Multilevel perceptions of the virtual delivery of the University of California Diabetes Prevention Program on RE-AIM domains due to COVID-19 mandates

Background

The University of California's Diabetes Prevention Program (UC DPP) Initiative was implemented across all 10 UC campuses in 2018. The COVID-19 pandemic and accompanying mandates required swift changes to program delivery, including pivoting from in-person to virtual delivery (i.e., Zoom). Our goal was to assess multilevel constituent perceptions of the use of a virtual platform to deliver UC DPP due to COVID-19 mandates.

Methods

We conducted qualitative interviews with 68 UC DPP participants, coordinators, and leaders to examine the use of virtual platform delivery on the reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, and maintenance (RE-AIM) of UC DPP. Transcripts were analyzed using rapid qualitative analysis and emergent themes were categorized using domains corresponding to RE-AIM framework.

Results

Among UC DPP participants (n = 42), virtual delivery primarily impacted perceptions of UC DPP effectiveness and implementation. Some participants perceived program effectiveness to be negatively impacted, given their preference for in-person sessions, which they felt provided more engagement, peer support, and accountability. Implementation challenges included problems with virtual format (e.g., "Zoom fatigue"); however, several benefits were also noted (e.g., increased flexibility, maintenance of DPP connections during campus closures). UC DPP coordinators (n = 18) perceived virtual delivery as positively impacting UC DPP reach, since virtual platforms provided access for some who could not participate in-person, and negatively impacting effectiveness due to reduced engagement and lower peer support. UC leaders (n = 8) perceived that use of the virtual format had a positive impact on reach (e.g., increased availability, accessibility) and negatively impacted effectiveness (e.g., less intensive interactions on a virtual platform). Across constituent levels, the use of a virtual platform had little to no impact on perceptions of adoption and maintenance of UC DPP.

Conclusion

Perceptions of the reach, effectiveness, and implementation of UC DPP using a virtual platform varied across constituents, although all groups noted a potential negative impact on overall program effectiveness. Unanticipated program adaptations, including virtual delivery, present potential benefits as well as perceived drawbacks, primarily across the effectiveness domain. Understanding differential constituent perceptions of the impact of virtual delivery can help maximize RE-AIM and inform future UC DPP delivery strategies.

Twelve-Month Reach and Effectiveness of a University-Based Diabetes Prevention Initiative

INTRODUCTION

The University of California (UC) implemented the Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP) to address diabetes and obesity risk. This project examined the reach and effectiveness of this university-based DPP delivery approach.

METHODS

This project compared 12-month weight change among three groups of UC beneficiaries with overweight/obesity: (1) those who received invitation letters and enrolled in UC DPP, (2) those mailed invitation letters but did not enroll, and (3) those who were not mailed letters and did not enroll (controls). Using 2012-2022 EHR, administrative and DPP cohort data, an interrupted time series was conducted in 2022-2023 to compare group differences in rate of weight change.

RESULTS

Among 6,231 beneficiaries (132 UC DPP aware enrollees, 1,750 DPP aware non-enrollees, 4,349 controls), UC DPP enrollees were older (mean age 49), mostly women (76%), and more diverse (33% Asian, 8% Black, 20% Hispanic, 4% Multi/Other). Over 12 months of follow-up, UC DPP enrollee postenrollment rate of weight loss was -0.68 lbs./month. UC DPP enrollees had significantly greater weight change from pre- to post-enrollment than DPP aware non-enrollees (adjusted Δ-1.02 vs. Δ-0.07 lbs./month, difference= -0.95, p<0.001). Weight change among all participants who received letters with/without DPP enrollment was similar to controls.

CONCLUSIONS

UC DPP reached a diverse group and was effective for weight loss at 12-month follow-up. However, UC DPP invitation letters to raise prediabetes and DPP awareness were not associated with significant weight change in the absence of DPP enrollment. University-based approaches to DPP delivery are effective and may enhance reach of DPP among at-risk adults.

Screening for Speech and Language Delay and Disorders in Children: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement

Importance

Speech and language delays and disorders can pose significant problems for children and their families. Evidence suggests that school-aged children with speech or language delays may be at increased risk of learning and literacy disabilities, including difficulties with reading and writing.

Objective

The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate benefits and harms of screening for speech and language delay and disorders in children 5 years or younger.

Population

Asymptomatic children 5 years or younger whose parents or clinicians do not have specific concerns about their speech, language, hearing, or development.

Evidence Assessment

The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for speech and language delay and disorders in children who do not present with signs or symptoms or parent/caregiver concerns.

Recommendation

The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for speech and language delay and disorders in children 5 years or younger without signs or symptoms. (I statement).

The Effectiveness of Shared Decision-making for Diabetes Prevention: 24- and 36-Month Results From the Prediabetes Informed Decision and Education (PRIDE) Trial

OBJECTIVE

We conducted a cluster-randomized, shared decision-making (SDM) trial offering lifestyle change, metformin, or both options, to adults at risk for diabetes in a primary care network (n = 20 practices).

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We used propensity score matching to identify control patients and used electronic health record data to compare weight loss at 24 and 36 months of follow-up and diabetes incidence at 36 months of follow-up.

RESULTS

In adjusted post hoc analyses, SDM participants (n = 489) maintained modestly greater 24-month weight loss of -3.1 lb and 36-month weight loss of -2.7 lb versus controls (n = 1,430, both comparisons P < 0.001). SDM participants who chose both lifestyle change and metformin sustained weight loss at 36 months of -4.1 lb (P < 0.001 vs. controls). We found no differences in incident diabetes (15% of SDM participants, 14% of control participants; P = 0.64).

CONCLUSIONS

This is one of the first studies to demonstrate weight loss maintenance up to 36 months after diabetes prevention SDM.

Exploring the Relationship Between Medication Adherence and Diabetes Disparities among Hispanic Patients in a Large Health System

BACKGROUND

Sub-optimal HbA1c control is a driver of disparities in diabetes outcomes among Hispanic patients. Differences in medication adherence may underlie racial/ethnic differences in HbA1c level.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the relationship between medication adherence and disparities in HbA1c level among Hispanic patients, relative to other racial/ethnic groups, obtaining care in the University of California Health System (UC Health).

DESIGN

This study used clinical, administrative, and prescription dispensing data (January-December 2021) derived from the electronic health records of 5 Academic Medical Centers in UC Health, and linear regression models (LRMs) to conduct a cross-sectional analysis of the association between medication adherence, race/ethnicity, and HbA1c level. Adjusted LRMs were run with and without the measure of medication adherence to assess this relationship.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients with a UC Health primary care physician (PCP), with ≥ 1 PCP visit within the last 3 years, ages 18-75, reporting Asian, Hispanic, or White race/ethnicity, and who had ≥ 2 encounters with an ICD diagnosis of diabetes or had a prescription for a diabetes medication within the last 2 years, as of 12/31/21 (N = 27, 542; Asian = 6253, Hispanic = 7216, White = 14,073).

MAIN MEASURES

Our measure of medication adherence was the proportion of days covered (PDC) for diabetes medications in 2021. Our outcome was the most recent HbA1c value.

KEY RESULTS

In the LRM excluding the PDC, Hispanic ethnicity was positively associated with HbA1c level (β = 0.31, p =  < 0.001). In the LRM model including PDC, PDC was negatively associated with HbA1c level (β =  - 0.18, p =  < 0.001). However, the positive relationship between Hispanic ethnicity and HbA1c level did not change (β = 0.31, p =  < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this study suggest that the relationship between Hispanic ethnicity, HbA1c level, and factors outside of medication adherence should be explored among primary care patients receiving care in Academic Medical Centers.

Aligning Prevention Evidence Gaps With Prevention Research

This Viewpoint describes the development of tools to communicate actionable steps to address research needs and gaps for USPSTF recommendations that have insufficient evidence to make definitive guidance.

Pharmacist-Led Diabetes Control Intervention and Health Outcomes in Hispanic Patients With Diabetes

Importance

Among patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D), Hispanic individuals are more likely than non-Hispanic White individuals to develop diabetes-related complications.

Objective

To examine the association of a pharmacist-led intervention (UCMyRx) with hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) and systolic blood pressure (SBP) among Hispanic patients with T2D.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This quality improvement study used electronic health record data and a difference-in-differences study design to evaluate the association of UCMyRx exposure with changes in HbA1c concentration and SBP among Hispanic patients with T2D, relative to usual care, at University of California, Los Angeles primary care clinics between February and April of 2023. The study population included patients with an International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision/International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision diagnosis of T2D, self-reporting Hispanic ethnicity, age 18 years or older, with 1 or more visits with a UCMyRx pharmacist (treatment) or 2 or more visits, 2 or more years apart, during the study window (comparison). Additionally, patients had to have the following observations during the study window (March 2, 2013-December 31, 2018): (1) a HbA1c 8% or higher, anywhere between 365 days before and 14 days after the index date (date of the first UCMyRx visit or a randomly generated index date) and a follow-up HbA1c measure within 120 to 365 days after the index date (n = 396) and/or (2) a SBP 140 mm Hg or higher between 365 days before and 14 days after the index date, and a follow-up SBP measure within 120 to 450 days after the index date (n = 795).

Exposure

Pharmacists review laboratory results/vital signs, perform medication reconciliation, and develop personally tailored interventions to address adherence barriers and increase guideline-concordant care.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Pre- to post-index date changes in HbA1c and SBP.

Results

Of the 931 unique patients with T2D analyzed, the mean (SD) age was 64 (14.1) years, and 552 (59.3%) were female. In adjusted analyses, having 1 or more UCMyRx visits was associated with a reduction in HbA1c concentration (β = -0.46%; 95% CI, -0.84% to -0.07%) but no change in SBP (β = -1.71 mm Hg; 95% CI, -4.00 to 0.58 mm Hg).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this quality improvement study of UCMyRx among Hispanic patients with T2D, a negative association was observed between UCMyRx exposure and HbA1c concentration but not SBP. Pharmacist-led intervention may be a strategy for improving outcomes among Hispanic patients with T2D.

Screening for Latent Tuberculosis Infection in Adults: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement

Importance

In the US, tuberculosis remains an important preventable disease, including active tuberculosis, which may be infectious, and latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI), which is asymptomatic and not infectious but can later progress to active disease. The precise prevalence rate of LTBI in the US is difficult to determine; however, estimated prevalence is about 5.0%, or up to 13 million persons. Incidence of tuberculosis varies by geography and living accommodations, suggesting an association with social determinants of health.

Objective

To update its 2016 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review on LTBI screening and treatment in asymptomatic adults seen in primary care, as well as the accuracy of LTBI screening tests.

Population

Asymptomatic adults 18 years or older at increased risk for tuberculosis.

Evidence Assessment

The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that there is a moderate net benefit in preventing active tuberculosis disease by screening for LTBI in persons at increased risk for tuberculosis infection.

Recommendation

The USPSTF recommends screening for LTBI in populations at increased risk. (B recommendation).

Screening for Skin Cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement

Importance

Skin cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer in the US. There are different types of skin cancer varying in disease incidence and severity. Basal and squamous cell carcinomas are the most common types of skin cancer but infrequently lead to death or substantial morbidity. Melanomas represent about 1% of skin cancer and cause the most skin cancer deaths. Melanoma is about 30 times more common in White persons than in Black persons. However, persons with darker skin color are often diagnosed at later stages, when skin cancer is more difficult to treat.

Objective

To update its 2016 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review on the benefits and harms of screening for skin cancer in asymptomatic adolescents and adults.

Population

Asymptomatic adolescents and adults who do not have a history of premalignant or malignant skin lesions.

Evidence Assessment

The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient to determine the balance of benefits and harms of visual skin examination by a clinician to screen for skin cancer in asymptomatic adolescents and adults.

Recommendation

The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of visual skin examination by a clinician to screen for skin cancer in adolescents and adults. (I statement).

Differential Impact of a Plan-Led Standardized Complex Care Management Intervention on Subgroups of High-Cost High-Need Medicaid Patients

Interventions to better coordinate care for high-need high-cost (HNHC) Medicaid patients frequently fail to demonstrate changes in hospitalizations or emergency department (ED) use. Many of these interventions are modeled after practice-level complex care management (CCM) programs. The authors hypothesized that a national CCM program may be effective for some subgroups of HNHC patients, and the overall null effect may obfuscate subgroup-level impact. They used a previously published typology defining 6 subgroups of high-cost Medicaid patients and evaluated program impact by subgroup. The analysis used an individual-level interrupted time series with a comparison group. Intervention subjects were high-cost adult Medicaid patients who enrolled in 1 of 2 national CCM programs implemented by UnitedHealthcare (UHC) (n = 39,687). The comparators were patients who met CCM program criteria but were ineligible due to current enrollment in another UHC/Optum led program (N = 26,359). The intervention was a CCM program developed by UHC/Optum to provide "whole person care" delivering standardized interventions to address medical, behavioral, and social needs for HNHC Medicaid patients, and the outcome was probability of hospitalization or ED use in a given month, estimated at 12 months postenrollment. A reduction in risk of ED utilization for 4 of 6 subgroups was found. A reduction in risk of hospitalization for 1 of 6 subgroups was also found. The authors conclude that standardized health plan led CCM programs demonstrate effectiveness for certain subgroups of HNHC patients in Medicaid. This effectiveness is principally in reducing ED risk and may extend to the risk of hospitalization for a small number of patients.

Putting Evidence Into Practice: An Update on the US Preventive Services Task Force Methods for Developing Recommendations for Preventive Services

PURPOSE

The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) is an independent body that makes evidence-based recommendations regarding preventive services to improve health for people nationwide. Here, we summarize current USPSTF methods, describe how methods are evolving to address preventive health equity, and define evidence gaps for future research.

METHODS

We summarize current USPSTF methods as well as ongoing methods development.

RESULTS

The USPSTF prioritizes topics on the basis of disease burden, extent of new evidence, and whether the service can be provided in primary care and going forward will increasingly consider health equity. Analytic frameworks specify the key questions and linkages connecting the preventive service to health outcomes. Contextual questions provide information on natural history, current practice, health outcomes in high-risk groups, and health equity. The USPSTF assigns a level of certainty to the estimate of net benefit of a preventive service (high, moderate, or low). The magnitude of net benefit is also judged (substantial, moderate, small, or zero/negative). The USPSTF uses these assessments to assign a letter grade from A (recommend) to D (recommend against). I statements are issued when evidence is insufficient.

CONCLUSIONS

The USPSTF will continue to evolve its methods for simulation modeling and to use evidence to address conditions for which there are limited data for population groups who bear a disproportionate burden of disease. Additional pilot work is underway to better understand the relations of the social constructs of race, ethnicity, and gender with health outcomes to inform the development of a USPSTF health equity framework.

Serologic Screening for Genital Herpes Infection: US Preventive Services Task Force Reaffirmation Recommendation Statement

IMPORTANCE

Genital herpes is a common sexually transmitted infection caused by 2 related viruses, herpes simplex type 1 (HSV-1) and herpes simplex type 2 (HSV-2). Infection is lifelong; currently, there is no cure for HSV infection. Antiviral medications may provide clinical benefits to symptomatic persons. Transmission of HSV from a pregnant person to their infant can occur, most commonly during delivery; when genital lesions or prodromal symptoms are present, cesarean delivery can reduce the risk of transmission. Neonatal herpes infection is uncommon yet can result in substantial morbidity and mortality.

OBJECTIVE

To reaffirm its 2016 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a reaffirmation evidence update on targeted key questions to systematically evaluate the evidence on accuracy, benefits, and harms of routine serologic screening for HSV-2 infection in asymptomatic adolescents, adults, and pregnant persons.

POPULATION

Adolescents and adults, including pregnant persons, without known history, signs, or symptoms of genital HSV infection.

EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT

The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that the harms outweigh the benefits for population-based screening for genital HSV infection in asymptomatic adolescents and adults, including pregnant persons.

RECOMMENDATION

The USPSTF recommends against routine serologic screening for genital HSV infection in asymptomatic adolescents and adults, including pregnant persons. (D recommendation).

The diabetes health plan and medication adherence among individuals with low incomes

OBJECTIVE

To test the impact of the Diabetes Health Plan (DHP), a diabetes-specific insurance plan that lowers out-of-pocket costs for diabetes-related medications and clinical visits, on adherence to oral hypoglycemic medications among low-income adults with Type 2 Diabetes (T2DM).

DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SETTING

Cohort of adults (18-64) with T2DM, an annual household income <USD 30,000, and who were continuously enrolled in an employer-sponsored UnitedHealthcare plan for at least two years between 2009 and 2014.

STUDY DESIGN

We employed a linear regression Difference-In-Differences (DID) approach with a matched comparison group. To assess for differential DHP effects across adherent versus non-adherent patients, we ran a Difference-in-Difference-in-Differences (DDD) analysis by including an interaction term that included indicators for DHP exposure status and time, and low versus high baseline medication adherence.

DATA COLLECTION

The analytic data set is limited to employer groups that purchased the DHP and standard benefit plans from UnitedHealthcare, had internal pharmacy contracts; complete pharmacy claims data, and sufficient medical claims and lab data to identify employees and their dependents with T2DM.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

Our DID analysis did not show improved medication adherence associated with employer DHP adoption. However, the DDD model suggested a difference between DHP-exposed and comparison beneficiaries when comparing the relative effect on individuals who were adherent versus non-adherent at baseline, as suggested by the significant three-way interaction term (10.2,p = 0.028). This effect was driven by the 8.2 percentage point increase in medication adherence for the DHP subsample that was non-adherent at baseline.

CONCLUSIONS

The DHP may benefit low-income patients with low baseline medication adherence. Value-based insurance design may be an important strategy for mitigating income disparities in T2DM outcomes.

"Positive Kidney Health": Implementation and design of a pharmacist-led intervention for patients at risk for development or progression of chronic kidney disease

BACKGROUND

Patients with early chronic kidney disease (CKD) or underlying risk factors are often unaware of their kidney test results, common causes of CKD, and ways to lower risk of disease onset/progression.

OBJECTIVE

To test feasibility of a pharmacist-led intervention targeting patient education and risk factors in patients with early CKD and those at risk for CKD.

PRACTICE DESCRIPTION

Ambulatory care pharmacists in community-based primary care clinics delivered kidney health education, ordered labs, and recommended medication adjustments.

PRACTICE INNOVATION

We identified patients with a moderate rate of decline (≥2 mL/min/1.73 m² per year) in estimated glomerular filtration (eGFR) at-risk for CKD or early stage CKD. An interactive workbook was designed to teach patients about kidney test results and self-management of risk factors including hypertension, type 2 diabetes, cigarette smoking, and chronic oral nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug use.

EVALUATION METHODS

Outcomes included visit uptake, completion of annual albuminuria screening, and initiation of guideline-directed medications for CKD. Patients were surveyed pre- and post-intervention for kidney health knowledge and perceptions regarding pharmacist-provided information.

RESULTS

Our sample of 20 participants had a mean eGFR of 59 mL/min/1.73 m² and the mean eGFR decline was -4.6 mL/min/1.73 m² per year. There were 47 visits during the pilot period from February 2021 to October 2021. Thirteen patients were missing albuminuria screening within 12 months; 2 of 9 patients with resulting labs had new microalbuminuria and were started on renoprotective medications. Patients had improved understanding of their kidney function test results and most did not consider the information scary or confusing.

CONCLUSION

Barriers to enrollment included fewer participants with multiple risk factors for CKD. The pharmacists were able to engage patients in learning the importance of monitoring and self-management of kidney health. A collaborative practice agreement may enhance a similar intervention that includes initiation of renoprotective medications.

The Diabetes Health Plan and Healthcare Utilization Among Beneficiaries with Low Incomes

BACKGROUND

The socioeconomic status (SES) gradient in hospital and emergency room utilization among adults with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) is partially driven by cost-related non-adherence.

OBJECTIVE

To test the impact of the Diabetes Health Plan (DHP), a diabetes-specific health plan incorporating value-based insurance design principles on healthcare utilization among low-income adults with T2DM.

DESIGN

To examine the impact of the DHP on healthcare utilization, we employed a difference-in-differences (DID) study design with a propensity-matched comparison group. We modeled count and dichotomous outcomes using Poisson and logit models, respectively.

PARTICIPANTS

Cohort of adults (18-64) with T2DM, with an annual household income <$ 30,000, and who were continuously enrolled in an employer-sponsored UnitedHealthcare plan for at least 2 years between 2009 and 2014.

INTERVENTIONS

The DHP reduces or eliminates out-of-pocket costs for disease management visits, diabetes-related medicines, and diabetes self-monitoring supplies. The DHP also provides access to diabetes-specific telephone case management as well as other online resources.

MAIN MEASURES

Number of disease management visits (N = 1732), any emergency room utilization (N = 1758), and any hospitalization (N = 1733), within the year.

KEY RESULTS

DID models predicting disease management visits suggested that DHP-exposed beneficiaries had 1.7 fewer in-person disease management visits per year (- 1.70 [95% CI: - 2.19, - 1.20], p < 0.001), on average, than comparison beneficiaries. Models for emergency room (0.00 [95% CI: - 0.06, 0.06], p = 0.966) and hospital utilization (- 0.03 [95% CI: - 0.08, - 0.01], p = 0.164) did not demonstrate statistically significant changes associated with DHP exposure.

CONCLUSIONS

While no relationship between DHP exposure and high-cost utilization was observed in the short term, fewer in-person disease management visits were observed. Future studies are needed to determine the clinical implications of these findings.

Screening for Obstructive Sleep Apnea in Adults: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement

IMPORTANCE

Current prevalence of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) in the US is not well established; however, based on cohort and survey data, in 2007-2010 the estimated prevalence of at least mild OSA (defined as an apnea-hypoxia index [AHI] ≥5) plus symptoms of daytime sleepiness among adults aged 30 to 70 years was 14% for men and 5% for women, and the estimated prevalence of moderate to severe OSA (defined as AHI ≥15) was 13% for men and 6% for women. Severe OSA is associated with increased all-cause mortality. Other adverse health outcomes associated with untreated OSA include cardiovascular disease and cerebrovascular events, type 2 diabetes, cognitive impairment, decreased quality of life, and motor vehicle crashes.

OBJECTIVE

To update its 2017 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the benefits and harms of screening for OSA in adults.

POPULATION

Asymptomatic adults (18 years or older) and adults with unrecognized symptoms of OSA.

EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT

The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for OSA in the general adult population.

RECOMMENDATION

The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for OSA in the general adult population. (I statement).

Addressing Gaps in Research to Reduce Disparities and Advance Health Equity: The USPSTF Incorporation of the NASEM Taxonomy on Closing Evidence Gaps in Clinical Prevention

This Viewpoint reviews the evidence gaps reported to Congress by the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) in 2021 on improving health inequities in prevention and uses the 3 taxonomies provided by National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) to classify these gaps.

Hormone Therapy for the Primary Prevention of Chronic Conditions in Postmenopausal Persons: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement

IMPORTANCE

Menopause is defined as the cessation of a person's menstrual cycle. It is defined retrospectively, 12 months after the final menstrual period. Perimenopause, or the menopausal transition, is the few-year time period preceding a person's final menstrual period and is characterized by increasing menstrual cycle length variability and periods of amenorrhea, and often symptoms such as vasomotor dysfunction. The prevalence and incidence of most chronic diseases (eg, cardiovascular disease, cancer, osteoporosis, and fracture) increase with age, and US persons who reach menopause are expected on average to live more than another 30 years.

OBJECTIVE

To update its 2017 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the benefits and harms of systemic (ie, oral or transdermal) hormone therapy for the prevention of chronic conditions in postmenopausal persons and whether outcomes vary by age or by timing of intervention after menopause.

POPULATION

Asymptomatic postmenopausal persons who are considering hormone therapy for the primary prevention of chronic medical conditions.

EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT

The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that the use of combined estrogen and progestin for the primary prevention of chronic conditions in postmenopausal persons with an intact uterus has no net benefit. The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that the use of estrogen alone for the primary prevention of chronic conditions in postmenopausal persons who have had a hysterectomy has no net benefit.

RECOMMENDATION

The USPSTF recommends against the use of combined estrogen and progestin for the primary prevention of chronic conditions in postmenopausal persons. (D recommendation) The USPSTF recommends against the use of estrogen alone for the primary prevention of chronic conditions in postmenopausal persons who have had a hysterectomy. (D recommendation).

Differences in Weight Loss by Race and Ethnicity in the PRIDE Trial: a Qualitative Analysis of Participant Perspectives

BACKGROUND

Many Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP) translation efforts have been less effective for underresourced populations. In the cluster-randomized Prediabetes Informed Decision and Education (PRIDE) trial, which evaluated a shared decision-making (SDM) intervention for diabetes prevention, Hispanic and non-Hispanic Black participants lost less weight than non-Hispanic White participants at 12-month follow-up.

OBJECTIVE

To explore perspectives about weight loss from PRIDE participants of different racial and ethnic groups.

PARTICIPANTS

Sample of participants with prediabetes who were randomized to the PRIDE intervention arm (n=24).

APPROACH

We conducted semi-structured interviews within three groups stratified by DPP participation and % weight loss at 12 months: (DPP+/WL+, enrolled in DPP and lost >5% weight; DPP+/WL-, enrolled in DPP and lost <3% weight; DPP-/WL-, did not enroll in DPP and lost <3% weight). Each group was further subdivided on race and ethnicity (non-Hispanic Black (NHB), non-Hispanic White (NHW), Hispanic). Interviews were conducted on Zoom and transcripts were coded and analyzed with Dedoose.

KEY RESULTS

Compared to NHW participants, Hispanic and NHB participants more often endorsed weight loss barriers of limited time to make lifestyle changes due to long work and commute hours, inconvenient DPP class locations and offerings, and limited disposable income for extra weight loss activities. Conversely, facilitators of weight loss regardless of race and ethnicity included retirement or having flexible work schedules; being able to identify convenient DPP classes; having a strong, positive support system; and purchasing supplementary resources to support lifestyle change (e.g., gym memberships, one-on-one activity classes).

CONCLUSIONS

We found that NHB and Hispanic SDM participants report certain barriers to weight loss more commonly than NHW participants, particularly barriers related to limited disposable income and/or time constraints. Our findings suggest that increased lifestyle change support and flexible program delivery options may be needed to ensure equity in DPP reach, participant engagement, and outcomes.

Screening for Depression and Suicide Risk in Children and Adolescents: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement

Importance

Depression is a leading cause of disability in the US. Children and adolescents with depression typically have functional impairments in their performance at school or work as well as in their interactions with their families and peers. Depression can also negatively affect the developmental trajectories of affected youth. Major depressive disorder (MDD) in children and adolescents is strongly associated with recurrent depression in adulthood; other mental disorders; and increased risk for suicidal ideation, suicide attempts, and suicide completion. Suicide is the second-leading cause of death among youth aged 10 to 19 years. Psychiatric disorders and previous suicide attempts increase suicide risk.

Objective

To update its 2014 and 2016 recommendations, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the benefits and harms of screening, accuracy of screening, and benefits and harms of treatment of MDD and suicide risk in children and adolescents that would be applicable to primary care settings.

Population

Children and adolescents who do not have a diagnosed mental health condition or are not showing recognized signs or symptoms of depression or suicide risk.

Evidence Assessment

The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that screening for MDD in adolescents aged 12 to 18 years has a moderate net benefit. The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient on screening for MDD in children 11 years or younger. The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient on the benefit and harms of screening for suicide risk in children and adolescents owing to a lack of evidence.

Recommendation

The USPSTF recommends screening for MDD in adolescents aged 12 to 18 years. (B recommendation) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for MDD in children 11 years or younger. (I statement) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for suicide risk in children and adolescents. (I statement).

Screening for Anxiety in Children and Adolescents: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement

IMPORTANCE

Anxiety disorder, a common mental health condition in the US, comprises a group of related conditions characterized by excessive fear or worry that present as emotional and physical symptoms. The 2018-2019 National Survey of Children's Health found that 7.8% of children and adolescents aged 3 to 17 years had a current anxiety disorder. Anxiety disorders in childhood and adolescence are associated with an increased likelihood of a future anxiety disorder or depression.

OBJECTIVE

The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the benefits and harms of screening for anxiety disorders in children and adolescents. This is a new recommendation.

POPULATION

Children and adolescents 18 years or younger who do not have a diagnosed anxiety disorder or are not showing recognized signs or symptoms of anxiety.

EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT

The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that screening for anxiety in children and adolescents aged 8 to 18 years has a moderate net benefit. The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient on screening for anxiety in children 7 years or younger.

RECOMMENDATION

The USPSTF recommends screening for anxiety in children and adolescents aged 8 to 18 years. (B recommendation) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for anxiety in children 7 years or younger. (I statement).

How Would You Screen This Patient for Colorectal Cancer? : Grand Rounds Discussion From Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third leading cause of cancer death for men and women in the United States, with an estimated 52 580 people expected to die in 2022. Most frequently, CRC is diagnosed among persons aged 65 to 74 years. However, among persons younger than 50 years, incidence rates have been increasing since the mid-1990s. In 2021, partially because of the rising incidence, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommended CRC screening for adults aged 45 to 49 years (Grade B recommendation). Options for CRC screening include stool-based and direct visualization tests. The USPSTF did not recommend a specific screening test; rather, its guidance was to select a test after a discussion with the patient. Here, a primary care physician and a gastroenterologist discuss the recommendation to begin CRC screening at age 45, review options for CRC screening, and discuss how to choose among the available options.

Screening for Syphilis Infection in Nonpregnant Adolescents and Adults: US Preventive Services Task Force Reaffirmation Recommendation Statement

IMPORTANCE

Syphilis is a sexually transmitted infection that can progress through different stages (primary, secondary, latent, and tertiary) and cause serious health problems if left untreated. Reported cases of primary and secondary syphilis in the US increased from a record low of 2.1 cases per 100 000 population in 2000 and 2001 to 11.9 cases per 100 000 population in 2019. Men account for the majority of cases (83% of primary and secondary syphilis cases in 2019), and rates among women nearly tripled from 2015 to 2019.

OBJECTIVE

To reaffirm its 2016 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a reaffirmation evidence update focusing on targeted key questions evaluating the performance of risk assessment tools and the benefits and harms of screening for syphilis in nonpregnant adolescents and adults.

POPULATION

Asymptomatic, nonpregnant adolescents and adults who have ever been sexually active and are at increased risk for syphilis infection.

EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT

Using a reaffirmation process, the USPSTF concludes with high certainty that there is a substantial net benefit of screening for syphilis infection in nonpregnant persons who are at increased risk for infection.

RECOMMENDATION

The USPSTF recommends screening for syphilis infection in persons who are at increased risk for infection. (A recommendation).

Screening for Prediabetes and Type 2 Diabetes in Children and Adolescents: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement

IMPORTANCE

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that 210 000 children and adolescents younger than 20 years had diabetes as of 2018; of these, approximately 23 000 had type 2 diabetes. Youth with type 2 diabetes have an increased prevalence of associated chronic comorbid conditions, including hypertension, dyslipidemia, and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Data indicate that the incidence of type 2 diabetes is rising; from 2002-2003 to 2014-2015, incidence increased from 9.0 cases per 100 000 children and adolescents to 13.8 cases per 100 000 children and adolescents.

OBJECTIVE

The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a review of the evidence on screening for prediabetes and type 2 diabetes in asymptomatic, nonpregnant persons younger than 18 years. This is a new recommendation.

POPULATION

Children and adolescents younger than 18 years without known diabetes or prediabetes or symptoms of diabetes or prediabetes.

EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT

The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for type 2 diabetes in children and adolescents. There is a lack of evidence on the effect of screening for, and early detection and treatment of, type 2 diabetes on health outcomes in youth, and the balance of benefits and harms cannot be determined.

RECOMMENDATION

The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for type 2 diabetes in children and adolescents. (I statement).

Does the diabetes health plan have a differential impact on medication adherence among beneficiaries with fewer financial resources?

BACKGROUND: The Diabetes Health Plan (DHP), a value-based insurance plan that reduces cost sharing, was previously shown to modestly increase employer-level medication adherence. It is unclear how the DHP might impact individuals with different incomes. OBJECTIVE: To examine the impact of the DHP on individual-level medication adherence, by income level. METHODS: This is a retrospective, quasiexperimental study. An employer-level propensity score match was done to identify suitable control employers, followed by individual-level propensity score weighing. These weights were applied to difference-in-difference models examining the effect of the DHP and the effect of income on changes in adherence to metformin, statins, and angiotensin-converting enzymes/angiotensin receptor blockers. The weights were then applied to a differences-in-differences-in-differences model to estimate the differential impact of DHP status on changes in adherence by income group. RESULTS: The study population included 2,065 beneficiaries with DHP and 17,704 matched controls. There were no significant differences in changes to adherence for any medications between beneficiaries enrolled in the DHP vs standard plans. However, adherence to all medications was higher among those with incomes greater than $75,000 (year 1: metformin: +7.3 percentage points; statin +4.3 percentage points; angiotensin-converting enzymes/angiotensin receptor blockers: +6.2 percentage points; P < 0.01) compared with those with incomes less than $50,000. The differences-in-differences-in-differences term examining the impact of income on the DHP effect was not significant for any comparisons. CONCLUSIONS: We did not find significant associations between the DHP and changes in individual-level medication adherence, even for low-income beneficiaries. New strategies to improve consumer engagement may be needed to translate value-based insurance designs into changes in patient behavior. DISCLOSURES: Drs Ettner and Moin received grants from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (Principal Investigator: Carol Mangione). Mr Luchs received support for attending meetings and/or travel (minimal-mileage and hotel on 2 occasions). Mr Chan has an employee benefit to purchase stock for UnitedHealth Group.

Statin Use for the Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease in Adults: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement

IMPORTANCE

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of morbidity and death in the US and is the cause of more than 1 of every 4 deaths. Coronary heart disease is the single leading cause of death and accounts for 43% of deaths attributable to CVD in the US. In 2019, an estimated 558 000 deaths were caused by coronary heart disease and 109 000 deaths were caused by ischemic stroke.

OBJECTIVE

To update its 2016 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a review of the evidence on the benefits and harms of statins for reducing CVD-related morbidity or mortality or all-cause mortality.

POPULATION

Adults 40 years or older without a history of known CVD and who do not have signs and symptoms of CVD.

EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT

The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that statin use for the prevention of CVD events and all-cause mortality in adults aged 40 to 75 years with no history of CVD and who have 1 or more CVD risk factors (ie, dyslipidemia, diabetes, hypertension, or smoking) and an estimated 10-year CVD event risk of 10% or greater has at least a moderate net benefit. The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that statin use for the prevention of CVD events and all-cause mortality in adults aged 40 to 75 years with no history of CVD and who have 1 or more of these CVD risk factors and an estimated 10-year CVD event risk of 7.5% to less than 10% has at least a small net benefit. The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient to determine the balance of benefits and harms of statin use for the primary prevention of CVD events and mortality in adults 76 years or older with no history of CVD.

RECOMMENDATION

The USPSTF recommends that clinicians prescribe a statin for the primary prevention of CVD for adults aged 40 to 75 years who have 1 or more CVD risk factors (ie, dyslipidemia, diabetes, hypertension, or smoking) and an estimated 10-year CVD risk of 10% or greater. (B recommendation) The USPSTF recommends that clinicians selectively offer a statin for the primary prevention of CVD for adults aged 40 to 75 years who have 1 or more of these CVD risk factors and an estimated 10-year CVD risk of 7.5% to less than 10%. The likelihood of benefit is smaller in this group than in persons with a 10-year risk of 10% or greater. (C recommendation) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of initiating a statin for the primary prevention of CVD events and mortality in adults 76 years or older. (I statement).

Evaluating Natural Experiments that Impact the Diabetes Epidemic: an Introduction to the NEXT-D3 Network

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Diabetes is an ongoing public health issue in the USA, and, despite progress, recent reports suggest acute and chronic diabetes complications are increasing.

RECENT FINDINGS

The Natural Experiments for Translation in Diabetes 3.0 (NEXT-D3) Network is a 5-year research collaboration involving six academic centers (Harvard University, Northwestern University, Oregon Health & Science University, Tulane University, University of California Los Angeles, and University of California San Francisco) and two funding agencies (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and National Institutes of Health) to address the gaps leading to persisting diabetes burdens. The network builds on previously funded networks, expanding to include type 2 diabetes (T2D) prevention and an emphasis on health equity. NEXT-D3 researchers use rigorous natural experiment study designs to evaluate impacts of naturally occurring programs and policies, with a focus on diabetes-related outcomes. NEXT-D3 projects address whether and to what extent federal or state legislative policies and health plan innovations affect T2D risk and diabetes treatment and outcomes in the USA; real-world effects of increased access to health insurance under the Affordable Care Act; and the effectiveness of interventions that reduce barriers to medication access (e.g., decreased or eliminated cost sharing for cardiometabolic medications and new medications such as SGLT-2 inhibitors for Medicaid patients). Overarching goals include (1) expanding generalizable knowledge about policies and programs to manage or prevent T2D and educate decision-makers and organizations and (2) generating evidence to guide the development of health equity goals to reduce disparities in T2D-related risk factors, treatment, and complications.

Behavioral Counseling Interventions to Promote a Healthy Diet and Physical Activity for Cardiovascular Disease Prevention in Adults Without Cardiovascular Disease Risk Factors: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement

IMPORTANCE

Cardiovascular disease (CVD), which includes heart disease, myocardial infarction, and stroke, is the leading cause of death in the US. A large proportion of CVD cases can be prevented by addressing modifiable risk factors, including smoking, obesity, diabetes, elevated blood pressure or hypertension, dyslipidemia, lack of physical activity, and unhealthy diet. Adults who adhere to national guidelines for a healthy diet and physical activity have lower rates of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality than those who do not; however, most US adults do not consume healthy diets or engage in physical activity at recommended levels.

OBJECTIVE

To update its 2017 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a review of the evidence on the benefits and harms of behavioral counseling interventions to promote healthy behaviors in adults without CVD risk factors.

POPULATION

Adults 18 years or older without known CVD risk factors, which include hypertension or elevated blood pressure, dyslipidemia, impaired fasting glucose or glucose tolerance, or mixed or multiple risk factors such as metabolic syndrome or an estimated 10-year CVD risk of 7.5% or greater.

EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT

The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that behavioral counseling interventions have a small net benefit on CVD risk in adults without CVD risk factors.

RECOMMENDATION

The USPSTF recommends that clinicians individualize the decision to offer or refer adults without CVD risk factors to behavioral counseling interventions to promote a healthy diet and physical activity. (C recommendation).

Diabetes And The Fragmented State Of US Health Care And Policy

Progress in the prevention and treatment of type 2 diabetes-the dominant form of diabetes-appears to have stalled in the US over the past decade, and diabetes-related morbidity has increased nationally. The most geographically and socioeconomically disadvantaged segments of the population have been especially hard hit, and interventions that reduce the risk for diabetes have not reached these populations. In this overview article we lay out how fragmentation in health policy and governance, payers and reimbursement design, and service delivery in the US has contributed to low accountability and coordination, and thus stagnation and persistent inequities. We also review the evidence regarding past, ongoing, and new reforms that may help address fragmentation, lower diabetes burdens, and narrow disparities.

Vitamin, Mineral, and Multivitamin Supplementation to Prevent Cardiovascular Disease and Cancer: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement

Importance

According to National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey data, 52% of surveyed US adults reported using at least 1 dietary supplement in the prior 30 days and 31% reported using a multivitamin-mineral supplement. The most commonly cited reason for using supplements is for overall health and wellness and to fill nutrient gaps in the diet. Cardiovascular disease and cancer are the 2 leading causes of death and combined account for approximately half of all deaths in the US annually. Inflammation and oxidative stress have been shown to have a role in both cardiovascular disease and cancer, and dietary supplements may have anti-inflammatory and antioxidative effects.

Objective

To update its 2014 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a review of the evidence on the efficacy of supplementation with single nutrients, functionally related nutrient pairs, or multivitamins for reducing the risk of cardiovascular disease, cancer, and mortality in the general adult population, as well as the harms of supplementation.

Population

Community-dwelling, nonpregnant adults.

Evidence Assessment

The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that the harms of beta carotene supplementation outweigh the benefits for the prevention of cardiovascular disease or cancer. The USPSTF also concludes with moderate certainty that there is no net benefit of supplementation with vitamin E for the prevention of cardiovascular disease or cancer. The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient to determine the balance of benefits and harms of supplementation with multivitamins for the prevention of cardiovascular disease or cancer. Evidence is lacking and the balance of benefits and harms cannot be determined. The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient to determine the balance of benefits and harms of supplementation with single or paired nutrients (other than beta carotene and vitamin E) for the prevention of cardiovascular disease or cancer. Evidence is lacking and the balance of benefits and harms cannot be determined.

Recommendation

The USPSTF recommends against the use of beta carotene or vitamin E supplements for the prevention of cardiovascular disease or cancer. (D recommendation) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of the use of multivitamin supplements for the prevention of cardiovascular disease or cancer. (I statement) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of the use of single- or paired-nutrient supplements (other than beta carotene and vitamin E) for the prevention of cardiovascular disease or cancer. (I statement).

Screening for Impaired Visual Acuity in Older Adults: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement

IMPORTANCE

Impairment of visual acuity is a serious public health problem in older adults. The number of persons 60 years or older with impaired visual acuity (defined as best corrected visual acuity worse than 20/40 but better than 20/200) was estimated at 2.91 million in 2015, and the number who are blind (defined as best corrected visual acuity of 20/200 or worse) was estimated at 760 000. Impaired visual acuity is consistently associated with decreased quality of life in older persons, including reduced ability to perform activities of daily living, work, and drive safely, as well as increased risk of falls and other unintentional injuries.

OBJECTIVE

To update its 2016 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the benefits and harms of screening for impaired visual acuity in older adults.

POPULATION

Asymptomatic adults 65 years or older who present in primary care without known impaired visual acuity and are not seeking care for vision problems.

EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT

The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for impaired visual acuity in asymptomatic older adults. The evidence is lacking, and the balance of benefits and harms cannot be determined. More research is needed.

RECOMMENDATION

The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for impaired visual acuity in older adults. (I statement).

Screening for Primary Open-Angle Glaucoma: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement

IMPORTANCE

Glaucoma affects an estimated 2.7 million people in the US. It is the second-leading cause of irreversible blindness in the US and the leading cause of blindness in Black and Hispanic/Latino persons.

OBJECTIVE

To update its 2013 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the benefits and harms of screening for glaucoma in adults.

POPULATION

Adults 40 years or older who present in primary care and do not have signs or symptoms of open-angle glaucoma.

EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT

The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for glaucoma in adults. The benefits and harms of screening for glaucoma in adults are uncertain. More research is needed.

RECOMMENDATION

The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for primary open-angle glaucoma in adults. (I statement).

Screening for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: US Preventive Services Task Force Reaffirmation Recommendation Statement

IMPORTANCE

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is an irreversible reduction of airflow in the lungs. Progression to severe disease can prevent participation in normal activities because of deterioration of lung function. In 2020 it was estimated that approximately 6% of US adults had been diagnosed with COPD. Chronic lower respiratory disease, composed mainly of COPD, is the sixth leading cause of death in the US.

OBJECTIVE

To update its 2016 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a reaffirmation evidence update that focused on targeted key questions for benefits and harms of screening for COPD in asymptomatic adults and treatment in screen-detected or screen-relevant adults.

POPULATION

Asymptomatic adults who do not recognize or report respiratory symptoms.

EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT

Using a reaffirmation process, the USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that screening for COPD in asymptomatic adults has no net benefit.

RECOMMENDATION

The USPSTF recommends against screening for COPD in asymptomatic adults. (D recommendation).

Aspirin Use to Prevent Cardiovascular Disease: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement

IMPORTANCE

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of mortality in the US, accounting for more than 1 in 4 deaths. Each year, an estimated 605 000 people in the US have a first myocardial infarction and an estimated 610 000 experience a first stroke.

OBJECTIVE

To update its 2016 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review on the effectiveness of aspirin to reduce the risk of CVD events (myocardial infarction and stroke), cardiovascular mortality, and all-cause mortality in persons without a history of CVD. The systematic review also investigated the effect of aspirin use on colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality in primary CVD prevention populations, as well as the harms (particularly bleeding) associated with aspirin use. The USPSTF also commissioned a microsimulation modeling study to assess the net balance of benefits and harms from aspirin use for primary prevention of CVD and CRC, stratified by age, sex, and CVD risk level.

POPULATION

Adults 40 years or older without signs or symptoms of CVD or known CVD (including history of myocardial infarction or stroke) who are not at increased risk for bleeding (eg, no history of gastrointestinal ulcers, recent bleeding, other medical conditions, or use of medications that increase bleeding risk).

EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT

The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that aspirin use for the primary prevention of CVD events in adults aged 40 to 59 years who have a 10% or greater 10-year CVD risk has a small net benefit. The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that initiating aspirin use for the primary prevention of CVD events in adults 60 years or older has no net benefit.

RECOMMENDATION

The decision to initiate low-dose aspirin use for the primary prevention of CVD in adults aged 40 to 59 years who have a 10% or greater 10-year CVD risk should be an individual one. Evidence indicates that the net benefit of aspirin use in this group is small. Persons who are not at increased risk for bleeding and are willing to take low-dose aspirin daily are more likely to benefit. (C recommendation) The USPSTF recommends against initiating low-dose aspirin use for the primary prevention of CVD in adults 60 years or older. (D recommendation).

Collaboration and Shared Decision-Making Between Patients and Clinicians in Preventive Health Care Decisions and US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendations

The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) works to improve the health of people nationwide by making evidence-based recommendations for preventive services. Patient-centered care is a core value in US health care. Shared decision-making (SDM), in which patients and clinicians make health decisions together, ensures patients' rights to be informed and involved in preventive care decisions and that these decisions are patient-centered. SDM has a role across the spectrum of USPSTF recommendations. For A or B recommendations (judged by the USPSTF to have high or moderate certainty of a moderate or substantial net benefit at the population level), SDM allows individual patients to decide whether to accept such services based on their personal values and preferences. For C recommendations (indicating at least moderate certainty of a small net benefit at the population level), SDM is critical for individual patients to decide whether the net benefit for them is worthwhile. For D recommendations (reflecting at least moderate certainty of a zero or negative net benefit) or I statements (low certainty of net benefit), clinicians should be prepared to discuss these services if patients ask. More evidence is needed to determine if, in addition to promoting patient-centeredness, SDM reduces inequities in preventive care, as well as to define new strategies to find time for discussion of preventive services in primary care.

Screening for Eating Disorders in Adolescents and Adults: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement

IMPORTANCE

Eating disorders (eg, binge eating disorder, bulimia nervosa, and anorexia nervosa) are a group of psychiatric conditions defined as a disturbance in eating or eating-related behaviors that impair physical or psychosocial functioning. According to large US cohort studies, estimated lifetime prevalences for anorexia nervosa, bulimia nervosa, and binge eating disorder in adult women are 1.42%, 0.46%, and 1.25%, respectively, and are lower in adult men (anorexia nervosa, 0.12%; bulimia nervosa, 0.08%; binge eating disorder, 0.42%). Eating disorder prevalence ranges from 0.3% to 2.3% in adolescent females and 0.3% to 1.3% in adolescent males. Eating disorders are associated with short-term and long-term adverse health outcomes, including physical, psychological, and social problems.

OBJECTIVE

The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the benefits and harms of screening for eating disorders in adolescents and adults with a normal or high body mass index. Evidence limited to populations who are underweight or have other physical signs or symptoms of eating disorders was not considered. The USPSTF has not previously made a recommendation on this topic.

POPULATION

Adolescents and adults (10 years or older) who have no signs or symptoms of eating disorders (eg, rapid weight loss, weight gain, or pronounced deviation from growth trajectory; pubertal delay; bradycardia; oligomenorrhea; and amenorrhea).

EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT

The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for eating disorders in adolescents and adults. The evidence is limited and the balance of benefits and harms cannot be determined.

RECOMMENDATION

The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for eating disorders in adolescents and adults. (I statement).

Screening for Atrial Fibrillation: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement

IMPORTANCE

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common cardiac arrhythmia. The prevalence of AF increases with age, from less than 0.2% in adults younger than 55 years to about 10% in those 85 years or older, with a higher prevalence in men than in women. It is uncertain whether the prevalence of AF differs by race and ethnicity. Atrial fibrillation is a major risk factor for ischemic stroke and is associated with a substantial increase in the risk of stroke. Approximately 20% of patients who have a stroke associated with AF are first diagnosed with AF at the time of the stroke or shortly thereafter.

OBJECTIVE

To update its 2018 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review on the benefits and harms of screening for AF in older adults, the accuracy of screening tests, the effectiveness of screening tests to detect previously undiagnosed AF compared with usual care, and the benefits and harms of anticoagulant therapy for the treatment of screen-detected AF in older adults.

POPULATION

Adults 50 years or older without a diagnosis or symptoms of AF and without a history of transient ischemic attack or stroke.

EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT

The USPSTF concludes that evidence is lacking, and the balance of benefits and harms of screening for AF in asymptomatic adults cannot be determined.

RECOMMENDATION

The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for AF. (I statement).

Association of Type 2 Diabetes Risk Perception With Interest in Diabetes Prevention Strategies Among Women With a History of Gestational Diabetes

OBJECTIVES

The aims of this study were to identify predictors of perception of type 2 diabetes risk in women with a history of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) and to determine factors associated with interest in evidence-based strategies for type 2 diabetes prevention.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We surveyed women with a history of GDM who had not progressed to type 2 diabetes from a large academic medical center. We used multivariate logistic regression to assess predictors of high levels of perception of type 2 diabetes risk. We also tested associations between risk perception and interest in a lifestyle change program and/or metformin therapy.

RESULTS

In our diverse sample of 264 women, 28% were unaware that GDM is a risk factor for incident type 2 diabetes after pregnancy, and 48% believed their personal risk of type 2 diabetes was low. In multivariate analyses, family history of diabetes (odds ratio [OR] 2.2, 95% CI 1.2-4.4) and knowledge of GDM as a risk factor for incident type 2 diabetes (OR 4.5, 95% CI 2.1-9.8) were significant predictors of greater perception of type 2 diabetes risk. Women with higher risk perception were more likely to express interest in a lifestyle change program compared with women with lower risk perception (OR 2.4, 95% CI 1.3-4.5).

CONCLUSION

Although some women are aware that GDM is a risk factor for incident type 2 diabetes, many still perceive their own risk of developing type 2 diabetes as low. Higher risk perception predicted interest in an evidence-based diabetes prevention program, highlighting the importance of personalized risk assessment and communication about risk for women who have had GDM.

Preventing opioid use disorder and misuse in asymptomatic primary care patients: A call for relevant primary prevention intervention research

To contribute to the national effort to combat the opioid crisis, the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a scoping review to describe the state of evidence for the primary prevention of opioid misuse or use disorder in persons not yet prescribed opioids or not yet misusing opioids. (Patnode et al., 2021) As found by the scoping review, sparse direct evidence focusing on primary care-relevant prevention interventions exists. The purpose of the current commentary is to describe the relevant research needed to effectively inform primary care providers and patients about how to reduce the risk for future opioid use disorder and opioid misuse and improve health outcomes in those not yet exposed to or misusing opioid medications.

Actions to Transform US Preventive Services Task Force Methods to Mitigate Systemic Racism in Clinical Preventive Services

IMPORTANCE

US life expectancy and health outcomes for preventable causes of disease have continued to lag in many populations that experience racism.

OBJECTIVE

To propose iterative changes to US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) processes, methods, and recommendations and enact a commitment to eliminate health inequities for people affected by systemic racism.

DESIGN AND EVIDENCE

In February 2021, the USPSTF began operational steps in its work to create preventive care recommendations to address the harmful effects of racism. A commissioned methods report was conducted to inform this process. Key findings of the report informed proposed updates to the USPSTF methods to address populations adversely affected by systemic racism and proposed pilots on implementation of the proposed changes.

FINDINGS

The USPSTF proposes to consider the opportunity to reduce health inequities when selecting new preventive care topics and prioritizing current topics; seek evidence about the effects of systemic racism and health inequities in all research plans and public comments requested, and integrate available evidence into evidence reviews; and summarize the likely effects of systemic racism and health inequities on clinical preventive services in USPSTF recommendations. The USPSTF will elicit feedback from its partners and experts and proposed changes will be piloted on selected USPSTF topics.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The USPSTF has developed strategies intended to mitigate the influence of systemic racism in its recommendations. The USPSTF seeks to reduce health inequities and other effects of systemic racism through iterative changes in methods of developing evidence-based recommendations, with partner and public input in the activities to implement the advancements.

Screening and Interventions to Prevent Dental Caries in Children Younger Than 5 Years: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement

IMPORTANCE

Dental caries is the most common chronic disease in children in the US. According to the 2011-2016 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, approximately 23% of children aged 2 to 5 years had dental caries in their primary teeth. Prevalence is higher in Mexican American children (33%) and non-Hispanic Black children (28%) than in non-Hispanic White children (18%). Dental caries in early childhood is associated with pain, loss of teeth, impaired growth, decreased weight gain, negative effects on quality of life, poor school performance, and future dental caries.

OBJECTIVE

To update its 2014 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review on screening and interventions to prevent dental caries in children younger than 5 years.

POPULATION

Asymptomatic children younger than 5 years.

EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT

The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that there is a moderate net benefit of preventing future dental caries with oral fluoride supplementation at recommended doses in children 6 months or older whose water supply is deficient in fluoride. The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that there is a moderate net benefit of preventing future dental caries with fluoride varnish application in all children younger than 5 years. The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient on performing routine oral screening examinations for dental caries by primary care clinicians in children younger than 5 years and that the balance of benefits and harms of screening cannot be determined.

RECOMMENDATION

The USPSTF recommends that primary care clinicians prescribe oral fluoride supplementation starting at age 6 months for children whose water supply is deficient in fluoride. (B recommendation) The USPSTF recommends that primary care clinicians apply fluoride varnish to the primary teeth of all infants and children starting at the age of primary tooth eruption. (B recommendation) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of routine screening examinations for dental caries performed by primary care clinicians in children younger than 5 years. (I statement).

USPSTF Approach to Addressing Sex and Gender When Making Recommendations for Clinical Preventive Services

Clinical preventive service recommendations from the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) are based on transparent, systematic, and rigorous methods that consider the certainty of the evidence and magnitude of net benefit. These guidelines aim to address the needs of diverse populations. Biological sex and gender identity are sources of diversity that are not often considered in studies of clinical preventive services that inform the recommendations, resulting in challenges when evaluating the evidence and communicating recommendations for persons in specific gender identification categories (man/woman/gender nonbinary/gender nonconforming/transgender). To advance its methods, the USPSTF reviewed its past recommendations that included the use of sex and gender terms, reviewed the approaches of other guideline-making bodies, and pilot tested strategies to address sex and gender diversity. Based on the findings, the USPSTF intends to use an inclusive approach to identify issues related to sex and gender at the start of the guideline development process; assess the applicability, variability, and quality of evidence as a function of sex and gender; ensure clarity in the use of language regarding sex and gender; and identify evidence gaps related to sex and gender. Evidence reviews will identify the limitations of applying findings to diverse groups from underlying studies that used unclear terminology regarding sex and gender. The USPSTF will use gender-neutral language when appropriate to communicate that recommendations are inclusive of people of any gender and will clearly state when recommendations apply to individuals with specific anatomy associated with biological sex (male/female) or to specific categories of gender identity. The USPSTF recognizes limited evidence to inform the preventive care of populations based on gender identity.

Evaluation of the University of California Diabetes Prevention Program (UC DPP) Initiative

Background

Type 2 diabetes can negatively impact long term health outcomes, healthcare costs and quality of life. However, intensive lifestyle interventions, including the Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP), can significantly lower risk of incident type 2 diabetes among overweight adults with prediabetes. Unfortunately, the majority of adults in the US who are at risk of developing diabetes do not engage in DPP-based lifestyle change programs. Increased adoption of evidence-based obesity and diabetes prevention interventions, such as the DPP, may help large employers reduce health risks and improve health outcomes among employees. In 2018, the University of California Office of thePresident (UCOP) implemented the UC DPP Initiative, a novel, multi-component program to address diabetes and obesity prevention across the UC system.

Methods

The goal of our study is to conduct a multifaceted evaluation of the UC DPP Initiative using the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework. Our evaluation will integrate unique and diverse UC data sources, including electronic health record (EHR) data, administrative claims, campus-based DPP cohort data, qualitative interviews and site visits. Our primary outcome of interest is the mean percent weight change among three groups of overweight/obese UC beneficiaries at risk for diabetes at 12-month follow-up. Secondary outcomes include mean percent weight change at 24-month follow-up, barriers and facilitators associated with implementatio, as well as  the degree of program adoption and maintenance.

Discussion

Our study will help inform diabetes and obesity prevention efforts across the UC system. Findings from this evaluation will also be highly applicable to universities and large employers, as well as community organizers, healthcare organizations and insurers implementing the DPP and/or other health promotion interventions.

Aspirin Use to Prevent Preeclampsia and Related Morbidity and Mortality: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement

IMPORTANCE

Preeclampsia is one of the most serious health problems that affect pregnant persons. It is a complication in approximately 4% of pregnancies in the US and contributes to both maternal and infant morbidity and mortality. Preeclampsia also accounts for 6% of preterm births and 19% of medically indicated preterm births in the US. There are racial and ethnic disparities in the prevalence of and mortality from preeclampsia. Non-Hispanic Black women are at greater risk for developing preeclampsia than other women and experience higher rates of maternal and infant morbidity and perinatal mortality.

OBJECTIVE

To update its 2014 recommendation, the USPSTF commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the effectiveness of low-dose aspirin use to prevent preeclampsia.

POPULATION

Pregnant persons at high risk for preeclampsia who have no prior adverse effects with or contraindications to low-dose aspirin.

EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT

The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that there is a substantial net benefit of daily low-dose aspirin use to reduce the risk for preeclampsia, preterm birth, small for gestational age/intrauterine growth restriction, and perinatal mortality in pregnant persons at high risk for preeclampsia.

RECOMMENDATION

The USPSTF recommends the use of low-dose aspirin (81 mg/d) as preventive medication for preeclampsia after 12 weeks of gestation in persons who are at high risk for preeclampsia. (B recommendation).

Screening for Chlamydia and Gonorrhea: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement

IMPORTANCE

Chlamydia and gonorrhea are among the most common sexually transmitted infections in the US. Infection rates are highest among adolescents and young adults of both sexes. Chlamydial and gonococcal infections in women are usually asymptomatic and may lead to pelvic inflammatory disease and its associated complications. Newborns of pregnant persons with untreated infection may develop neonatal chlamydial pneumonia or gonococcal or chlamydial ophthalmia. Infection in men may lead to urethritis and epididymitis. Both types of infection can increase risk of acquiring or transmitting HIV.

OBJECTIVE

To update its 2014 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the benefits and harms of screening for chlamydia and gonorrhea in sexually active adolescents and adults, including pregnant persons.

POPULATION

Asymptomatic, sexually active adolescents and adults, including pregnant persons.

EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT

The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that screening for chlamydia in all sexually active women 24 years or younger and in women 25 years or older who are at increased risk for infection has moderate net benefit. The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that screening for gonorrhea in all sexually active women 24 years or younger and in women 25 years or older who are at increased risk for infection has moderate net benefit. The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for chlamydia and gonorrhea in men.

RECOMMENDATION

The USPSTF recommends screening for chlamydia in all sexually active women 24 years or younger and in women 25 years or older who are at increased risk for infection. (B recommendation) The USPSTF recommends screening for gonorrhea in all sexually active women 24 years or younger and in women 25 years or older who are at increased risk for infection. (B recommendation) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for chlamydia and gonorrhea in men. (I statement).

Screening for Prediabetes and Type 2 Diabetes: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement

IMPORTANCE

An estimated 13% of all US adults (18 years or older) have diabetes, and 34.5% meet criteria for prediabetes. The prevalences of prediabetes and diabetes are higher in older adults. Estimates of the risk of progression from prediabetes to diabetes vary widely, perhaps because of differences in the definition of prediabetes or the heterogeneity of prediabetes. Diabetes is the leading cause of kidney failure and new cases of blindness among adults in the US. It is also associated with increased risks of cardiovascular disease, nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, and nonalcoholic steatohepatitis and was estimated to be the seventh leading cause of death in the US in 2017. Screening asymptomatic adults for prediabetes and type 2 diabetes may allow earlier detection, diagnosis, and treatment, with the ultimate goal of improving health outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

To update its 2015 recommendation, the USPSTF commissioned a systematic review to evaluate screening for prediabetes and type 2 diabetes in asymptomatic, nonpregnant adults and preventive interventions for those with prediabetes.

POPULATION

Nonpregnant adults aged 35 to 70 years seen in primary care settings who have overweight or obesity (defined as a body mass index ≥25 and ≥30, respectively) and no symptoms of diabetes.

EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT

The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that screening for prediabetes and type 2 diabetes and offering or referring patients with prediabetes to effective preventive interventions has a moderate net benefit.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION

The USPSTF recommends screening for prediabetes and type 2 diabetes in adults aged 35 to 70 years who have overweight or obesity. Clinicians should offer or refer patients with prediabetes to effective preventive interventions. (B recommendation).

Screening for Gestational Diabetes: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement

IMPORTANCE

Gestational diabetes is diabetes that develops during pregnancy. Prevalence of gestational diabetes in the US has been estimated at 5.8% to 9.2%, based on traditional diagnostic criteria, although it may be higher if more inclusive criteria are used. Pregnant persons with gestational diabetes are at increased risk for maternal and fetal complications, including preeclampsia, fetal macrosomia (which can cause shoulder dystocia and birth injury), and neonatal hypoglycemia. Gestational diabetes has also been associated with an increased risk of several long-term health outcomes in pregnant persons and intermediate outcomes in their offspring.

OBJECTIVE

The USPSTF commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the accuracy, benefits, and harms of screening for gestational diabetes and the benefits and harms of treatment for the pregnant person and infant.

POPULATION

Pregnant persons who have not been previously diagnosed with type 1 or type 2 diabetes.

EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT

The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that there is a moderate net benefit to screening for gestational diabetes at 24 weeks of gestation or after to improve maternal and fetal outcomes. The USPSTF concludes that the evidence on screening for gestational diabetes before 24 weeks of gestation is insufficient, and the balance of benefits and harms of screening cannot be determined.

RECOMMENDATION

The USPSTF recommends screening for gestational diabetes in asymptomatic pregnant persons at 24 weeks of gestation or after. (B recommendation) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for gestational diabetes in asymptomatic pregnant persons before 24 weeks of gestation. (I statement).