Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 6.399
Filtrar
2.
Medicine (Baltimore) ; 99(2): e18741, 2020 Jan.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31914092

RESUMO

Inappropriate care for patients with cognitive dysfunction in the hospital could worsen quality of care and medical service satisfaction.All elderly participants were recruited from acute wards of 5 departments in an university hospital. They were administered the Chinese version of Ascertain Dementia 8 (AD8) at admission and the Nursing Service Satisfaction Questionnaire before discharge.A total of 345 participants completed the study. There were 91 (26.4%) participants with AD8 ≥ 2, the cut-off value of high risk of dementia. The prevalence was much higher than prior community-based reports. The Nursing Service Satisfaction Score was significantly lower in AD8 ≥ 2 than in AD8 < 2 (56.99 ±â€Š0.94 vs 60.55 ±â€Š0.48, P < .01).Using AD8 in hospital-based screening might be more efficient than in the community in terms of cost-effectiveness due to higher positive rate and easier approach to diagnostic facilities. AD8 ≥ 2 is also an indicator to identify care dissatisfaction among inpatients. By identifying patients with cognitive dysfunction, such as its related communication barriers, care systems could be tailored for more friendly services.


Assuntos
Demência/diagnóstico , Demência/enfermagem , Programas de Rastreamento/métodos , Satisfação do Paciente , Inquéritos e Questionários/normas , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Análise Custo-Benefício , Demência/epidemiologia , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Programas de Rastreamento/economia , Programas de Rastreamento/normas , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Qualidade da Assistência à Saúde/normas , Reprodutibilidade dos Testes
4.
Int J Cancer ; 146(3): 617-626, 2020 02 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30861114

RESUMO

US guidelines recommend that most women older than 65 years cease cervical screening after two consecutive negative cotests (concurrent HPV and cytology tests) in the previous 10 years, with one in the last 5 years. However, this recommendation was based on expert opinion and modeling rather than empirical data on cancer risk. We therefore estimated the 5-year risks of cervical precancer (cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 or adenocarcinoma in situ [CIN3]) after one, two and three negative cotests among 346,760 women aged 55-64 years undergoing routine cotesting at Kaiser Permanente Northern California (2003-2015). Women with a history of excisional treatment or CIN2+ were excluded. No woman with one or more negative cotests was diagnosed with cancer during follow-up. Five-year risks of CIN3 after one, two, and three consecutive negative cotests were 0.034% (95% CI: 0.023%-0.046%), 0.041% (95% CI: 0.007%-0.076%) and 0.016% (95% CI: 0.000%-0.052%), respectively (ptrend < 0.001). These risks did not appreciably differ by a positive cotest result prior to the one, two or three negative cotest(s). Since CIN3 risks after one or more negative cotests were significantly below a proposed 0.12% CIN3+ risk threshold for a 5-year screening interval, a longer screening interval in these women is justified. However, the choice of how many negative cotests provide sufficient safety against invasive cancer over a woman's remaining life represents a value judgment based on the harms versus benefits of continued screening. Ideally, this guideline should be informed by longer-term follow-up given that exiting is a long-term decision.


Assuntos
Adenocarcinoma in Situ/epidemiologia , Neoplasia Intraepitelial Cervical/epidemiologia , Infecções por Papillomavirus/epidemiologia , Lesões Pré-Cancerosas/epidemiologia , Neoplasias do Colo do Útero/prevenção & controle , Adenocarcinoma in Situ/diagnóstico , Adenocarcinoma in Situ/patologia , California/epidemiologia , Neoplasia Intraepitelial Cervical/diagnóstico , Neoplasia Intraepitelial Cervical/patologia , Colo do Útero/patologia , Detecção Precoce de Câncer/normas , Feminino , Humanos , Programas de Rastreamento/normas , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Papillomaviridae/isolamento & purificação , Infecções por Papillomavirus/diagnóstico , Infecções por Papillomavirus/virologia , Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto , Lesões Pré-Cancerosas/diagnóstico , Lesões Pré-Cancerosas/patologia , Estudos Prospectivos , Medição de Risco/estatística & dados numéricos , Neoplasias do Colo do Útero/diagnóstico , Neoplasias do Colo do Útero/patologia
5.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 68(42): 947-952, 2019 Oct 25.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31652252

RESUMO

A 2014 report evaluating accuracy of serologic testing for transfusion-transmissible viruses at African blood center laboratories found sensitivities of 92%, 87%, and 90% for detecting infections with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), hepatitis B virus (HBV), and hepatitis C virus (HCV), respectively (1). Following substantial investments in national blood transfusion service (NBTS) laboratories, in 2017 investigators tested proficiency at 84 blood center laboratories (29 NBTS and 55 non-NBTS) in seven African countries. A blinded panel of 25 plasma samples was shipped to each participating laboratory for testing with their usual protocols based on rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) (2) and third and fourth generation enzyme immunoassays (EIA-3 and EIA-4). Sensitivity and specificity were estimated using separate regression models that clustered assays by laboratory and adjusted for assay type and NBTS laboratory status. Mean specificities were ≥95% for all three viruses; however, mean sensitivities were 97% for HIV-positive, 76% for HBV-positive, and 80% for HCV-positive samples. Testing sensitivities for all viruses were high when EIA-3 assays were used (≥97%). Lower sensitivities for HBV-positive samples and HCV-positive samples were associated with assay types other than EIA-3, used primarily by non-NBTS laboratories. Proficiency for HIV testing has improved following international investments, but proficiency remains suboptimal for HBV and HCV testing. In sub-Saharan African blood centers, the quality of rapid tests used for HBV and HCV screening needs to be improved or their use discouraged in favor of EIA-3 tests.


Assuntos
Bancos de Sangue , HIV/isolamento & purificação , Hepacivirus/isolamento & purificação , Vírus da Hepatite B/isolamento & purificação , Programas de Rastreamento/normas , África , Testes Diagnósticos de Rotina , Humanos , Técnicas Imunoenzimáticas , Programas de Rastreamento/métodos , Sensibilidade e Especificidade , Testes Sorológicos
7.
BMJ ; 367: l5383, 2019 Oct 02.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31578177

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To estimate benefits and harms of different colorectal cancer screening strategies, stratified by (baseline) 15-year colorectal cancer risk. DESIGN: Microsimulation modelling study using MIcrosimulation SCreening ANalysis-Colon (MISCAN-Colon). SETTING: A parallel guideline committee (BMJ Rapid Recommendations) defined the time frame and screening interventions, including selection of outcome measures. POPULATION: Norwegian men and women aged 50-79 years with varying 15-year colorectal cancer risk (1-7%). COMPARISONS: Four screening strategies were compared with no screening: biennial or annual faecal immunochemical test (FIT) or single sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy at 100% adherence. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Colorectal cancer mortality and incidence, burdens, and harms over 15 years of follow-up. The certainty of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach. RESULTS: Over 15 years of follow-up, screening individuals aged 50-79 at 3% risk of colorectal cancer with annual FIT or single colonoscopy reduced colorectal cancer mortality by 6 per 1000 individuals. Single sigmoidoscopy and biennial FIT reduced it by 5 per 1000 individuals. Colonoscopy, sigmoidoscopy, and annual FIT reduced colorectal cancer incidence by 10, 8, and 4 per 1000 individuals, respectively. The estimated incidence reduction for biennial FIT was 1 per 1000 individuals. Serious harms were estimated to be between 3 per 1000 (biennial FIT) and 5 per 1000 individuals (colonoscopy); harms increased with older age. The absolute benefits of screening increased with increasing colorectal cancer risk, while harms were less affected by baseline risk. Results were sensitive to the setting defined by the guideline panel. Because of uncertainty associated with modelling assumptions, we applied a GRADE rating of low certainty evidence to all estimates. CONCLUSIONS: Over a 15 year period, all screening strategies may reduce colorectal cancer mortality to a similar extent. Colonoscopy and sigmoidoscopy may also reduce colorectal cancer incidence, while FIT shows a smaller incidence reduction. Harms are rare and of similar magnitude for all screening strategies.


Assuntos
Neoplasias Colorretais/diagnóstico , Detecção Precoce de Câncer/normas , Programas de Rastreamento/normas , Modelos Estatísticos , Idoso , Colonoscopia/efeitos adversos , Colonoscopia/normas , Colonoscopia/estatística & dados numéricos , Neoplasias Colorretais/epidemiologia , Detecção Precoce de Câncer/métodos , Detecção Precoce de Câncer/estatística & dados numéricos , Feminino , Seguimentos , Humanos , Incidência , Masculino , Programas de Rastreamento/métodos , Programas de Rastreamento/estatística & dados numéricos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Noruega/epidemiologia , Sangue Oculto , Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto , Sigmoidoscopia/efeitos adversos , Sigmoidoscopia/normas , Sigmoidoscopia/estatística & dados numéricos , Análise de Sobrevida
8.
BMJ ; 367: l5515, 2019 Oct 02.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31578196

RESUMO

CLINICAL QUESTION: Recent 15-year updates of sigmoidoscopy screening trials provide new evidence on the effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening. Prompted by the new evidence, we asked: "Does colorectal cancer screening make an important difference to health outcomes in individuals initiating screening at age 50 to 79? And which screening option is best?" CURRENT PRACTICE: Numerous guidelines recommend screening, but vary on recommended test, age and screening frequency. This guideline looks at the evidence and makes recommendations on screening for four screening options: faecal immunochemical test (FIT) every year, FIT every two years, a single sigmoidoscopy, or a single colonoscopy. RECOMMENDATIONS: These recommendations apply to adults aged 50-79 years with no prior screening, no symptoms of colorectal cancer, and a life expectancy of at least 15 years. For individuals with an estimated 15-year colorectal cancer risk below 3%, we suggest no screening (weak recommendation). For individuals with an estimated 15-year risk above 3%, we suggest screening with one of the four screening options: FIT every year, FIT every two years, a single sigmoidoscopy, or a single colonoscopy (weak recommendation). With our guidance we publish the linked research, a graphic of the absolute harms and benefits, a clear description of how we reached our value judgments, and linked decision aids. HOW THIS GUIDELINE WAS CREATED: A guideline panel including patients, clinicians, content experts and methodologists produced these recommendations using GRADE and in adherence with standards for trustworthy guidelines. A linked systematic review of colorectal cancer screening trials and microsimulation modelling were performed to inform the panel of 15-year screening benefits and harms. The panel also reviewed each screening option's practical issues and burdens. Based on their own experience, the panel estimated the magnitude of benefit typical members of the population would value to opt for screening and used the benefit thresholds to inform their recommendations. THE EVIDENCE: Overall there was substantial uncertainty (low certainty evidence) regarding the 15-year benefits, burdens and harms of screening. Best estimates suggested that all four screening options resulted in similar colorectal cancer mortality reductions. FIT every two years may have little or no effect on cancer incidence over 15 years, while FIT every year, sigmoidoscopy, and colonoscopy may reduce cancer incidence, although for FIT the incidence reduction is small compared with sigmoidoscopy and colonoscopy. Screening related serious gastrointestinal and cardiovascular adverse events are rare. The magnitude of the benefits is dependent on the individual risk, while harms and burdens are less strongly associated with cancer risk. UNDERSTANDING THE RECOMMENDATION: Based on benefits, harms, and burdens of screening, the panel inferred that most informed individuals with a 15-year risk of colorectal cancer of 3% or higher are likely to choose screening, and most individuals with a risk of below 3% are likely to decline screening. Given varying values and preferences, optimal care will require shared decision making.


Assuntos
Colonoscopia/estatística & dados numéricos , Neoplasias Colorretais/diagnóstico , Detecção Precoce de Câncer/normas , Programas de Rastreamento/normas , Sangue Oculto , Sigmoidoscopia/estatística & dados numéricos , Idoso , Colonoscopia/normas , Neoplasias Colorretais/epidemiologia , Detecção Precoce de Câncer/métodos , Detecção Precoce de Câncer/estatística & dados numéricos , Feminino , Humanos , Incidência , Masculino , Programas de Rastreamento/métodos , Programas de Rastreamento/estatística & dados numéricos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Aceitação pelo Paciente de Cuidados de Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Sigmoidoscopia/normas , Fatores de Tempo
9.
Pediatrics ; 144(4)2019 10.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31562252

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Universal screening is recommended to reduce the age of diagnosis for autism spectrum disorder (ASD). However, there are insufficient data on children who screen negative and no study of outcomes from truly universal screening. With this study, we filled these gaps by examining the accuracy of universal screening with systematic follow-up through 4 to 8 years. METHODS: Universal, primary care-based screening was conducted using the Modified Checklist for Autism in Toddlers with Follow-Up (M-CHAT/F) and supported by electronic administration and integration into electronic health records. All children with a well-child visit (1) between 16 and 26 months, (2) at a Children's Hospital of Philadelphia site after universal electronic screening was initiated, and (3) between January 2011 and July 2015 were included (N = 25 999). RESULTS: Nearly universal screening was achieved (91%), and ASD prevalence was 2.2%. Overall, the M-CHAT/F's sensitivity was 38.8%, and its positive predictive value (PPV) was 14.6%. Sensitivity was higher in older toddlers and with repeated screenings, whereas PPV was lower in girls. Finally, the M-CHAT/F's specificity and PPV were lower in children of color and those from lower-income households. CONCLUSIONS: Universal screening in primary care is possible when supported by electronic administration. In this "real-world" cohort that was systematically followed, the M-CHAT/F was less accurate in detecting ASD than in previous studies. Disparities in screening rates and accuracy were evident in traditionally underrepresented groups. Future research should focus on the development of new methods that detect a greater proportion of children with ASD and reduce disparities in the screening process.


Assuntos
Transtorno do Espectro Autista/diagnóstico , Lista de Checagem , Programas de Rastreamento/normas , Pediatria/normas , Fatores Etários , Transtorno do Espectro Autista/epidemiologia , Pré-Escolar , Registros Eletrônicos de Saúde , Feminino , Seguimentos , Hospitais Pediátricos , Humanos , Lactente , Masculino , Programas de Rastreamento/estatística & dados numéricos , Grupos Minoritários/estatística & dados numéricos , Pediatria/estatística & dados numéricos , Philadelphia/epidemiologia , Valor Preditivo dos Testes , Prevalência , Sensibilidade e Especificidade , Fatores Sexuais , Fatores Socioeconômicos
10.
BMC Public Health ; 19(1): 1270, 2019 Sep 18.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31533670

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The Getting it Right study determined the validity, sensitivity, specificity and acceptability of the culturally adapted 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire (aPHQ-9) as a screening tool for depression in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (hereafter referred to as Indigenous) people. In this process evaluation we aimed to explore staff perceptions about whether Getting it Right was conducted per protocol, and if the aPHQ-9 was considered an acceptable and feasible screening tool for depression in primary healthcare. This process evaluation will provide information for clinicians and policy makers about the experiences of staff and patients with Getting it Right and what they thought about using the aPHQ-9. METHODS: Process evaluation using grounded theory approaches. Semi-structured interviews with primary healthcare staff from services participating in Getting it Right were triangulated with feedback (free-text and elicited) from participants collected during the validation study and field notes. Data were thematically analysed according to the Getting it Right study protocol to identify the acceptability and feasibility of the aPHQ-9. RESULTS: Primary healthcare staff (n = 36) and community members (n = 4) from nine of the ten participating Getting it Right services and Indigenous participants (n = 500) from the ten services that took part. Most staff reported that the research was conducted according to the study protocol. Staff from two services reported sometimes recruiting opportunistically (rather than recruiting consecutive patients attending the service as outlined in the main study protocol), when they spoke to patients who they knew from previous interactions, because they perceived their previous relationship may increase the likelihood of patients participating. All Getting it Right participants responded to at least six of the seven feedback questions and 20% provided free-text feedback. Most staff said they would use the aPHQ-9 and most participants said that the questions were easy to understand (87%), the response categories made sense (89%) and that they felt comfortable answering the questions (91%). CONCLUSION: Getting it Right was predominantly conducted according to the study protocol. The aPHQ-9, the first culturally adapted, nationally validated, freely available depression screening tool for use by Indigenous people, appears to be acceptable and feasible to use. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry ANZCTR12614000705684 , 03/07/2014.


Assuntos
Depressão/diagnóstico , Programas de Rastreamento/normas , Grupo com Ancestrais Oceânicos/psicologia , Adulto , Austrália , Estudos de Viabilidade , Feminino , Serviços de Saúde do Indígena/normas , Humanos , Masculino , Grupo com Ancestrais Oceânicos/estatística & dados numéricos , Aceitação pelo Paciente de Cuidados de Saúde/psicologia , Questionário de Saúde do Paciente , Atenção Primária à Saúde , Projetos de Pesquisa
11.
JAMA ; 322(12): 1188-1194, 2019 09 24.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31550038

RESUMO

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).


Assuntos
Bacteriúria/diagnóstico , Programas de Rastreamento/normas , Complicações Infecciosas na Gravidez/diagnóstico , Adulto , Antibacterianos/efeitos adversos , Antibacterianos/uso terapêutico , Bacteriúria/tratamento farmacológico , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Gravidez , Complicações Infecciosas na Gravidez/tratamento farmacológico , Pielonefrite/prevenção & controle , Fatores de Risco , Infecções Urinárias/diagnóstico
12.
Fortschr Neurol Psychiatr ; 87(9): 499-502, 2019 Sep.
Artigo em Alemão | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31519025

RESUMO

Strains of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) are of major economic and health-related importance to early neurological and neurosurgical rehabilitation. It is crucial to identify MRSA-carriers as soon as possible upon admission in order to prevent transmissions and to initiate contact precautions and decolonization. The present study focuses on validity of a polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test to identify MRSA genetic material from nasopharyngeal samples (BD MAX MRSA XT, BD Diagnostics, Heidelberg, Germany) of early neurological and neurosurgical rehabilitation patients. PCR-results were compared to gold standard (culture). In 2013, 66 patients were tested using PCR and incubation within one week after admission. Sensitivity of PCR was 84.6 %, specificity 86.6 %. Positive predictive value (PPV) was only 61.1 %, while negative predictive value was as high as 95.8 %. In 39 cases, PCR and subsequent culture were done within one day, leading to a sensitivity of 100 % and a specificity of 90.3 %. In this subgroup, PPV was 72.7 %, NPV 100 %. The results from the study suggest that incubation should quickly follow a positive PCR finding (within 24 hours) in order to verify MRSA colonization. High NPV (95.8 resp. 100 %) indicate that PCR negative patients very likely are not colonized with MRSA. A positive PCR test is less reliable (due to false positive results) and should be followed by incubation in due course in order to avoid unnecessary contact precautions.


Assuntos
Programas de Rastreamento/normas , Staphylococcus aureus Resistente à Meticilina/genética , Staphylococcus aureus Resistente à Meticilina/isolamento & purificação , Reabilitação Neurológica , Reação em Cadeia da Polimerase/normas , Infecções Estafilocócicas/diagnóstico , Infecções Estafilocócicas/microbiologia , Alemanha , Humanos , Sensibilidade e Especificidade
14.
Presse Med ; 48(12): 1393-1400, 2019 Dec.
Artigo em Francês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31471091

RESUMO

An ECG is recommended by the French Society of Cardiology in the screening of a competitive athlete. An intense and prolonged physical activity (>4 hours of intense sport/week) can lead to a physiological electric remodeling. In addition to physical activity (type, intensity, duration), the ECG should be interpreted according to the athlete's ethnicity and age. It is necessary to know the physiological modifications related to sport practice to avoid either false reassurances or the realization of unjustified additional examinations because of a wrong interpretation. The latest athlete ECG classification published in 2017 can be used to identify in which athlete additional tests are recommended (figure 1).


Assuntos
Atletas , Eletrocardiografia , Cardiopatias/diagnóstico , Esportes , Cardiologia/métodos , Cardiologia/normas , Diagnóstico Diferencial , Técnicas de Diagnóstico Cardiovascular/normas , Eletrocardiografia/métodos , Eletrocardiografia/normas , Exercício/fisiologia , Humanos , Programas de Rastreamento/métodos , Programas de Rastreamento/normas , Padrões de Referência , Esportes/normas
15.
Gastroenterology ; 157(6): 1494-1505, 2019 12.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31472152

RESUMO

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Quantitative fecal immunochemical tests (FITs) for hemoglobin are commonly used for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening. We aimed to quantify the change in CRC and advanced adenoma detection and number of positive test results at different positivity thresholds and by sex and age. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE, selecting articles of FIT for CRC detection in asymptomatic adults undergoing screening. We calculated sensitivity and specificity, as well as detected number of cancers, advanced adenomas, and positive test results at positivity thresholds ≤10 µg hemoglobin/g feces, 10 to ≤20 µg/g, 20 to ≤30 µg/g, and >30 µg/g. We also analyzed results from stratified by patient sex, age, and reference standard. RESULTS: Our meta-analysis comprised 46 studies with 2.4 million participants and 6478 detected cancers. Sensitivity for detection of CRC increased from 69% (95% confidence interval [CI], 63%-75%) at thresholds >10 µg/g and ≤20 µg/g to 80% (95% CI, 76%-83%) at thresholds ≤10 µg/g. At these threshold values, sensitivity for detection of advanced adenomas increased from 21% (95% CI, 18%-25%) to 31% (95% CI, 27%-35%), whereas specificity decreased from 94% (95% CI, 93%-96%) to 91% (95% CI, 89%-93%). In 3 studies stratified by sex, sensitivity of CRC detection was 77% in men (95% CI, 75%-79%) and 81% in women (95% CI, 60%-100%) (P = .68). In 3 studies stratified by age groups, sensitivity of CRC detection was 85% for ages 50-59 years (95% CI, 71%-99%) and 73% for ages 60-69 years (95% CI, 71%-75%) (P = .10). All studies with colonoscopy follow-up had similar sensitivity levels for detection of CRC to studies that analyzed 2-year registry follow-up data (74%; 95% CI, 68%-78% vs 75%; 95% CI, 73%-77%). CONCLUSIONS: In a meta-analysis of studies that analyzed detection of CRC and advanced adenomas at different FIT positivity thresholds, we found the sensitivity and specificity of detection to vary with positive cutoff value. It might be possible to decrease positive threshold values for centers with sufficient follow-up colonoscopy resources. More research is needed to precisely establish FIT thresholds for each sex and age subgroup. PROTOCOL: PROSPERO CRD42017068760.


Assuntos
Adenoma/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Colorretais/diagnóstico , Detecção Precoce de Câncer/normas , Programas de Rastreamento/normas , Sangue Oculto , Fatores Etários , Colonoscopia , Detecção Precoce de Câncer/métodos , Hemoglobinas/análise , Humanos , Programas de Rastreamento/métodos , Padrões de Referência , Sensibilidade e Especificidade , Fatores Sexuais
17.
JAMA ; 322(5): 438-444, 2019 08 06.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31386141

RESUMO

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).


Assuntos
Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/diagnóstico , Detecção Precoce de Câncer/normas , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/diagnóstico , Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/genética , Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/cirurgia , Efeitos Psicossociais da Doença , Detecção Precoce de Câncer/efeitos adversos , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Programas de Rastreamento/normas , Pâncreas/diagnóstico por imagem , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/genética , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/cirurgia , Medição de Risco , Fatores de Risco , Sensibilidade e Especificidade
18.
J Autism Dev Disord ; 49(11): 4674-4680, 2019 Nov.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31372801

RESUMO

We investigated the clinical validity of the BADEC, an abbreviated, five-item version of the Autism Detection in Early Childhood, level-2 screening tool for autism. Initially developed by Nah et al. (2019) using a research sample, the present study replicated Nah et al. (2019) procedures in a clinical population. Using a cutoff score of five, five items were identified as most effective in discriminating children who later received an ASD diagnosis by an interdisciplinary team. This algorithm had improved validity compared to the original research algorithm. Results supported the efficacy of a very brief, easy to administer ASD screening tool in identifying children under three who are likely to have ASD.


Assuntos
Transtorno do Espectro Autista/diagnóstico , Transtorno do Espectro Autista/psicologia , Escalas de Graduação Psiquiátrica Breve/normas , Algoritmos , Pré-Escolar , Diagnóstico Precoce , Feminino , Humanos , Lactente , Masculino , Programas de Rastreamento/métodos , Programas de Rastreamento/normas , Reprodutibilidade dos Testes
20.
Virol J ; 16(1): 107, 2019 08 22.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31438976

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The indicating FTA card is a dry medium used for collection of cervical samples. HPVIR is a multiplex real-time PCR test that detects 12 high-risk human papillomavirus types (hrHPV) and provides single genotype information for HPV16, - 31, - 35, - 39, - 51, - 56, and - 59 and pooled type information for HPV18/45 and HPV33/52/58. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether a strategy with cervical samples collected on the FTA card and subsequently analysed with the HPVIR test complies with the criteria of the international guidelines for a clinically validated method for cervical screening. METHODS: We performed a non-inferiority test comparing the clinical sensitivity and specificity of the candidate test (FTA card and HPVIR) with a clinically validated reference test (Cobas® HPV test) based on liquid-based cytology (LBC) samples. Two clinical samples (LBC and FTA) were collected from 896 participants in population-based screening. For evaluation of the specificity we used 799 women without ≥ CIN2, and for clinical sensitivity we used 67 women with histologically confirmed ≥ CIN2. The reproducibility was studied by performing inter- and intra-laboratory tests of 558 additional clinical samples. RESULTS: The clinical sensitivity and specificity for samples collected on the FTA card and analysed using the HPVIR test were non-inferior to samples analysed with the Cobas® HPV test based on LBC samples (non-inferiority test score, p = 1.0 × 10- 2 and p = 1.89 × 10- 9, respectively). Adequate agreement of > 87% was seen in both the intra- and inter-laboratory comparisons. CONCLUSIONS: Samples collected on the indicating FTA card and analysed with HPVIR test fulfil the requirements of the international guidelines and can therefore be used in primary cervical cancer screening.


Assuntos
Neoplasia Intraepitelial Cervical/diagnóstico , Detecção Precoce de Câncer/normas , Testes de DNA para Papilomavírus Humano/normas , Programas de Rastreamento/normas , Infecções por Papillomavirus/diagnóstico , Neoplasias do Colo do Útero/diagnóstico , Adulto , Alphapapillomavirus/classificação , Neoplasia Intraepitelial Cervical/virologia , Colo do Útero/virologia , DNA Viral/genética , Feminino , Genótipo , Testes de DNA para Papilomavírus Humano/instrumentação , Humanos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Infecções por Papillomavirus/virologia , Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto , Reprodutibilidade dos Testes , Sensibilidade e Especificidade , Manejo de Espécimes/instrumentação , Manejo de Espécimes/métodos , Neoplasias do Colo do Útero/virologia
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA