Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 92
Filter
Add more filters

Country/Region as subject
Publication year range
1.
JAMA ; 331(4): 329-334, 2024 01 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38261037

ABSTRACT

Importance: Speech and language delays and disorders can pose significant problems for children and their families. Evidence suggests that school-aged children with speech or language delays may be at increased risk of learning and literacy disabilities, including difficulties with reading and writing. Objective: The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate benefits and harms of screening for speech and language delay and disorders in children 5 years or younger. Population: Asymptomatic children 5 years or younger whose parents or clinicians do not have specific concerns about their speech, language, hearing, or development. Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for speech and language delay and disorders in children who do not present with signs or symptoms or parent/caregiver concerns. Recommendation: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for speech and language delay and disorders in children 5 years or younger without signs or symptoms. (I statement).


Subject(s)
Language Development Disorders , Mass Screening , Child , Humans , Advisory Committees , Language Development Disorders/diagnosis , Child, Preschool , Asymptomatic Diseases
2.
JAMA ; 2024 Jun 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38888912

ABSTRACT

Importance: Approximately 19.7% of children and adolescents aged 2 to 19 years in the US have a body mass index (BMI) at or above the 95th percentile for age and sex, based on Centers for Disease Control and Prevention growth charts from 2000. The prevalence of high BMI increases with age and is higher among Hispanic/Latino, Native American/Alaska Native, and non-Hispanic Black children and adolescents and children from lower-income families. Objective: The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the evidence on interventions (behavioral counseling and pharmacotherapy) for weight loss or weight management in children and adolescents that can be provided in or referred from a primary care setting. Population: Children and adolescents 6 years or older. Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that providing or referring children and adolescents 6 years or older with a high BMI to comprehensive, intensive behavioral interventions has a moderate net benefit. Recommendation: The USPSTF recommends that clinicians provide or refer children and adolescents 6 years or older with a high BMI (≥95th percentile for age and sex) to comprehensive, intensive behavioral interventions. (B recommendation).

3.
Med Care ; 61(10): 708-714, 2023 10 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37943526

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Routine self-monitoring of blood glucose is a low-value practice that provides limited benefit for patients with non-insulin-treated type 2 diabetes mellitus. OBJECTIVES: We estimated the costs of Rethink the Strip (RTS), a multistrategy approach to the de-implementation of self-monitoring of blood glucose in primary care. RESEARCH DESIGN: RTS was conducted among 20 primary care clinics in North Carolina. We estimated the non-site-based and site-based costs of the 5 RTS strategies (practice facilitation, audit and feedback, provider champions, educational meetings, and educational materials) from the analytic perspective of an integrated health care system for 12 and 27-month time horizons. Material costs were tracked through project records, and personnel costs were assessed using activity-based costing. We used nationally based wage estimates. RESULTS: Total RTS costs equaled $68,941 for 12 months. Specifically, non-site-based costs comprised $16,560. Most non-site-based costs ($11,822) were from the foundational programming and coding updates to the electronic health record data to develop the audit and feedback reports. The non-site-based costs of educational meetings, practice facilitation, and educational materials were substantially lower, ranging between ~$400 and $1000. Total 12-month site-based costs equaled $2569 for a single clinic (or $52,381 for 20 clinics). Educational meetings were the most expensive strategy, averaging $1401 per clinic. The site-based costs for the 4 other implementation strategies were markedly lower, ranging between $51 for educational materials and $555 for practice facilitation per clinic. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides detailed cost information for implementation strategies used to support evidence-based programs in primary care clinics.


Subject(s)
Blood Glucose , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 , Humans , Costs and Cost Analysis , Educational Status , Primary Health Care
4.
JAMA ; 330(3): 253-260, 2023 07 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37462699

ABSTRACT

Importance: Familial hypercholesterolemia and multifactorial dyslipidemia are 2 conditions that cause abnormally high lipid levels in children, which can lead to premature cardiovascular events (eg, myocardial infarction and stroke) and death in adulthood. Objective: The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the benefits and harms of screening for lipid disorders in asymptomatic children and adolescents. Population: Asymptomatic children and adolescents 20 years or younger without a known diagnosis of a lipid disorder. Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient and the balance of benefits and harms for screening for lipid disorders in asymptomatic children and adolescents 20 years or younger cannot be determined. Recommendation: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for lipid disorders in children and adolescents 20 years or younger. (I statement).


Subject(s)
Dyslipidemias , Mass Screening , Adolescent , Child , Humans , Advisory Committees , Dyslipidemias/complications , Dyslipidemias/diagnosis , Dyslipidemias/therapy , Lipids , Mass Screening/adverse effects , Mass Screening/methods , Preventive Health Services , Risk Assessment , Young Adult , Asymptomatic Diseases , Cardiovascular Diseases/etiology , Cardiovascular Diseases/prevention & control
5.
JAMA ; 330(8): 736-745, 2023 08 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37606666

ABSTRACT

Importance: An estimated 1.2 million persons in the US currently have HIV, and more than 760 000 persons have died of complications related to HIV since the first cases were reported in 1981. Although treatable, HIV is not curable and has significant health consequences. Therefore, effective strategies to prevent HIV are an important public health and clinical priority. Objective: The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the benefits and harms of preexposure prophylaxis with antiretroviral therapy for the prevention of HIV acquisition, and the diagnostic accuracy of risk assessment tools to identify persons at increased risk of HIV acquisition. Population: Adolescents and adults who do not have HIV and are at increased risk of HIV. Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes with high certainty that there is a substantial net benefit from the use of effective antiretroviral therapy to reduce the risk of acquisition of HIV in persons at increased risk of acquiring HIV. Recommendation: The USPSTF recommends that clinicians prescribe preexposure prophylaxis using effective antiretroviral therapy to persons at increased risk of HIV acquisition to decrease the risk of acquiring HIV. (A recommendation).


Subject(s)
Anti-Retroviral Agents , HIV Infections , Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis , Adolescent , Adult , Humans , Advisory Committees , Anti-Retroviral Agents/administration & dosage , Anti-Retroviral Agents/adverse effects , Anti-Retroviral Agents/therapeutic use , HIV Infections/diagnosis , HIV Infections/epidemiology , HIV Infections/etiology , HIV Infections/prevention & control , Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis/methods , Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis/standards , Preventive Health Services , Public Health , Risk Assessment/methods , Risk Assessment/standards , United States/epidemiology
6.
JAMA ; 329(17): 1487-1494, 2023 05 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37129649

ABSTRACT

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).


Subject(s)
Latent Tuberculosis , Adult , Humans , Latent Tuberculosis/complications , Latent Tuberculosis/diagnosis , Latent Tuberculosis/epidemiology , Latent Tuberculosis/etiology , Mass Screening/adverse effects , Mass Screening/methods , Risk Assessment , Tuberculosis/epidemiology , Tuberculosis/etiology , Tuberculosis/prevention & control , United States/epidemiology , Social Determinants of Health/statistics & numerical data
7.
JAMA ; 329(24): 2163-2170, 2023 06 27.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37338866

ABSTRACT

Importance: Anxiety disorders are commonly occurring mental health conditions. They are often unrecognized in primary care settings and substantial delays in treatment initiation occur. Objective: The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the benefits and harms of screening for anxiety disorders in asymptomatic adults. Population: Asymptomatic adults 19 years or older, including pregnant and postpartum persons. Older adults are defined as those 65 years or older. Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that screening for anxiety disorders in adults, including pregnant and postpartum persons, has a moderate net benefit. The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient on screening for anxiety disorders in older adults. Recommendation: The USPSTF recommends screening for anxiety disorders in adults, including pregnant and postpartum persons. (B recommendation) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for anxiety disorders in older adults. (I statement).


Subject(s)
Anxiety , Mass Screening , Female , Pregnancy , Humans , Aged , Mass Screening/adverse effects , Anxiety Disorders/diagnosis , Anxiety Disorders/therapy , Preventive Health Services , Fear
8.
JAMA ; 329(23): 2057-2067, 2023 06 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37338872

ABSTRACT

Importance: Major depressive disorder (MDD), a common mental disorder in the US, may have substantial impact on the lives of affected individuals. If left untreated, MDD can interfere with daily functioning and can also be associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events, exacerbation of comorbid conditions, or increased mortality. Objective: The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate benefits and harms of screening, accuracy of screening, and benefits and harms of treatment of MDD and suicide risk in asymptomatic adults that would be applicable to primary care settings. Population: Asymptomatic adults 19 years or older, including pregnant and postpartum persons. Older adults are defined as those 65 years or older. Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that screening for MDD in adults, including pregnant and postpartum persons and older adults, has a moderate net benefit. The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient on the benefit and harms of screening for suicide risk in adults, including pregnant and postpartum persons and older adults. Recommendation: The USPSTF recommends screening for depression in the adult population, including pregnant and postpartum persons and older adults. (B recommendation) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for suicide risk in the adult population, including pregnant and postpartum persons and older adults. (I statement).


Subject(s)
Depressive Disorder, Major , Mass Screening , Suicide , Adult , Aged , Female , Humans , Male , Pregnancy , Depression/diagnosis , Depressive Disorder, Major/complications , Depressive Disorder, Major/diagnosis , Mass Screening/adverse effects , Mass Screening/methods , Risk Assessment , United States
9.
JAMA ; 329(15): 1290-1295, 2023 04 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37071089

ABSTRACT

Importance: Skin cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer in the US. There are different types of skin cancer varying in disease incidence and severity. Basal and squamous cell carcinomas are the most common types of skin cancer but infrequently lead to death or substantial morbidity. Melanomas represent about 1% of skin cancer and cause the most skin cancer deaths. Melanoma is about 30 times more common in White persons than in Black persons. However, persons with darker skin color are often diagnosed at later stages, when skin cancer is more difficult to treat. Objective: To update its 2016 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review on the benefits and harms of screening for skin cancer in asymptomatic adolescents and adults. Population: Asymptomatic adolescents and adults who do not have a history of premalignant or malignant skin lesions. Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient to determine the balance of benefits and harms of visual skin examination by a clinician to screen for skin cancer in asymptomatic adolescents and adults. Recommendation: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of visual skin examination by a clinician to screen for skin cancer in adolescents and adults. (I statement).


Subject(s)
Carcinoma, Basal Cell , Carcinoma, Squamous Cell , Early Detection of Cancer , Mass Screening , Melanoma , Skin Neoplasms , Adolescent , Adult , Humans , Early Detection of Cancer/adverse effects , Early Detection of Cancer/methods , Mass Screening/adverse effects , Mass Screening/methods , Melanoma/diagnosis , Physical Examination/adverse effects , Physical Examination/methods , Risk Assessment , Skin Neoplasms/diagnosis , Skin Neoplasms/prevention & control , Carcinoma, Basal Cell/diagnosis , Carcinoma, Squamous Cell/diagnosis
10.
JAMA ; 330(17): 1666-1673, 2023 11 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37934215

ABSTRACT

Importance: Oral health is fundamental to health and well-being across the lifespan. Oral health conditions affect the daily lives of school-age children and adolescents, leading to loss of more than 51 million school hours every year. Untreated oral health conditions in children can lead to serious infections and affect growth, development, and quality of life. Objective: The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate screening and preventive interventions for oral health conditions in children and adolescents aged 5 to 17 years. Population: Asymptomatic children and adolescents aged 5 to 17 years. Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for oral health conditions (eg, dental caries) performed by primary care clinicians in asymptomatic children and adolescents aged 5 to 17 years. The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of preventive interventions for oral health conditions (eg, dental caries) performed by primary care clinicians in asymptomatic children and adolescents aged 5 to 17 years. Recommendations: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of routine screening performed by primary care clinicians for oral health conditions, including dental caries, in children and adolescents aged 5 to 17 years. (I statement) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of preventive interventions performed by primary care clinicians for oral health conditions, including dental caries, in children and adolescents aged 5 to 17 years. (I statement).


Subject(s)
Dental Caries , Oral Health , Adolescent , Child , Humans , Advisory Committees , Dental Caries/diagnosis , Dental Caries/prevention & control , Quality of Life , Mass Screening , Child, Preschool , Asymptomatic Diseases , Primary Health Care , Stomatognathic Diseases/diagnosis , Stomatognathic Diseases/prevention & control , Risk Assessment , United States/epidemiology
11.
JAMA ; 330(18): 1773-1779, 2023 11 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37934473

ABSTRACT

Importance: Oral health is fundamental to health and well-being across the life span. Dental caries (cavities) and periodontal disease (gum disease) are common and often untreated oral health conditions that affect eating, speaking, learning, smiling, and employment potential. Untreated oral health conditions can lead to tooth loss, irreversible tooth damage, and other serious adverse health outcomes. Objective: The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate screening and preventive interventions for oral health conditions in adults. Population: Asymptomatic adults 18 years or older. Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for oral health conditions (eg, dental caries or periodontal disease) performed by primary care clinicians in asymptomatic adults. The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of preventive interventions for oral health conditions (eg, dental caries or periodontal disease) performed by primary care clinicians in asymptomatic adults. Recommendations: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of routine screening performed by primary care clinicians for oral health conditions, including dental caries or periodontal-related disease, in adults. (I statement) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of preventive interventions performed by primary care clinicians for oral health conditions, including dental caries or periodontal-related disease, in adults. (I statement).


Subject(s)
Dental Caries , Periodontal Diseases , Adult , Humans , Mass Screening/adverse effects , Oral Health , Dental Caries/diagnosis , Dental Caries/prevention & control , Dental Caries/etiology , Preventive Health Services , Periodontal Diseases/diagnosis , Periodontal Diseases/prevention & control , Primary Health Care
12.
JAMA ; 329(6): 502-507, 2023 02 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36786784

ABSTRACT

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).


Subject(s)
Herpes Genitalis , Herpesvirus 1, Human , Herpesvirus 2, Human , Mass Screening , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious , Serologic Tests , Adolescent , Adult , Female , Humans , Infant, Newborn , Pregnancy , Herpes Genitalis/diagnosis , Herpes Genitalis/drug therapy , Mass Screening/adverse effects , Mass Screening/psychology , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/diagnosis , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/drug therapy , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/prevention & control , Serologic Tests/adverse effects , Serologic Tests/methods , Serologic Tests/psychology , Herpes Simplex/diagnosis
13.
JAMA ; 330(5): 454-459, 2023 08 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37526713

ABSTRACT

Importance: Neural tube defects are among the most common congenital malformations in the US, with an estimated 3000 pregnancies affected each year. Many of these neural tube defects are caused by low folate levels in the body. Objective: The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a reaffirmation evidence update on the benefits and harms of folic acid supplementation. Population: Persons who are planning to or could become pregnant. Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes that, for persons who are planning to or could become pregnant, there is high certainty that folic acid supplementation has a substantial net benefit to prevent neural tube defects in their offspring. Recommendation: The USPSTF recommends that all persons planning to or who could become pregnant take a daily supplement containing 0.4 to 0.8 mg (400 to 800 µg) of folic acid. (A recommendation).


Subject(s)
Dietary Supplements , Folic Acid Deficiency , Folic Acid , Neural Tube Defects , Pregnancy Complications , Female , Humans , Pregnancy , Advisory Committees , Folic Acid/administration & dosage , Folic Acid/therapeutic use , Mass Screening , Neural Tube Defects/etiology , Neural Tube Defects/prevention & control , Preventive Health Services , Folic Acid Deficiency/complications , Folic Acid Deficiency/diagnosis , Folic Acid Deficiency/drug therapy , Pregnancy Complications/etiology , Pregnancy Complications/prevention & control , Preconception Care/standards
14.
JAMA ; 330(11): 1074-1082, 2023 09 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37721605

ABSTRACT

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).


Subject(s)
Hypertension, Pregnancy-Induced , Female , Humans , Pregnancy , Advisory Committees , Hypertension, Pregnancy-Induced/diagnosis , Preventive Health Services , Mass Screening , Blood Pressure Determination
15.
J Gen Intern Med ; 37(15): 3989-3998, 2022 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35867305

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Using race-a socially assigned identity that does not adequately capture human genetic variation-to guide clinical care can result in poor outcomes for racially minoritized patients. This study assessed (1) how physicians conceptualize and use race in their clinical care (race-based care) and (2) physician characteristics associated with race-based care. METHODS: PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, and Scopus databases were searched. Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed-methods studies written in peer-reviewed, English-language journal articles evaluating US physicians' perceptions of race and physician factors associated with race-based care were included. Risk of bias was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Qualitative studies were evaluated using thematic analysis, and quantitative findings were summarized and combined with qualitative findings in a narrative synthesis. RESULTS: A total of 1149 articles were identified; 9 (4 qualitative, 5 quantitative) studies met inclusion criteria. Five themes emerged: (1) the belief in race as biological; (2) the use of race to contextualize patients' health; (3) the use of race to counsel patients and determine care; (4) justifications for race-based practice (evidence-based, personal experience, addresses disparities, provides personalized care, increases compliance); and (5) concerns with race-based practice (poorly characterizes patients, normalizes disparities, patient distrust, clinician discomfort, legitimized biological race). In quantitative studies, older age was positively associated with race-based care. DISCUSSION: Physicians had varied perceptions of race, but many believed race was biological. Concern and support for race-based practice were related to beliefs regarding the evidence for using race in care and the appropriateness of race as a variable in medical research. Older physicians were more likely to use race, which could be due to increased exposure to race-based medical literature, in addition to generational differences in conceptualizations of race. Additional research on the evolution of physicians' perceptions of race, and the role of medical literature in shaping these perceptions, is needed.


Subject(s)
Physicians , Humans , Qualitative Research , Narration
16.
Clin Diabetes ; 40(3): 339-344, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35983413

ABSTRACT

This study examined whether certain patient characteristics are associated with the prescribing of self-monitoring of blood glucose for patients with type 2 diabetes who are not using insulin and have well-controlled blood glucose. Against recommendations, one-third of the patient sample from a large health network in North Carolina (N = 9,338) received a prescription for testing supplies (i.e., strips or lancets) within the prior 18 months. Women, African Americans, individuals prescribed an oral medication, nonsmokers, and those who were underweight or normal weight all had greater odds of receiving such a prescription. These results indicate that providers may have prescribing tendencies that are potentially biased against more vulnerable patient groups and contrary to guidelines.

17.
JAMA ; 327(18): 1806-1811, 2022 05 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35536260

ABSTRACT

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).


Subject(s)
Mass Screening , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive , Adult , Advisory Committees , Humans , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/diagnosis , Risk Assessment , United States
18.
JAMA ; 327(20): 1992-1997, 2022 05 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35608574

ABSTRACT

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).


Subject(s)
Glaucoma, Open-Angle , Mass Screening , Adult , Advisory Committees , Blindness , Glaucoma, Open-Angle/diagnosis , Glaucoma, Open-Angle/therapy , Humans , Mass Screening/methods , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Preventive Health Services , Risk Assessment , United States
19.
JAMA ; 327(21): 2123-2128, 2022 06 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35608838

ABSTRACT

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).


Subject(s)
Vision Disorders , Vision Screening , Activities of Daily Living , Advisory Committees , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Humans , Mass Screening/methods , Primary Health Care/methods , Quality of Life , Risk Assessment , Vision Disorders/diagnosis , Vision Disorders/etiology , Vision Disorders/therapy , Vision Screening/methods , Visual Acuity
20.
JAMA ; 327(16): 1577-1584, 2022 04 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35471505

ABSTRACT

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).


Subject(s)
Aspirin , Cardiovascular Diseases , Adult , Aspirin/adverse effects , Aspirin/therapeutic use , Cardiovascular Diseases/diagnosis , Cardiovascular Diseases/mortality , Cardiovascular Diseases/prevention & control , Colorectal Neoplasms/mortality , Colorectal Neoplasms/prevention & control , Computer Simulation , Hemorrhage/chemically induced , Humans , Middle Aged , Myocardial Infarction/drug therapy , Myocardial Infarction/prevention & control , Primary Prevention , Risk Assessment , Stroke/drug therapy , Stroke/prevention & control
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL