Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 14 de 14
Filtrar
1.
J Med Internet Res ; 25: e39054, 2023 03 10.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36745776

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: In 2020, at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, the United States experienced surges in healthcare needs, which challenged capacity throughout the healthcare system. Stay-at-home orders in many jurisdictions, cancellation of elective procedures, and closures of outpatient medical offices disrupted patient access to care. To inform symptomatic persons about when to seek care and potentially help alleviate the burden on the healthcare system, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and partners developed the CDC Coronavirus Self-Checker ("Self-Checker"). This interactive tool assists individuals seeking information about COVID-19 to determine the appropriate level of care by asking demographic, clinical, and nonclinical questions during an online "conversation." OBJECTIVE: This paper describes user characteristics, trends in use, and recommendations delivered by the Self-Checker between March 23, 2020, and April 19, 2021, for pursuing appropriate levels of medical care depending on the severity of user symptoms. METHODS: User characteristics and trends in completed conversations that resulted in a care message were analyzed. Care messages delivered by the Self-Checker were manually classified into three overarching conversation themes: (1) seek care immediately; (2) take no action, or stay home and self-monitor; and (3) conversation redirected. Trends in 7-day averages of conversations and COVID-19 cases were examined with development and marketing milestones that potentially impacted Self-Checker user engagement. RESULTS: Among 16,718,667 completed conversations, the Self-Checker delivered recommendations for 69.27% (n=11,580,738) of all conversations to "take no action, or stay home and self-monitor"; 28.8% (n=4,822,138) of conversations to "seek care immediately"; and 1.89% (n=315,791) of conversations were redirected to other resources without providing any care advice. Among 6.8 million conversations initiated for self-reported sick individuals without life-threatening symptoms, 59.21% resulted in a recommendation to "take no action, or stay home and self-monitor." Nearly all individuals (99.8%) who were not sick were also advised to "take no action, or stay home and self-monitor." CONCLUSIONS: The majority of Self-Checker conversations resulted in advice to take no action, or stay home and self-monitor. This guidance may have reduced patient volume on the medical system; however, future studies evaluating patients' satisfaction, intention to follow the care advice received, course of action, and care modality pursued could clarify the impact of the Self-Checker and similar tools during future public health emergencies.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Humanos , Estados Unidos , Pandemias , Comunicación , Satisfacción del Paciente , Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S.
2.
J Public Health Manag Pract ; 28(6): 650-656, 2022.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36037509

RESUMEN

Telehealth is the use of electronic information and telecommunication technologies to provide care when the patient and the provider are not in the same room at the same time. Telehealth accounted for less than 1% of all Medicare Fee-for-Service outpatient visits in the United States in 2019 but grew to account for 46% of all visits in April 2020. Changes in reimbursement and licensure policies during the COVID-19 pandemic appeared to greatly facilitate this increased use. Telehealth will continue to account for a substantial portion of care provided in the United States and globally. A better understanding of telehealth approaches and their evidence base by public health practitioners may help improve their ability to collaborate with health care organizations to improve population health. The article summarizes the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC's) approach to understanding the evidence base for telehealth in public health practice, possible applications for telehealth in public health practice, and CDC's use of telehealth to improve population health.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Telemedicina , Anciano , COVID-19/epidemiología , Humanos , Medicare , Pandemias , Práctica de Salud Pública , Estados Unidos/epidemiología
3.
Public Health Rep ; 137(4): 796-802, 2022.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35642664

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: In 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic overburdened the US health care system because of extended and unprecedented patient surges and supply shortages in hospitals. We investigated the extent to which several US hospitals experienced emergency department (ED) and intensive care unit (ICU) overcrowding and ventilator shortages during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We analyzed Health Pulse data to assess the extent to which US hospitals reported alerts when experiencing ED overcrowding, ICU overcrowding, and ventilator shortages from March 7, 2020, through April 30, 2021. RESULTS: Of 625 participating hospitals in 29 states, 393 (63%) reported at least 1 hospital alert during the study period: 246 (63%) reported ED overcrowding, 239 (61%) reported ICU overcrowding, and 48 (12%) reported ventilator shortages. The number of alerts for overcrowding in EDs and ICUs increased as the number of COVID-19 cases surged. CONCLUSIONS: Timely assessment and communication about critical factors such as ED and ICU overcrowding and ventilator shortages during public health emergencies can guide public health response efforts in supporting federal, state, and local public health agencies.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , COVID-19/epidemiología , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , Hospitales , Humanos , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos , Pandemias , Ventiladores Mecánicos
4.
Clin Microbiol Rev ; 34(3): e0012618, 2021 06 16.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34105993

RESUMEN

Patient care and public health require timely, reliable laboratory testing. However, clinical laboratory professionals rarely know whether patient specimens contain infectious agents, making ensuring biosafety while performing testing procedures challenging. The importance of biosafety in clinical laboratories was highlighted during the 2014 Ebola outbreak, where concerns about biosafety resulted in delayed diagnoses and contributed to patient deaths. This review is a collaboration between subject matter experts from large and small laboratories and the federal government to evaluate the capability of clinical laboratories to manage biosafety risks and safely test patient specimens. We discuss the complexity of clinical laboratories, including anatomic pathology, and describe how applying current biosafety guidance may be difficult as these guidelines, largely based on practices in research laboratories, do not always correspond to the unique clinical laboratory environments and their specialized equipment and processes. We retrospectively describe the biosafety gaps and opportunities for improvement in the areas of risk assessment and management; automated and manual laboratory disciplines; specimen collection, processing, and storage; test utilization; equipment and instrumentation safety; disinfection practices; personal protective equipment; waste management; laboratory personnel training and competency assessment; accreditation processes; and ethical guidance. Also addressed are the unique biosafety challenges successfully handled by a Texas community hospital clinical laboratory that performed testing for patients with Ebola without a formal biocontainment unit. The gaps in knowledge and practices identified in previous and ongoing outbreaks demonstrate the need for collaborative, comprehensive solutions to improve clinical laboratory biosafety and to better combat future emerging infectious disease outbreaks.


Asunto(s)
Servicios de Laboratorio Clínico , Contención de Riesgos Biológicos , Brotes de Enfermedades/prevención & control , Humanos , Laboratorios , Estudios Retrospectivos
5.
Clin Infect Dis ; 73(Suppl 1): S92-S97, 2021 07 15.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33977297

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Influenza vaccination is the most effective way to prevent influenza and influenza-associated complications including those leading to hospitalization. Resources otherwise used for influenza could support caring for patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) Health Center Program serves 30 million people annually by providing comprehensive primary healthcare, including influenza vaccination, to demographically diverse and historically underserved communities. Because racial and ethnic minority groups have been disproportionately affected by COVID-19, the objective of this analysis was to assess disparities in influenza vaccination at HRSA-funded health centers during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and HRSA analyzed cross-sectional data on influenza vaccinations from a weekly, voluntary health center COVID-19 survey after addition of an influenza-related question covering 7-11 November 2020. RESULTS: During the 3-week period, 1126 of 1385 health centers (81%) responded to the survey. Most of the 811 738 influenza vaccinations took place in urban areas and in the Western US region. There were disproportionately more health center influenza vaccinations among racial and ethnic minorities in comparison with county demographics, except among non-Hispanic blacks and American Indian/Alaska Natives. CONCLUSIONS: HRSA-funded health centers were able to quickly vaccinate large numbers of mostly racial or ethnic minority populations, disproportionately more than county demographics. However, additional efforts might be needed to reach specific racial populations and persons in rural areas. Success in influenza vaccination efforts can support success in severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 vaccination efforts.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Vacunas contra la Influenza , Gripe Humana , Estudios Transversales , Etnicidad , Humanos , Gripe Humana/epidemiología , Gripe Humana/prevención & control , Grupos Minoritarios , Pandemias/prevención & control , SARS-CoV-2 , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Vacunación
6.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 70(7): 240-244, 2021 Feb 19.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33600385

RESUMEN

Telehealth can facilitate access to care, reduce risk for transmission of SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 [COVID-19]), conserve scarce medical supplies, and reduce strain on health care capacity and facilities while supporting continuity of care. Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA)-funded health centers* expanded telehealth† services during the COVID-19 pandemic (1). The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services eliminated geographic restrictions and enhanced reimbursement so that telehealth services-enabled health centers could expand telehealth services and continue providing care during the pandemic (2,3). CDC and HRSA analyzed data from 245 health centers that completed a voluntary weekly HRSA Health Center COVID-19 Survey§ for 20 consecutive weeks to describe trends in telehealth use. During the weeks ending June 26-November 6, 2020, the overall percentage of weekly health care visits conducted via telehealth (telehealth visits) decreased by 25%, from 35.8% during the week ending June 26 to 26.9% for the week ending November 6, averaging 30.2% over the study period. Weekly telehealth visits declined when COVID-19 cases were decreasing and plateaued as cases were increasing. Health centers in the South and in rural areas consistently reported the lowest average percentage of weekly telehealth visits over the 20 weeks, compared with health centers in other regions and urban areas. As the COVID-19 pandemic continues, maintaining and expanding telehealth services will be critical to ensuring access to care while limiting exposure to SARS-CoV-2.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19/epidemiología , Instituciones de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Pandemias , Telemedicina/estadística & datos numéricos , Telemedicina/tendencias , Encuestas de Atención de la Salud , Humanos , Estados Unidos/epidemiología
7.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 69(50): 1902-1905, 2020 Dec 18.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33332297

RESUMEN

Early in the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, in-person ambulatory health care visits declined by 60% across the United States, while telehealth* visits increased, accounting for up to 30% of total care provided in some locations (1,2). In March 2020, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) released updated regulations and guidance changing telehealth provisions during the COVID-19 Public Health Emergency, including the elimination of geographic barriers and enhanced reimbursement for telehealth services† (3-6). The Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) administers a voluntary weekly Health Center COVID-19 Survey§ to track health centers' COVID-19 testing capacity and the impact of COVID-19 on operations, patients, and staff. CDC and HRSA analyzed data from the weekly COVID-19 survey completed by 1,009 HRSA-funded health centers (health centers¶) for the week of July 11-17, 2020, to describe telehealth service use in the United States by U.S. Census region,** urbanicity,†† staffing capacity, change in visit volume, and personal protective equipment (PPE) supply. Among the 1,009 health center respondents, 963 (95.4%) reported providing telehealth services. Health centers in urban areas were more likely to provide >30% of health care visits virtually (i.e., via telehealth) than were health centers in rural areas. Telehealth is a promising approach to promoting access to care and can facilitate public health mitigation strategies and help prevent transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and other respiratory illnesses, while supporting continuity of care. Although CMS's change of its telehealth provisions enabled health centers to expand telehealth by aligning guidance and leveraging federal resources, sustaining expanded use of telehealth services might require additional policies and resources.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Instituciones de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Telemedicina/estadística & datos numéricos , Encuestas de Atención de la Salud , Accesibilidad a los Servicios de Salud , Humanos , Telemedicina/organización & administración , Estados Unidos/epidemiología
8.
J Appl Lab Med ; 2(2): 244-258, 2017 Sep.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29181454

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Specimen labeling errors have long plagued the laboratory industry putting patients at risk of transfusion-related death, medication errors, misdiagnosis, and patient mismanagement. Many interventions have been implemented and deemed to be effective in reducing sample error rates. The objective of this review was to identify and evaluate the effectiveness of laboratory practices/ interventions to develop evidence based recommendations for the best laboratory practices to reduce labeling errors. CONTENT: The standardized LMBP™ A-6 methods were used to conduct this systematic review. Total evidence included 12 studies published during the time periods of 1980 to September 2015. Combined data from seven studies found that the interventions developed as a result of improved communication and collaboration between the laboratory and clinical staff resulted in substantial decrease in specimen labeling errors (Median relative percent change in labeling errors: -75.86; IQI: -84.77, -58.00). Further data from subset of four studies showed a significant decrease in specimen labeling errors after the institution of the standardized specimen labeling protocols (Median relative percent decrease in specimen labeling errors: -72.45; IQI: -83.25, -46.50). SUMMARY: Based on the evidence included in this review, the interventions that enhance the communication and collaboration between laboratory and healthcare professionals can decrease the specimen identification errors in healthcare settings. However, more research is needed to make the conclusion on the effectiveness of other evaluated practices in this review including training and education of the specimen collection staff, audit and feedback of labeling errors, and implementation of new technology (other than barcoding).

9.
J Appl Lab Med ; 1(2): 214-229, 2016 Sep 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27840858

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Controversy exists about the incremental utility of nontraditional lipid biomarkers [e.g., apolipoprotein (apo) B, apo A-I, and non-HDL-C] in improving cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk prediction when added to a conventional model of traditional risk factors (e.g., total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, HDL cholesterol, sex, age, smoking status, and blood pressure). Here we present a systematic review that was conducted to assess the use of nontraditional lipid biomarkers including apo B, apo A-I, apo B/A-I ratio, and non-HDL-C in improving CVD risk prediction after controlling for the traditional risk factors in populations at risk for cardiovascular events. CONTENT: This systematic review used the Laboratory Medicine Best Practices (LMBP™) A-6 methods. A total of 9 relevant studies published before and including July 2015 comprised the evidence base for this review. Results from this systematic review indicated that after the adjustment for standard nonlipid and lipid CVD risk factors, nontraditional apolipoprotein biomarkers apo B (overall effect = relative risk: 1.31; 95% CI, 1.22-1.40; 4 studies) and apo B/apo A-I ratio (overall effect = relative risk: 1.31; 95% CI, 1.11-1.38; 7 studies) resulted in significant improvement in long-term CVD risk assessment. SUMMARY: Available evidence showed that nontraditional lipid biomarkers apo B and apo B/apo I ratio can improve the risk prediction for cardiovascular events after controlling for the traditional risk factors for the populations at risk. However, because of insufficient evidence, no conclusions could be made for the effectiveness of apo A-I and non-HDL-C lipid markers to predict the CVD events, indicating a need for more research in this field.

10.
Am J Prev Med ; 51(5): 801-811, 2016 11.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27745678

RESUMEN

CONTEXT: Excessive drinking is responsible for one in ten deaths among working-age adults in the U.S. annually. Alcohol screening and brief intervention is an effective but underutilized intervention for reducing excessive drinking among adults. Electronic screening and brief intervention (e-SBI) uses electronic devices to deliver key elements of alcohol screening and brief intervention, with the potential to expand population reach. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Using Community Guide methods, a systematic review of the scientific literature on the effectiveness of e-SBI for reducing excessive alcohol consumption and related harms was conducted. The search covered studies published from 1967 to October 2011. A total of 31 studies with 36 study arms met quality criteria and were included in the review. Analyses were conducted in 2012. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Twenty-four studies (28 study arms) provided results for excessive drinkers only and seven studies (eight study arms) reported results for all drinkers. Nearly all studies found that e-SBI reduced excessive alcohol consumption and related harms: nine study arms reported a median 23.9% reduction in binge-drinking intensity (maximum drinks/binge episode) and nine study arms reported a median 16.5% reduction in binge-drinking frequency. Reductions in drinking measures were sustained for up to 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: According to Community Guide rules of evidence, e-SBI is an effective method for reducing excessive alcohol consumption and related harms among intervention participants. Implementation of e-SBI could complement population-level strategies previously recommended by the Community Preventive Services Task Force for reducing excessive drinking (e.g., increasing alcohol taxes and regulating alcohol outlet density).


Asunto(s)
Trastornos Relacionados con Alcohol/diagnóstico , Tamizaje Masivo/métodos , Trastornos Relacionados con Alcohol/terapia , Humanos , Telecomunicaciones
11.
Am J Prev Med ; 51(4): 531-9, 2016 10.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27647053

RESUMEN

CONTEXT: Skin cancer is a preventable and commonly diagnosed cancer in the U.S. Excessive ultraviolet radiation exposure is a known cause of skin cancer. This article presents updated results of two types of interventions evaluated in a previously published Community Guide systematic review: multicomponent community-wide interventions and mass media interventions when used alone. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Studies assessing multicomponent community-wide and mass media interventions to prevent skin cancer by reducing ultraviolet radiation exposure were evaluated using Community Guide systematic review methods. Relevant studies published between 1966 and 2013 were included and analyzed for this review. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Seven studies evaluating the effectiveness of multicomponent community-wide interventions showed a median increase in sunscreen use of 10.8 (interquartile interval=7.3, 23.2) percentage points, a small decrease in ultraviolet radiation exposure, a decrease in indoor tanning device use of 4.0 (95% CI=2.5, 5.5) percentage points, and mixed results for other protective behaviors. Four studies evaluating the effectiveness of mass media interventions found that they generally led to improved ultraviolet protection behaviors among children and adults. CONCLUSIONS: The available evidence showed that multicomponent community-wide interventions are effective in reducing the deleterious effects of ultraviolet radiation exposure by increasing sunscreen use. There was, however, insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of mass media interventions alone in reducing ultraviolet radiation exposure and increasing ultraviolet protection behaviors, indicating a continuing need for more research in this field to improve assessment of effectiveness.


Asunto(s)
Educación en Salud , Neoplasias Cutáneas/prevención & control , Humanos
12.
Matern Child Health J ; 19(1): 144-54, 2015 Jan.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24825031

RESUMEN

Smoking during pregnancy is causally associated with many adverse health outcomes. Quitting smoking, even late in pregnancy, improves some outcomes. Among adults in general and reproductive-aged women, we sought to understand knowledge and attitudes towards prenatal smoking and its effects on pregnancy outcomes. Using data from the 2008 HealthStyles© survey, we assessed knowledge and attitudes about prenatal smoking and smoking cessation. We classified respondents as having high knowledge if they gave ≥ 5 correct responses to six knowledge questions regarding the health effects of prenatal smoking. We calculated frequencies of correct responses to assess knowledge about prenatal smoking and estimated relative risk to examine knowledge by demographic and lifestyle factors. Only 15 % of all respondents and 23 % of reproductive-aged women had high knowledge of the adverse effects of prenatal smoking on pregnancy outcomes. Preterm birth and low birth weight were most often recognized as adverse outcomes associated with prenatal smoking. Nearly 70 % of reproductive-aged women smokers reported they would quit smoking if they became pregnant without any specific reasons from their doctor. Few respondents recognized the benefits of quitting smoking after the first trimester of pregnancy. Our results suggest that many women lack knowledge regarding the increased risks for adverse outcomes associated with prenatal smoking. Healthcare providers should follow the recommendations provided by the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, which include educating women about the health risks of prenatal smoking and the benefits of quitting. Healthcare providers should emphasize quitting smoking even after the first trimester of pregnancy.


Asunto(s)
Conocimientos, Actitudes y Práctica en Salud , Mujeres Embarazadas/psicología , Cese del Hábito de Fumar/psicología , Fumar/psicología , Adolescente , Adulto , Femenino , Encuestas Epidemiológicas , Humanos , Masculino , Relaciones Médico-Paciente , Embarazo , Primer Trimestre del Embarazo/psicología , Atención Prenatal , Fumar/efectos adversos , Fumar/epidemiología , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Adulto Joven
13.
Vaccine ; 29(46): 8215-21, 2011 Oct 26.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-21893149

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: Despite increases in routine vaccination coverage during the past three decades, the percent of children completing the recommended vaccination schedule remains below expected targets in many low and middle income countries. In 2008, the World Health Organization Strategic Advisory Group of Experts on Immunization requested more information on the reasons that children were under-vaccinated (receiving at least one but not all recommended vaccinations) or not vaccinated in order to develop effective strategies and interventions to reach these children. METHODS: A systematic review of the peer-reviewed literature published from 1999 to 2009 was conducted to aggregate information on reasons and factors related to the under-vaccination and non-vaccination of children. A standardized form was used to abstract information from relevant articles identified from eight different medical, behavioural and social science literature databases. FINDINGS: Among 202 relevant articles, we abstracted 838 reasons associated with under-vaccination; 379 (45%) were related to immunization systems, 220 (26%) to family characteristics, 181 (22%) to parental attitudes and knowledge, and 58 (7%) to limitations in immunization-related communication and information. Of the 19 reasons abstracted from 11 identified articles describing the non-vaccinated child, 6 (32%) were related to immunization systems, 8 (42%) to parental attitudes and knowledge, 4 (21%) to family characteristics, and 1 (5%) to communication and information. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple reasons for under-vaccination and non-vaccination were identified, indicating that a multi-faceted approach is needed to reach under-vaccinated and unvaccinated children. Immunization system issues can be addressed through improving outreach services, vaccine supply, and health worker training; however, under-vaccination and non-vaccination linked to parental attitudes and knowledge are more difficult to address and likely require local interventions.


Asunto(s)
Aceptación de la Atención de Salud , Vacunación/estadística & datos numéricos , Actitud del Personal de Salud , Niño , Preescolar , Atención a la Salud/organización & administración , Países en Desarrollo , Conocimientos, Actitudes y Práctica en Salud , Humanos , Vacunas/provisión & distribución
14.
Dig Dis Sci ; 52(11): 3159-64, 2007 Nov.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-17404851

RESUMEN

We sought to assess the significance of an incidental finding of colorectal wall thickening (CRWT) on computed tomography (CT) scan in African-American and Hispanic patients. We retrospectively reviewed charts of African-American and Hispanic patients from January 1994 to December 2005. Those patients were included in whom the colonoscopy was performed due to incidental CRWT on CT scan. Patients with a history or a family history of colorectal malignancy, inflammatory bowel disease, or colorectal surgery, with an incomplete colonoscopic examination, or <18 years of age were excluded. Endoscopic and pathological findings were abstracted. Thirty-two patients met the criteria. Endoscopic examination was abnormal in 21 (65.6%). The positive predictive value of CRWT for abnormal endoscopic examination was 65.6%. Abnormal endoscopic examination revealed diverticulosis in 9 (43%), erythematous mucosa in 8 (38%), polyps in 6 (29%), mass in 2 (9%), thickened folds in 1 (5%), and diverticulitis in 1 (5%). Histopathological findings revealed colitis in 7 (33%), adenoma in 4 (19%), hyperplastic polyps in 4 (19%), adenocarcinoma in 2 (9%), lymphoid aggregates in 2 (9%), melanosis coli in 1 (5%), and normal in 1 (5%) in the abnormal examination group. Abnormal endoscopic examination was found in 65.6% of patients. The prevalence of colitis, adenomas, and malignancy was high, therefore abnormal CRWT warrants further endoscopic evaluation.


Asunto(s)
Negro o Afroamericano , Colon/diagnóstico por imagen , Enfermedades del Colon/diagnóstico por imagen , Hispánicos o Latinos , Enfermedades del Recto/diagnóstico por imagen , Recto/diagnóstico por imagen , Tomografía Computarizada por Rayos X/métodos , Adulto , Anciano , Colon/patología , Enfermedades del Colon/etnología , Enfermedades del Colon/patología , Colonoscopía , Diagnóstico Diferencial , Femenino , Humanos , Hipertrofia/diagnóstico por imagen , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Valor Predictivo de las Pruebas , Prevalencia , Enfermedades del Recto/etnología , Enfermedades del Recto/patología , Recto/patología , Estudios Retrospectivos , Estados Unidos/epidemiología
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA
...