Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 122
Filter
Add more filters

Publication year range
1.
JAMA ; 325(10): 962-970, 2021 Mar 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33687470

ABSTRACT

IMPORTANCE: Lung cancer is the second most common cancer and the leading cause of cancer death in the US. In 2020, an estimated 228 820 persons were diagnosed with lung cancer, and 135 720 persons died of the disease. The most important risk factor for lung cancer is smoking. Increasing age is also a risk factor for lung cancer. Lung cancer has a generally poor prognosis, with an overall 5-year survival rate of 20.5%. However, early-stage lung cancer has a better prognosis and is more amenable to treatment. OBJECTIVE: To update its 2013 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review on the accuracy of screening for lung cancer with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) and on the benefits and harms of screening for lung cancer and commissioned a collaborative modeling study to provide information about the optimum age at which to begin and end screening, the optimal screening interval, and the relative benefits and harms of different screening strategies compared with modified versions of multivariate risk prediction models. POPULATION: This recommendation statement applies to adults aged 50 to 80 years who have a 20 pack-year smoking history and currently smoke or have quit within the past 15 years. EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT: The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that annual screening for lung cancer with LDCT has a moderate net benefit in persons at high risk of lung cancer based on age, total cumulative exposure to tobacco smoke, and years since quitting smoking. RECOMMENDATION: The USPSTF recommends annual screening for lung cancer with LDCT in adults aged 50 to 80 years who have a 20 pack-year smoking history and currently smoke or have quit within the past 15 years. Screening should be discontinued once a person has not smoked for 15 years or develops a health problem that substantially limits life expectancy or the ability or willingness to have curative lung surgery. (B recommendation) This recommendation replaces the 2013 USPSTF statement that recommended annual screening for lung cancer with LDCT in adults aged 55 to 80 years who have a 30 pack-year smoking history and currently smoke or have quit within the past 15 years.


Subject(s)
Early Detection of Cancer , Lung Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Smoking , Tomography, X-Ray Computed , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Early Detection of Cancer/adverse effects , Early Detection of Cancer/standards , Humans , Lung/diagnostic imaging , Middle Aged , Risk Assessment , Sensitivity and Specificity , Smoking Cessation
2.
JAMA ; 323(8): 757-763, 2020 02 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32096858

ABSTRACT

Importance: Dementia (also known as major neurocognitive disorder) is defined by a significant decline in 1 or more cognitive domains that interferes with a person's independence in daily activities. Dementia affects an estimated 2.4 to 5.5 million individuals in the United States, and its prevalence increases with age. Objective: To update its 2014 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a review of the evidence on screening for cognitive impairment, including mild cognitive impairment and mild to moderate dementia, in community-dwelling adults, including those 65 years or older residing in independent living facilities. Population: This recommendation applies to community-dwelling older adults 65 years or older, without recognized signs or symptoms of cognitive impairment. Evidence Assessment: The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is lacking, and the balance of benefits and harms of screening for cognitive impairment cannot be determined. Recommendation: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for cognitive impairment in older adults. (I statement).


Subject(s)
Cognitive Dysfunction/diagnosis , Dementia/diagnosis , Mass Screening , Aged , Cognitive Dysfunction/therapy , Dementia/therapy , Early Diagnosis , Humans , Independent Living , Mass Screening/adverse effects , Neuropsychological Tests , Sensitivity and Specificity
3.
JAMA ; 322(22): 2211-2218, 2019 12 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31821437

ABSTRACT

Importance: An abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is typically defined as aortic enlargement with a diameter of 3.0 cm or larger. The prevalence of AAA has declined over the past 2 decades among screened men 65 years or older in various European countries. The current prevalence of AAA in the United States is unclear because of the low uptake of screening. Most AAAs are asymptomatic until they rupture. Although the risk for rupture varies greatly by aneurysm size, the associated risk for death with rupture is as high as 81%. Objective: To update its 2014 recommendation, the USPSTF commissioned a review of the evidence on the effectiveness of 1-time and repeated screening for AAA, the associated harms of screening, and the benefits and harms of available treatments for small AAAs (3.0-5.4 cm in diameter) identified through screening. Population: This recommendation applies to asymptomatic adults 50 years or older. However, the randomized trial evidence focuses almost entirely on men aged 65 to 75 years. Evidence Assessment: Based on a review of the evidence, the USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that screening for AAA in men aged 65 to 75 years who have ever smoked is of moderate net benefit. The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that screening for AAA in men aged 65 to 75 years who have never smoked is of small net benefit. The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient to determine the net benefit of screening for AAA in women aged 65 to 75 years who have ever smoked or have a family history of AAA. The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that the harms of screening for AAA in women aged 65 to 75 years who have never smoked and have no family history of AAA outweigh the benefits. Recommendations: The USPSTF recommends 1-time screening for AAA with ultrasonography in men aged 65 to 75 years who have ever smoked. (B recommendation) The USPSTF recommends that clinicians selectively offer screening for AAA with ultrasonography in men aged 65 to 75 years who have never smoked rather than routinely screening all men in this group. (C recommendation) The USPSTF recommends against routine screening for AAA with ultrasonography in women who have never smoked and have no family history of AAA. (D recommendation) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for AAA with ultrasonography in women aged 65 to 75 years who have ever smoked or have a family history of AAA. (I statement).


Subject(s)
Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal/diagnostic imaging , Mass Screening , Aged , Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal/complications , Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal/epidemiology , Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal/surgery , Aortic Rupture/etiology , Female , Humans , Male , Mass Screening/adverse effects , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors , Sex Factors , Smoking , Ultrasonography
4.
JAMA ; 322(12): 1188-1194, 2019 09 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31550038

ABSTRACT

Importance: Among the general adult population, women (across all ages) have the highest prevalence of asymptomatic bacteriuria, although rates increase with age among both men and women. Asymptomatic bacteriuria is present in an estimated 1% to 6% of premenopausal women and an estimated 2% to 10% of pregnant women and is associated with pyelonephritis, one of the most common nonobstetric reasons for hospitalization in pregnant women. Among pregnant persons, pyelonephritis is associated with perinatal complications including septicemia, respiratory distress, low birth weight, and spontaneous preterm birth. Objective: To update its 2008 recommendation, the USPSTF commissioned a review of the evidence on potential benefits and harms of screening for and treatment of asymptomatic bacteriuria in adults, including pregnant persons. Population: This recommendation applies to community-dwelling adults 18 years and older and pregnant persons of any age without signs and symptoms of a urinary tract infection. Evidence Assessment: Based on a review of the evidence, the USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that screening for and treatment of asymptomatic bacteriuria in pregnant persons has moderate net benefit in reducing perinatal complications. There is adequate evidence that pyelonephritis in pregnancy is associated with negative maternal outcomes and that treatment of screen-detected asymptomatic bacteriuria can reduce the incidence of pyelonephritis in pregnant persons. The USPSTF found adequate evidence of harms associated with treatment of asymptomatic bacteriuria (including adverse effects of antibiotic treatment and changes in the microbiome) to be at least small in magnitude. The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that screening for and treatment of asymptomatic bacteriuria in nonpregnant adults has no net benefit. The known harms associated with treatment include adverse effects of antibiotic use and changes to the microbiome. Based on these known harms, the USPSTF determined the overall harms to be at least small in this group. Recommendations: The USPSTF recommends screening pregnant persons for asymptomatic bacteriuria using urine culture. (B recommendation) The USPSTF recommends against screening for asymptomatic bacteriuria in nonpregnant adults. (D recommendation).


Subject(s)
Bacteriuria/diagnosis , Mass Screening/standards , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/diagnosis , Adult , Anti-Bacterial Agents/adverse effects , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Bacteriuria/drug therapy , Female , Humans , Male , Pregnancy , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/drug therapy , Pyelonephritis/prevention & control , Risk Factors , Urinary Tract Infections/diagnosis
5.
JAMA ; 322(9): 857-867, 2019 09 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31479144

ABSTRACT

Importance: Breast cancer is the most common nonskin cancer among women in the United States and the second leading cause of cancer death. The median age at diagnosis is 62 years, and an estimated 1 in 8 women will develop breast cancer at some point in their lifetime. African American women are more likely to die of breast cancer compared with women of other races. Objective: To update the 2013 US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation on medications for risk reduction of primary breast cancer. Evidence Review: The USPSTF reviewed evidence on the accuracy of risk assessment methods to identify women who could benefit from risk-reducing medications for breast cancer, as well as evidence on the effectiveness, adverse effects, and subgroup variations of these medications. The USPSTF reviewed evidence from randomized trials, observational studies, and diagnostic accuracy studies of risk stratification models in women without preexisting breast cancer or ductal carcinoma in situ. Findings: The USPSTF found convincing evidence that risk assessment tools can predict the number of cases of breast cancer expected to develop in a population. However, these risk assessment tools perform modestly at best in discriminating between individual women who will or will not develop breast cancer. The USPSTF found convincing evidence that risk-reducing medications (tamoxifen, raloxifene, or aromatase inhibitors) provide at least a moderate benefit in reducing risk for invasive estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer in postmenopausal women at increased risk for breast cancer. The USPSTF found that the benefits of taking tamoxifen, raloxifene, and aromatase inhibitors to reduce risk for breast cancer are no greater than small in women not at increased risk for the disease. The USPSTF found convincing evidence that tamoxifen and raloxifene and adequate evidence that aromatase inhibitors are associated with small to moderate harms. Overall, the USPSTF determined that the net benefit of taking medications to reduce risk of breast cancer is larger in women who have a greater risk for developing breast cancer. Conclusions and Recommendation: The USPSTF recommends that clinicians offer to prescribe risk-reducing medications, such as tamoxifen, raloxifene, or aromatase inhibitors, to women who are at increased risk for breast cancer and at low risk for adverse medication effects. (B recommendation) The USPSTF recommends against the routine use of risk-reducing medications, such as tamoxifen, raloxifene, or aromatase inhibitors, in women who are not at increased risk for breast cancer. (D recommendation) This recommendation applies to asymptomatic women 35 years and older, including women with previous benign breast lesions on biopsy (such as atypical ductal or lobular hyperplasia and lobular carcinoma in situ). This recommendation does not apply to women who have a current or previous diagnosis of breast cancer or ductal carcinoma in situ.


Subject(s)
Aromatase Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Breast Neoplasms/prevention & control , Selective Estrogen Receptor Modulators/therapeutic use , Tamoxifen/therapeutic use , Adult , Breast Neoplasms/genetics , Female , Genes, BRCA1 , Genes, BRCA2 , Humans , Middle Aged , Mutation , Raloxifene Hydrochloride/therapeutic use , Risk Assessment/methods , Risk Factors
6.
JAMA ; 322(7): 652-665, 2019 08 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31429903

ABSTRACT

Importance: Potentially harmful mutations of the breast cancer susceptibility 1 and 2 genes (BRCA1/2) are associated with increased risk for breast, ovarian, fallopian tube, and peritoneal cancer. For women in the United States, breast cancer is the most common cancer after nonmelanoma skin cancer and the second leading cause of cancer death. In the general population, BRCA1/2 mutations occur in an estimated 1 in 300 to 500 women and account for 5% to 10% of breast cancer cases and 15% of ovarian cancer cases. Objective: To update the 2013 US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation on risk assessment, genetic counseling, and genetic testing for BRCA-related cancer. Evidence Review: The USPSTF reviewed the evidence on risk assessment, genetic counseling, and genetic testing for potentially harmful BRCA1/2 mutations in asymptomatic women who have never been diagnosed with BRCA-related cancer, as well as those with a previous diagnosis of breast, ovarian, tubal, or peritoneal cancer who have completed treatment and are considered cancer free. In addition, the USPSTF reviewed interventions to reduce the risk for breast, ovarian, tubal, or peritoneal cancer in women with potentially harmful BRCA1/2 mutations, including intensive cancer screening, medications, and risk-reducing surgery. Findings: For women whose family or personal history is associated with an increased risk for harmful mutations in the BRCA1/2 genes, or who have an ancestry associated with BRCA1/2 gene mutations, there is adequate evidence that the benefits of risk assessment, genetic counseling, genetic testing, and interventions are moderate. For women whose personal or family history or ancestry is not associated with an increased risk for harmful mutations in the BRCA1/2 genes, there is adequate evidence that the benefits of risk assessment, genetic counseling, genetic testing, and interventions are small to none. Regardless of family or personal history, the USPSTF found adequate evidence that the overall harms of risk assessment, genetic counseling, genetic testing, and interventions are small to moderate. Conclusions and Recommendation: The USPSTF recommends that primary care clinicians assess women with a personal or family history of breast, ovarian, tubal, or peritoneal cancer or who have an ancestry associated with BRCA1/2 gene mutations with an appropriate brief familial risk assessment tool. Women with a positive result on the risk assessment tool should receive genetic counseling and, if indicated after counseling, genetic testing. (B recommendation) The USPSTF recommends against routine risk assessment, genetic counseling, or genetic testing for women whose personal or family history or ancestry is not associated with potentially harmful BRCA1/2 gene mutations. (D recommendation).


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms/genetics , Genes, BRCA1 , Genes, BRCA2 , Genetic Counseling , Genetic Testing , Mutation , Ovarian Neoplasms/genetics , Breast Neoplasms/prevention & control , Fallopian Tube Neoplasms/genetics , Female , Genetic Predisposition to Disease , Humans , Ovarian Neoplasms/prevention & control , Peritoneal Neoplasms/genetics , Risk Assessment
7.
JAMA ; 322(4): 349-354, 2019 07 23.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31334800

ABSTRACT

Importance: Screening for hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection during pregnancy identifies women whose infants are at risk of perinatal transmission. Data from a nationally representative sample showed a prevalence of maternal HBV infection of 85.8 cases per 100 000 deliveries from 1998 to 2011 (0.09% of live-born singleton deliveries in the United States). Although there are guidelines for universal infant HBV vaccination, rates of maternal HBV infection have increased annually by 5.5% since 1998. Children infected with HBV during infancy or childhood are more likely to develop chronic infection. Chronic HBV infection increases long-term morbidity and mortality by predisposing infected persons to cirrhosis of the liver and liver cancer. Objective: To update the 2009 US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation on screening for HBV infection in pregnant women. Evidence Review: The USPSTF commissioned a reaffirmation evidence update to identify substantial new evidence sufficient enough to change the prior recommendation. The USPSTF targeted its evidence review on the effectiveness and potential harms of screening and the effectiveness and harms of case management to prevent perinatal transmission. Findings: The USPSTF previously found adequate evidence that serologic testing for hepatitis B surface antigen accurately identifies HBV infection. Interventions are effective for preventing perinatal transmission, based on foundational evidence and observational studies of US case management programs. In addition, there is evidence that over time, perinatal transmission has decreased among women and infants enrolled in case management, providing an overall substantial health benefit. Therefore, the USPSTF reaffirms its previous conclusion that there is convincing evidence that screening for HBV infection in pregnant women provides substantial benefit. Conclusions and Recommendation: The USPSTF recommends screening for HBV infection in pregnant women at their first prenatal visit. (A recommendation).


Subject(s)
Hepatitis B virus , Hepatitis B , Child , Female , Humans , Infant , Infectious Disease Transmission, Vertical , Mass Screening , Pregnancy , Pregnant Women , United States
8.
JAMA ; 322(5): 438-444, 2019 08 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31386141

ABSTRACT

Importance: Pancreatic cancer is an uncommon cancer with an age-adjusted annual incidence of 12.9 cases per 100 000 person-years. However, the death rate is 11.0 deaths per 100 000 person-years because the prognosis of pancreatic cancer is poor. Although its incidence is low, pancreatic cancer is the third most common cause of cancer death in the United States. Because of the increasing incidence of pancreatic cancer, along with improvements in early detection and treatment of other types of cancer, it is estimated that pancreatic cancer may soon become the second-leading cause of cancer death in the United States. Objective: To update the 2004 US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation on screening for pancreatic cancer. Evidence Review: The USPSTF reviewed the evidence on the benefits and harms of screening for pancreatic cancer, the diagnostic accuracy of screening tests for pancreatic cancer, and the benefits and harms of treatment of screen-detected or asymptomatic pancreatic cancer. Findings: The USPSTF found no evidence that screening for pancreatic cancer or treatment of screen-detected pancreatic cancer improves disease-specific morbidity or mortality, or all-cause mortality. The USPSTF found adequate evidence that the magnitude of the benefits of screening for pancreatic cancer in asymptomatic adults can be bounded as no greater than small. The USPSTF found adequate evidence that the magnitude of the harms of screening for pancreatic cancer and treatment of screen-detected pancreatic cancer can be bounded as at least moderate. The USPSTF reaffirms its previous conclusion that the potential benefits of screening for pancreatic cancer in asymptomatic adults do not outweigh the potential harms. Conclusions and Recommendation: The USPSTF recommends against screening for pancreatic cancer in asymptomatic adults. (D recommendation).


Subject(s)
Carcinoma, Pancreatic Ductal/diagnosis , Early Detection of Cancer/standards , Pancreatic Neoplasms/diagnosis , Carcinoma, Pancreatic Ductal/genetics , Carcinoma, Pancreatic Ductal/surgery , Cost of Illness , Early Detection of Cancer/adverse effects , Female , Humans , Male , Mass Screening/standards , Pancreas/diagnostic imaging , Pancreatic Neoplasms/genetics , Pancreatic Neoplasms/surgery , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors , Sensitivity and Specificity
9.
JAMA ; 321(4): 394-398, 2019 Jan 29.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30694327

ABSTRACT

IMPORTANCE: In the United States, the rate of gonococcal ophthalmia neonatorum was an estimated 0.4 cases per 100 000 live births per year from 2013 to 2017. Gonococcal ophthalmia neonatorum can cause corneal scarring, ocular perforation, and blindness as early as 24 hours after birth. In the absence of ocular prophylaxis, transmission rates of gonococcal infection from mother to newborn are 30% to 50%. OBJECTIVE: To reaffirm the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) 2011 recommendation on ocular prophylaxis for gonococcal ophthalmia neonatorum. EVIDENCE REVIEW: The USPSTF commissioned a reaffirmation evidence update to identify new and substantial evidence sufficient enough to change its prior recommendation. FINDINGS: Using a reaffirmation process, the USPSTF found no new data that would change its previous conclusion that topical ocular prophylaxis is effective in preventing gonococcal ophthalmia neonatorum and related ocular conditions. The USPSTF found no new data that would change its previous conclusion that there is convincing evidence that topical ocular prophylaxis of all newborns is not associated with serious harms. Therefore, the USPSTF reaffirms its previous conclusion that there is convincing evidence that topical ocular prophylaxis for all newborns provides substantial benefit. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION: The USPSTF recommends prophylactic ocular topical medication for all newborns to prevent gonococcal ophthalmia neonatorum. (A recommendation).


Subject(s)
Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Erythromycin/therapeutic use , Ophthalmia Neonatorum/prevention & control , Administration, Topical , Humans , Infant, Newborn , Ointments , Ophthalmia Neonatorum/epidemiology , United States/epidemiology
10.
JAMA ; 321(23): 2326-2336, 2019 Jun 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31184701

ABSTRACT

IMPORTANCE: Approximately 1.1 million persons in the United States are currently living with HIV, and more than 700 000 persons have died of AIDS since the first cases were reported in 1981. There were approximately 38 300 new diagnoses of HIV infection in 2017. The estimated prevalence of HIV infection among persons 13 years and older in the United States is 0.4%, and data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention show a significant increase in HIV diagnoses starting at age 15 years. An estimated 8700 women living with HIV give birth each year in the United States. HIV can be transmitted from mother to child during pregnancy, labor, delivery, and breastfeeding. The incidence of perinatal HIV infection in the United States peaked in 1992 and has declined significantly following the implementation of routine prenatal HIV screening and the use of effective therapies and precautions to prevent mother-to-child transmission. OBJECTIVE: To update the 2013 US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation on screening for HIV infection in adolescents, adults, and pregnant women. EVIDENCE REVIEW: The USPSTF reviewed the evidence on the benefits and harms of screening for HIV infection in nonpregnant adolescents and adults, the yield of screening for HIV infection at different intervals, the effects of initiating antiretroviral therapy (ART) at a higher vs lower CD4 cell count, and the longer-term harms associated with currently recommended ART regimens. The USPSTF also reviewed the evidence on the benefits (specifically, reduced risk of mother-to-child transmission of HIV infection) and harms of screening for HIV infection in pregnant persons, the yield of repeat screening for HIV at different intervals during pregnancy, the effectiveness of currently recommended ART regimens for reducing mother-to-child transmission of HIV infection, and the harms of ART during pregnancy to the mother and infant. FINDINGS: The USPSTF found convincing evidence that currently recommended HIV tests are highly accurate in diagnosing HIV infection. The USPSTF found convincing evidence that identification and early treatment of HIV infection is of substantial benefit in reducing the risk of AIDS-related events or death. The USPSTF found convincing evidence that the use of ART is of substantial benefit in decreasing the risk of HIV transmission to uninfected sex partners. The USPSTF also found convincing evidence that identification and treatment of pregnant women living with HIV infection is of substantial benefit in reducing the rate of mother-to-child transmission. The USPSTF found adequate evidence that ART is associated with some harms, including neuropsychiatric, renal, and hepatic harms, and an increased risk of preterm birth in pregnant women. The USPSTF concludes with high certainty that the net benefit of screening for HIV infection in adolescents, adults, and pregnant women is substantial. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION: The USPSTF recommends screening for HIV infection in adolescents and adults aged 15 to 65 years. Younger adolescents and older adults who are at increased risk of infection should also be screened. (A recommendation) The USPSTF recommends screening for HIV infection in all pregnant persons, including those who present in labor or at delivery whose HIV status is unknown. (A recommendation).


Subject(s)
Anti-Retroviral Agents/therapeutic use , HIV Infections/diagnosis , Mass Screening/standards , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/diagnosis , Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome/mortality , Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome/prevention & control , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , CD4 Lymphocyte Count , Cost of Illness , Female , HIV/immunology , HIV Infections/drug therapy , HIV Infections/epidemiology , HIV Infections/transmission , Humans , Immunoassay , Infectious Disease Transmission, Vertical/prevention & control , Male , Middle Aged , Pregnancy , Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/drug therapy , Risk Factors , United States/epidemiology , Young Adult
11.
JAMA ; 321(22): 2203-2213, 2019 06 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31184747

ABSTRACT

Importance: An estimated 1.1 million individuals in the United States are currently living with HIV, and more than 700 000 persons have died of AIDS since the first cases were reported in 1981. In 2017, there were 38 281 new diagnoses of HIV infection reported in the United States; 81% of these new diagnoses were among males and 19% were among females. Although treatable, HIV infection has no cure and has significant health consequences. Objective: To issue a new US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation on preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for the prevention of HIV infection. Evidence Review: The USPSTF reviewed the evidence on the benefits of PrEP for the prevention of HIV infection with oral tenofovir disoproxil fumarate monotherapy or combined tenofovir disoproxil fumarate and emtricitabine and whether the benefits vary by risk group, population subgroup, or regimen or dosing strategy; the diagnostic accuracy of risk assessment tools to identify persons at high risk of HIV acquisition; the rates of adherence to PrEP in primary care settings; the association between adherence and effectiveness of PrEP; and the harms of PrEP when used for HIV prevention. Findings: The USPSTF found convincing evidence that PrEP is of substantial benefit in decreasing the risk of HIV infection in persons at high risk of HIV acquisition. The USPSTF also found convincing evidence that adherence to PrEP is highly associated with its efficacy in preventing the acquisition of HIV infection; thus, adherence to PrEP is central to realizing its benefit. The USPSTF found adequate evidence that PrEP is associated with small harms, including kidney and gastrointestinal adverse effects. The USPSTF concludes with high certainty that the magnitude of benefit of PrEP with oral tenofovir disoproxil fumarate-based therapy to reduce the risk of acquisition of HIV infection in persons at high risk is substantial. Conclusions and Recommendation: The USPSTF recommends offering PrEP with effective antiretroviral therapy to persons at high risk of HIV acquisition. (A recommendation).


Subject(s)
Anti-Retroviral Agents/therapeutic use , Emtricitabine/therapeutic use , HIV Infections/prevention & control , Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis , Tenofovir/therapeutic use , Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome/epidemiology , Administration, Oral , Advisory Committees , Anti-Retroviral Agents/adverse effects , Drug Therapy, Combination , Emtricitabine/adverse effects , Female , Humans , Male , Medication Adherence , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors , Tenofovir/adverse effects , United States/epidemiology
12.
JAMA ; 321(15): 1502-1509, 2019 04 16.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30990556

ABSTRACT

Importance: Elevated blood lead levels in children are associated with neurologic effects such as behavioral and learning problems, lower IQ, hyperactivity, hearing problems, and impaired growth. In pregnant women, lead exposure can impair organ systems such as the hematopoietic, hepatic, renal, and nervous systems, and increase the risk of preeclampsia and adverse perinatal outcomes. Many of the adverse health effects of lead exposure are irreversible. Objective: To update the 2006 US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation on screening for elevated blood lead levels in children and pregnant women. Evidence Review: The USPSTF reviewed the evidence on the benefits and harms of screening for and treatment of elevated blood lead levels. In this update, an elevated blood lead level was defined according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reference level of 5 µg/dL. Findings: The USPSTF found adequate evidence that questionnaires and other clinical prediction tools to identify asymptomatic children with elevated blood lead levels are inaccurate. The USPSTF found adequate evidence that capillary blood testing accurately identifies children with elevated blood lead levels. The USPSTF found inadequate evidence on the effectiveness of treatment of elevated blood lead levels in asymptomatic children 5 years and younger and in pregnant women. The USPSTF found inadequate evidence regarding the accuracy of questionnaires and other clinical prediction tools to identify asymptomatic pregnant women with elevated blood lead levels. The USPSTF found inadequate evidence on the harms of screening for or treatment of elevated blood lead levels in asymptomatic children and pregnant women. The USPSTF concluded that the current evidence is insufficient, and that the balance of benefits and harms of screening for elevated blood lead levels in asymptomatic children 5 years and younger and in pregnant women cannot be determined. Conclusions and Recommendation: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for elevated blood lead levels in asymptomatic children. (I statement) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for elevated blood lead levels in asymptomatic pregnant persons. (I statement).


Subject(s)
Lead Poisoning/therapy , Lead/blood , Mass Screening , Pregnant Women , Child, Preschool , Female , Humans , Infant , Lead Poisoning/diagnosis , Lead Poisoning/prevention & control , Pregnancy , Pregnancy Complications/diagnosis , Pregnancy Complications/therapy , Preventive Health Services , Surveys and Questionnaires
13.
JAMA ; 321(6): 580-587, 2019 02 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30747971

ABSTRACT

Importance: Perinatal depression, which is the occurrence of a depressive disorder during pregnancy or following childbirth, affects as many as 1 in 7 women and is one of the most common complications of pregnancy and the postpartum period. It is well established that perinatal depression can result in adverse short- and long-term effects on both the woman and child. Objective: To issue a new US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation on interventions to prevent perinatal depression. Evidence Review: The USPSTF reviewed the evidence on the benefits and harms of preventive interventions for perinatal depression in pregnant or postpartum women or their children. The USPSTF reviewed contextual information on the accuracy of tools used to identify women at increased risk of perinatal depression and the most effective timing for preventive interventions. Interventions reviewed included counseling, health system interventions, physical activity, education, supportive interventions, and other behavioral interventions, such as infant sleep training and expressive writing. Pharmacological approaches included the use of nortriptyline, sertraline, and omega-3 fatty acids. Findings: The USPSTF found convincing evidence that counseling interventions, such as cognitive behavioral therapy and interpersonal therapy, are effective in preventing perinatal depression. Women with a history of depression, current depressive symptoms, or certain socioeconomic risk factors (eg, low income or young or single parenthood) would benefit from counseling interventions and could be considered at increased risk. The USPSTF found adequate evidence to bound the potential harms of counseling interventions as no greater than small, based on the nature of the intervention and the low likelihood of serious harms. The USPSTF found inadequate evidence to assess the benefits and harms of other noncounseling interventions. The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that providing or referring pregnant or postpartum women at increased risk to counseling interventions has a moderate net benefit in preventing perinatal depression. Conclusions and Recommendation: The USPSTF recommends that clinicians provide or refer pregnant and postpartum persons who are at increased risk of perinatal depression to counseling interventions. (B recommendation).


Subject(s)
Counseling , Depression, Postpartum/prevention & control , Depression/prevention & control , Pregnancy Complications/prevention & control , Antidepressive Agents/adverse effects , Antidepressive Agents/therapeutic use , Cognitive Behavioral Therapy , Female , Humans , Pregnancy , Referral and Consultation , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors
14.
Ann Intern Med ; 166(8): 565-571, 2017 Apr 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28265649

ABSTRACT

The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) summarizes the principles and considerations that guide development of its recommendations for diverse U.S. populations. It uses these principles through each step in the evidence-based guideline process: developing the research plan, conducting the evidence review, developing the recommendation, and communicating to guideline users. Three recent recommendations provide examples of how the USPSTF has used these principles: the 2015 recommendation on screening for abnormal blood glucose and type 2 diabetes; the 2016 recommendation on screening for breast cancer; and the recommendation on screening for prostate cancer, which is currently in progress. A more comprehensive list of recommendations that includes considerations for specific populations is also provided.


Subject(s)
Advisory Committees/organization & administration , Evidence-Based Medicine , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Preventive Health Services/methods , Humans , Information Dissemination , Research Design , United States
15.
JAMA ; 319(24): 2521-2531, 2018 06 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29946735

ABSTRACT

Importance: By 2020, approximately 12.3 million individuals in the United States older than 50 years are expected to have osteoporosis. Osteoporotic fractures, particularly hip fractures, are associated with limitations in ambulation, chronic pain and disability, loss of independence, and decreased quality of life, and 21% to 30% of patients who experience a hip fracture die within 1 year. The prevalence of primary osteoporosis (ie, osteoporosis without underlying disease) increases with age and differs by race/ethnicity. With the aging of the US population, the potential preventable burden is likely to increase in future years. Objective: To update the 2011 US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation on screening for osteoporosis. Evidence Review: The USPSTF reviewed the evidence on screening for and treatment of osteoporotic fractures in men and women, as well as risk assessment tools, screening intervals, and efficacy of screening and treatment in subgroups. The screening population was postmenopausal women and older men with no known previous osteoporotic fractures and no known comorbid conditions or medication use associated with secondary osteoporosis. Findings: The USPSTF found convincing evidence that bone measurement tests are accurate for detecting osteoporosis and predicting osteoporotic fractures in women and men. The USPSTF found adequate evidence that clinical risk assessment tools are moderately accurate in identifying risk of osteoporosis and osteoporotic fractures. The USPSTF found convincing evidence that drug therapies reduce subsequent fracture rates in postmenopausal women. The USPSTF found that the evidence is inadequate to assess the effectiveness of drug therapies in reducing subsequent fracture rates in men without previous fractures. Conclusions and Recommendation: The USPSTF recommends screening for osteoporosis with bone measurement testing to prevent osteoporotic fractures in women 65 years and older. (B recommendation) The USPSTF recommends screening for osteoporosis with bone measurement testing to prevent osteoporotic fractures in postmenopausal women younger than 65 years at increased risk of osteoporosis, as determined by a formal clinical risk assessment tool. (B recommendation) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for osteoporosis to prevent osteoporotic fractures in men. (I statement).


Subject(s)
Bone Density Conservation Agents/therapeutic use , Mass Screening , Osteoporosis/diagnostic imaging , Osteoporotic Fractures/prevention & control , Absorptiometry, Photon , Aged , Bone Density Conservation Agents/adverse effects , Diphosphonates/adverse effects , Diphosphonates/therapeutic use , Female , Humans , Male , Mass Screening/adverse effects , Middle Aged , Osteoporosis/drug therapy , Postmenopause
16.
JAMA ; 320(3): 272-280, 2018 07 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29998297

ABSTRACT

Importance: Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the most common cause of death among adults in the United States. Treatment to prevent CVD events by modifying risk factors is currently informed by the Framingham Risk Score, the Pooled Cohort Equations, or similar CVD risk assessment models. If current CVD risk assessment models could be improved by adding more risk factors, treatment might be better targeted, thereby maximizing the benefits and minimizing the harms. Objective: To update the 2009 US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation on using nontraditional risk factors in coronary heart disease risk assessment. Evidence Review: The USPSTF reviewed the evidence on using nontraditional risk factors in CVD risk assessment, focusing on the ankle-brachial index (ABI), high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) level, and coronary artery calcium (CAC) score; the health benefits and harms of CVD risk assessment and treatment guided by nontraditional risk factors combined with the Framingham Risk Score or Pooled Cohort Equations compared with using either risk assessment model alone; and whether adding nontraditional risk factors to existing CVD risk assessment models improves measures of calibration, discrimination, and risk reclassification. Findings: The USPSTF found adequate evidence that adding the ABI, hsCRP level, and CAC score to existing CVD risk assessment models results in small improvements in discrimination and risk reclassification; however, the clinical meaning of these changes is largely unknown. Evidence on adding the ABI, hsCRP level, and CAC score to the Pooled Cohort Equations is limited. The USPSTF found inadequate evidence to assess whether treatment decisions guided by the ABI, hsCRP level, or CAC score, in addition to risk factors in existing CVD risk assessment models, leads to reduced incidence of CVD events or mortality. The USPSTF found adequate evidence to conceptually bound the harms of early detection and interventions as small. The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of using the ABI, hsCRP level, or CAC score in risk assessment for CVD in asymptomatic adults to prevent CVD events. Conclusions and Recommendation: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of adding the ABI, hsCRP level, or CAC score to traditional risk assessment for CVD in asymptomatic adults to prevent CVD events. (I statement).


Subject(s)
Ankle Brachial Index , C-Reactive Protein/analysis , Cardiovascular Diseases , Coronary Artery Disease/diagnosis , Risk Assessment/methods , Vascular Calcification/diagnosis , Biomarkers/blood , Humans , Risk Factors
17.
JAMA ; 320(2): 177-183, 2018 07 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29998344

ABSTRACT

Importance: Peripheral artery disease (PAD) is a manifestation of atherosclerosis in the lower limbs. It can impair walking and, in severe cases, can lead to tissue loss, infection, and amputation. In addition to morbidity directly caused by PAD, patients with PAD are at increased risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD) events, because atherosclerosis is a systemic disease that also causes coronary and cerebrovascular events. Objective: To update the 2013 US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation on screening for PAD and CVD risk with the ankle-brachial index (ABI). Evidence Review: The USPSTF reviewed the evidence on whether screening for PAD with the ABI in generally asymptomatic adults reduces morbidity or mortality from PAD or CVD. The current review expanded on the previous review to include individuals with diabetes and interventions that include supervised exercise and physical therapy intended to improve outcomes in the lower limbs. Findings: The USPSTF found few data on the accuracy of the ABI for identifying asymptomatic persons who can benefit from treatment of PAD or CVD. There are few studies addressing the benefits of treating screen-detected patients with PAD; 2 good-quality studies showed no benefit of using the ABI to manage daily aspirin therapy in unselected populations, and 2 studies showed no benefit from exercise therapy. No studies addressed the harms of screening, although the potential exists for overdiagnosis, labeling, and opportunity costs. Studies that addressed the harms of treatment showed nonsignificant results. Therefore, the USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient and that the balance of benefits and harms of screening for PAD with the ABI in asymptomatic adults cannot be determined. Conclusions and Recommendation: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for PAD and CVD risk with the ABI in asymptomatic adults. (I statement).


Subject(s)
Ankle Brachial Index , Mass Screening/methods , Peripheral Arterial Disease/diagnosis , Adult , Ankle Brachial Index/adverse effects , Aspirin/therapeutic use , Asymptomatic Diseases , Early Diagnosis , Exercise Therapy , Fibrinolytic Agents/therapeutic use , Humans , Mass Screening/adverse effects , Peripheral Arterial Disease/therapy , Risk Assessment
18.
JAMA ; 320(11): 1163-1171, 2018 09 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30326502

ABSTRACT

Importance: More than 35% of men and 40% of women in the United States are obese. Obesity is associated with health problems such as increased risk for coronary heart disease, type 2 diabetes, various types of cancer, gallstones, and disability. Obesity is also associated with an increased risk for death, particularly among adults younger than 65 years. Objective: To update the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) 2012 recommendation on screening for obesity in adults. Evidence Review: The USPSTF reviewed the evidence on interventions (behavioral and pharmacotherapy) for weight loss or weight loss maintenance that can be provided in or referred from a primary care setting. Surgical weight loss interventions and nonsurgical weight loss devices (eg, gastric balloons) are considered to be outside the scope of the primary care setting. Findings: The USPSTF found adequate evidence that intensive, multicomponent behavioral interventions in adults with obesity can lead to clinically significant improvements in weight status and reduce the incidence of type 2 diabetes among adults with obesity and elevated plasma glucose levels; these interventions are of moderate benefit. The USPSTF found adequate evidence that behavior-based weight loss maintenance interventions are of moderate benefit. The USPSTF found adequate evidence that the harms of intensive, multicomponent behavioral interventions (including weight loss maintenance interventions) in adults with obesity are small to none. Therefore, the USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that offering or referring adults with obesity to intensive behavioral interventions or behavior-based weight loss maintenance interventions has a moderate net benefit. Conclusions and Recommendation: The USPSTF recommends that clinicians offer or refer adults with a body mass index of 30 or higher to intensive, multicomponent behavioral interventions. (B recommendation).


Subject(s)
Behavior Therapy , Health Behavior , Obesity/therapy , Adult , Anti-Obesity Agents/therapeutic use , Combined Modality Therapy , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/prevention & control , Female , Humans , Male , Obesity/complications , Obesity/drug therapy , Obesity Management/methods , Preventive Health Services , United States , Weight Loss
19.
JAMA ; 320(20): 2122-2128, 2018 11 27.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30480735

ABSTRACT

Importance: In 2016, approximately 676 000 children in the United States experienced maltreatment (abuse, neglect, or both), with 75% of these children experiencing neglect, 18% experiencing physical abuse, and 8% experiencing sexual abuse. Approximately 14% of abused children experienced multiple forms of maltreatment, and more than 1700 children died as a result of maltreatment. Objective: To update the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) 2013 recommendation on primary care interventions to prevent child maltreatment. Evidence Review: The USPSTF commissioned a review of the evidence on primary care interventions to prevent maltreatment in children and adolescents without signs or symptoms of maltreatment. Findings: The USPSTF found limited and inconsistent evidence on the benefits of primary care interventions, including home visitation programs, to prevent child maltreatment and found no evidence related to the harms of such interventions. The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of primary care interventions to prevent child maltreatment. The level of certainty of the magnitude of the benefits and harms of these interventions is low. Conclusions and Recommendation: The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of primary care interventions to prevent child maltreatment. (I statement).


Subject(s)
Child Abuse/prevention & control , Primary Health Care , Adolescent , Child , House Calls , Humans , Infant , Mandatory Reporting , Mass Screening , Primary Health Care/methods , Primary Health Care/standards , Risk Assessment
20.
JAMA ; 320(18): 1899-1909, 2018 11 13.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30422199

ABSTRACT

Importance: Excessive alcohol use is one of the most common causes of premature mortality in the United States. From 2006 to 2010, an estimated 88 000 alcohol-attributable deaths occurred annually in the United States, caused by both acute conditions (eg, injuries from motor vehicle collisions) and chronic conditions (eg, alcoholic liver disease). Alcohol use during pregnancy is also one of the major preventable causes of birth defects and developmental disabilities. Objective: To update the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) 2013 recommendation on screening for unhealthy alcohol use in primary care settings. Evidence Review: The USPSTF commissioned a review of the evidence on the effectiveness of screening to reduce unhealthy alcohol use (defined as a spectrum of behaviors, from risky drinking to alcohol use disorder, that result in increased risk for health consequences) morbidity, mortality, or risky behaviors and to improve health, social, or legal outcomes; the accuracy of various screening approaches; the effectiveness of counseling interventions to reduce unhealthy alcohol use, morbidity, mortality, or risky behaviors and to improve health, social, or legal outcomes; and the harms of screening and behavioral counseling interventions. Findings: The net benefit of screening and brief behavioral counseling interventions for unhealthy alcohol use in adults, including pregnant women, is moderate. The evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening and brief behavioral counseling interventions for unhealthy alcohol use in adolescents. Conclusions and Recommendation: The USPSTF recommends screening for unhealthy alcohol use in primary care settings in adults 18 years or older, including pregnant women, and providing persons engaged in risky or hazardous drinking with brief behavioral counseling interventions to reduce unhealthy alcohol use. (B recommendation) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening and brief behavioral counseling interventions for alcohol use in primary care settings in adolescents aged 12 to 17 years. (I statement).


Subject(s)
Alcohol Drinking/therapy , Alcohol-Related Disorders/diagnosis , Alcohol-Related Disorders/therapy , Counseling , Health Risk Behaviors , Patient Education as Topic , Adolescent , Adult , Advisory Committees , Behavior Therapy , Female , Humans , Male , Mass Screening , Preventive Health Services , Primary Health Care
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL