generalized linear mixed model regressions that included a random intercept for each participant. RESULTS: In unadjusted models comparing average meal calories after vs before labeling, participants exposed to PACE labels purchased 40.4 fewer calories (P = 0.002), and participants exposed to calorie-only labels purchased 38.2 fewer calories (P = 0.0002). The small difference of 2 fewer calories purchased among participants exposed to PACE labeling vs calorie-only labeling was not significant (P = 0.90). Models adjusting for age, sex, race, occupation, numeracy level, and health literacy level did not change estimates appreciably. CONCLUSION: In this workplace cafeteria setting, PACE labeling was no more effective than calorie-only labeling in reducing lunchtime calories purchased.

Physical activity equivalent labeling vs. calorie labeling: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Many countries are trying to identify strategies to control obesity. Nutrition labeling is a policy that could lead to healthy food choices by providing information to consumers. Calorie labeling, for example, could lead to consumers choosing lower calorie foods. However, its effectiveness has been limited. Recently, physical activity equivalent labeling (i.e., displaying calories in terms of estimated amount of physical activity to burn calories) has been proposed as an alternative to the calorie-only label. The aim of this review was to identify and evaluate the published literature comparing effects on health behavior between physical activity equivalent labeling and calorie-only labeling. METHOD: We searched the following databases: Pubmed/medline, Scopus, Web of science, Agris, Cochrane library, Google Scholar. We also searched along with reference lists of included articles. Articles that were published between 1 January 2000 and 31 October 2016 were eligible for inclusion provided they reported on studies that examined the effects of both types of labeling and included at least one outcome of interest. Mean and standard deviations of the included results were combined using a fixed-effect model. The difference in calories purchased between people exposed to physical activity labeling and calorie-only labeling was calculated as weighted mean difference by using a fixed-effect model. RESULT: The difference of calories ordered between physical activity label and calorie label groups was not statistically significant (SMD: -0.03; 95% CI: -0.13, 0.07). The difference of calories ordered between physical activity label and calorie label according to real vs unreal (e.g. web-based) condition was 65 Kcal fewer in real-world settings. CONCLUSION: Physical activity calorie equivalent labeling in minutes does not significantly reduce calories ordered compared to calorie-only labeling.

Workplace health and safety intervention for child care staff: Rationale, design, and baseline results from the CARE cluster randomized control trial.

BACKGROUND: Low-wage workers suffer disproportionately high rates of chronic disease and are important targets for workplace health and safety interventions. Child care centers offer an ideal opportunity to reach some of the lowest paid workers, but these settings have been ignored in workplace intervention studies. METHODS: Caring and Reaching for Health (CARE) is a cluster-randomized controlled trial evaluating efficacy of a multi-level, workplace-based intervention set in child care centers that promotes physical activity and other health behaviors among staff. Centers are randomized (1:1) into the Healthy Lifestyles (intervention) or the Healthy Finances (attention control) program. Healthy Lifestyles is delivered over six months including a kick-off event and three 8-week health campaigns (magazines, goal setting, behavior monitoring, tailored feedback, prompts, center displays, director coaching). The primary outcome is minutes of moderate and vigorous physical activity (MVPA); secondary outcomes are health behaviors (diet, smoking, sleep, stress), physical assessments (body mass index (BMI), waist circumference, blood pressure, fitness), and workplace supports for health and safety. RESULTS: In total, 56 centers and 553 participants have been recruited and randomized. Participants are predominately female (96.7%) and either Non-Hispanic African American (51.6%) or Non-Hispanic White (36.7%). Most participants (63.4%) are obese. They accumulate 17.4 (±14.2) minutes/day of MVPA and consume 1.3 (±1.4) and 1.3 (±0.8) servings/day of fruits and vegetables, respectively. Also, 14.2% are smokers; they report 6.4 (±1.4) hours/night of sleep; and 34.9% are high risk for depression. CONCLUSIONS: Baseline data demonstrate several serious health risks, confirming the importance of workplace interventions in child care.

Effects of physical activity calorie expenditure (PACE) labeling: study design and baseline sample characteristics.

BACKGROUND: Obesity and physical inactivity are responsible for more than 365,000 deaths per year and contribute substantially to rising healthcare costs in the US, making clear the need for effective public health interventions. Calorie labeling on menus has been implemented to guide consumer ordering behaviors, but effects on calories purchased has been minimal. METHODS: In this project, we tested the effect of physical activity calorie expenditure (PACE) food labels on actual point-of-decision food purchasing behavior as well as physical activity. Using a two-group interrupted time series cohort study design in three worksite cafeterias, one cafeteria was assigned to the intervention condition, and the other two served as controls. Calories from food purchased in the cafeteria were assessed by photographs of meals (accompanied by notes made on-site) using a standardized calorie database and portion size-estimation protocol. Primary outcomes will be average calories purchased and minutes of moderate to vigorous physical activity (MVPA) by individuals in the cohorts. We will compare pre-post changes in study outcomes between study groups using piecewise generalized linear mixed model regressions (segmented regressions) with a single change point in our interrupted time-series study. The results of this project will provide evidence of the effectiveness of worksite cafeteria menu labeling, which could potentially inform policy intervention approaches. DISCUSSION: Labels that convey information in a more readily understandable manner may be more effective at motivating behavior change. Strengths of this study include its cohort design and its robust data capture methods using food photographs and accelerometry.

Evaluation of Diabetic Retinal Screening and Factors for Ophthalmology Referral in a Telemedicine Network.

Importance: Retinal telescreening for evaluation of diabetic retinopathy (DR) in the primary care setting may be useful in reaching rural and underserved patients. Objectives: To evaluate telemedicine retinal screenings for patients with type 1 or 2 diabetes and identify factors for ophthalmology referral in the North Carolina Diabetic Retinopathy Telemedicine Network. Design, Setting, and Participants: A preimplementation and postimplementation evaluation was conducted from January 6, 2014, to November 1, 2015, at 5 primary care clinics serving rural and underserved populations in North Carolina among 1787 adult patients with type 1 or 2 diabetes who received primary care at the clinics and obtained retinal telescreening to determine the presence and severity of DR. A total of 1661 patients with complete data were included in the statistical analysis. Intervention: Nonmydriatic fundus photography with remote interpretation by an expert. Main Outcomes and Measures: Number of patients recruited, level of detected DR, change in rates of screening, rate of ophthalmology referral, percentage of completed referrals, and patient characteristics associated with varying levels of DR. Results: Of the 1661 patients (1041 women and 620 men; mean [SD] age, 55.4 [12.7] years), 1323 patients (79.7%) had no DR, 183 patients (11.0%) had DR without a need for an ophthalmology referral, and 155 patients (9.3%) had DR with a need for an ophthalmology referral. The mean rate of screening for DR before implementation of the program was 25.6% (1512 of 5905), which increased to 40.4% (1884 of 4664) after implementation. A total of 93 referred patients (60.0%) completed an ophthalmology referral visit within the study period. Older patients (odds ratio [OR], 1.28; 95% CI, 1.11-1.48) and African American patients (OR, 1.84; 95% CI, 1.24-2.73) or other racial/ethnic minorities (OR, 2.19; 95% CI, 1.16-4.11) had greater odds of requiring an ophthalmology referral compared with white and/or younger patients. Patients with higher hemoglobin A1c levels (OR, 1.19 per unit change; 95% CI, 1.13-1.25 per unit change) and longer duration of diabetes (OR, 1.76 per decade; 95% CI, 1.53-2.02 per decade) had greater odds of DR requiring an ophthalmology referral. History of stroke (OR, 1.65; 95% CI, 1.10-2.48) and kidney disease (OR, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.10-2.31) were strongly associated with DR and ophthalmology referral. Conclusions and Relevance: When implemented in the primary care setting, retinal telescreening increased the rate of evaluation for DR for patients in rural and underserved settings. This strategy may also increase access to care for minorities and patients with DR requiring treatment.

Potential Effect of Physical Activity Calorie Equivalent (PACE) Labeling on Adult Fast Food Ordering and Exercise.

INTRODUCTION: Numeric calorie content labels show limited efficacy in reducing the number of calories ordered from fast food meals. Physical activity calorie equivalent (PACE) labels are an alternative that may reduce the number of calories ordered in fast food meals while encouraging patrons to exercise. METHODS: A total of 1000 adults from 47 US states were randomly assigned via internet survey to one of four generic fast food menus: no label, calories only, calories + minutes, or calories + miles necessary to walk to burn off the calories. After completing hypothetical orders participants were asked to rate the likelihood of calorie-only and PACE labels to influence (1) food choice and (2) physical activity. RESULTS: Respondents (n = 823) ordered a median of 1580 calories from the no-label menu, 1200 from the calories-only menu, 1140 from the calories + minutes menu, and 1210 from the calories + miles menu (p = 0.0001). 40% of respondents reported that PACE labels were "very likely" to influence food item choice vs. 28% for calorie-only labels (p<0.0001). 64% of participants reported that PACE labels were "somewhat likely" or "very likely" to influence their level of physical activity vs. 49% for calorie-only labels (p<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: PACE labels may be helpful in reducing the number of calories ordered in fast food meals and may have the added benefit of encouraging exercise.

Different Measures, Different Outcomes? A Systematic Review of Performance-Based versus Self-Reported Measures of Health Literacy and Numeracy.

BACKGROUND: Health literacy (HL) and numeracy are measured by one of two methods: performance on objective tests or self-report of one's skills. Whether results from these methods differ in their relationship to health outcomes or use of health services is unknown. METHODS: We performed a systematic review to identify and evaluate articles that measured both performance-based and self-reported HL or numeracy and examined their relationship to health outcomes or health service use. To identify studies, we started with an AHRQ-funded systematic review of HL and health outcomes. We then looked for newer studies by searching MEDLINE from 1 February 2010 to 9 December 2014. We included English language studies meeting pre-specified criteria. Two reviewers independently assessed abstracts and studies for inclusion and graded study quality. One reviewer abstracted information from included studies while a second checked content for accuracy. RESULTS: We identified four "fair" quality studies that met inclusion criteria for our review. Two studies measuring HL found no differences between performance-based and self-reported HL for association with self-reported outcomes (including diabetes, stroke, hypertension) or a physician-completed rheumatoid arthritis disease activity score. However, HL measures were differentially related to a patient-completed health assessment questionnaire and to a patient's ability to interpret their prescription medication name and dose from a medication bottle. Only one study measured numeracy and found no difference between performance-based and self-reported measures of numeracy and colorectal cancer (CRC) screening utilization. However, in a moderator analysis from the same study, performance-based and self-reported numeracy were differentially related to CRC screening utilization when stratified by certain patient-provider communication behaviors (e.g., the chance to always ask questions and get the support that is needed). DISCUSSION: Most studies found no difference in the relationship between results of performance-based and self-reported measures and outcomes. However, we identified few studies using multiple instruments and/or objective outcomes.

Comparison of brief health literacy screens in the emergency department.

Measuring health literacy efficiently yet accurately is of interest both clinically and in research. The authors examined 6 brief health literacy measures and compared their categorization of patient health literacy levels and their comparative associations with patients' health status. The authors assessed 400 emergency department patients with the Short Test of Functional Health Literacy in Adults, the Newest Vital Sign, Single Item Literacy Screen, brief screening questions, Rapid Estimate of Adult Literacy in Medicine-Revised, and the Medical Term Recognition Test. The authors analyzed data using Spearman's correlation coefficients and ran separate logistic regressions for each instrument for patient self-reported health status. Tests differed in the proportion of patients' skills classified as adequate, but all instruments were significantly correlated; instruments targeting similar skills were more strongly correlated. Scoring poorly on any instrument was significantly associated with worse health status after adjusting for age, sex and race, with a score in the combined inadequate/marginal category on the Short Test of Functional Health Literacy in Adults carrying the largest risk (OR = 2.94, 95% CI [1.23, 7.05]). Future research will need to further elaborate instrument differences in predicting different outcomes.

Quantifying the utility of taking pills for cardiovascular prevention.

BACKGROUND: The decrease in utility attributed to taking pills for cardiovascular prevention can have major effects on the cost-effectiveness of interventions but has not been well studied. We sought to measure the utility of daily pill-taking for cardiovascular prevention. METHODS AND RESULTS: We conducted a cross-sectional Internet-based survey of 1000 US residents aged ≥30 in March 2014. We calculated utility values, using time trade-off as our primary method and standard gamble and willingness-to-pay techniques as secondary analyses. Mean age of respondents was 50 years. Most were female (59%) and white (63%); 28% had less than a college degree; and 79% took ≥1 pills daily. Mean utility using the time trade-off method was 0.990 (95% confidence interval, 0.988-0.992), including ≈70% not willing to trade any amount of time to avoid taking a preventive pill daily. Using the standard gamble method, mean utility was 0.991 (0.989-0.993), with 62% not willing to risk any chance of death. Respondents were willing to pay an average of $1445 to avoid taking a pill daily, which translated to a mean utility of 0.994 (0.940-0.997), including 41% unwilling to pay any amount. Time trade-off-based utility varied by age (decreasing utility as age increased), sex, race, numeracy, difficulty with obtaining pills, and number of pills taken per day but did not vary by education level, literacy, or income. CONCLUSIONS: Mean utility for taking a pill daily for cardiovascular prevention is ≈0.990 to 0.994.