Colorectal Cancer Screening After Sequential Outreach Components in a Demographically Diverse Cohort

Importance

Organized screening outreach can reduce differences in colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence and mortality between demographic subgroups. Outcomes associated with additional outreach, beyond universal outreach, are not well known.

Objective

To compare CRC screening completion by race and ethnicity, age, and sex after universal automated outreach and additional personalized outreach.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This observational cohort study included screening-eligible individuals aged 50 to 75 years assessed during 2019 in a community-based organized CRC screening program within the Kaiser Permanente Northern California (KPNC) integrated health care delivery setting. For KPNC members who are not up to date with screening by colonoscopy, each year the program first uses automated outreach (mailed prescreening notification postcards and fecal immunochemical test [FIT] kits, automated telephone calls, and postcard reminders), followed by personalized components for nonresponders (telephone calls, electronic messaging, and screening offers during office visits). Data analyses were performed between November 2021 and February 2023 and completed on February 5, 2023.

Exposures

Completed CRC screening via colonoscopy, sigmoidoscopy, or FIT.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was the proportion of participants completing an FIT or colonoscopy after each component of the screening process. Differences across subgroups were assessed using the χ2 test.

Results

This study included 1 046 745 KPNC members. Their mean (SD) age was 61.1 (6.9) years, and more than half (53.2%) were women. A total of 0.4% of members were American Indian or Alaska Native, 18.5% were Asian, 7.2% were Black, 16.2% were Hispanic, 0.8% were Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, and 56.5% were White. Automated outreach significantly increased screening participation by 31.1%, 38.1%, 29.5%, 31.9%, 31.8%, and 34.5% among these groups, respectively; follow-up personalized outreach further significantly increased participation by absolute additional increases of 12.5%, 12.4%, 13.3%, 14.4%, 14.7%, and 11.2%, respectively (all differences P < .05 compared with White members). Overall screening coverage at the end of the yearly program differed significantly among members who were American Indian or Alaska Native (74.1%), Asian (83.5%), Black (77.7%), Hispanic (76.4%), or Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander (74.4%) compared with White members (82.2%) (all differences P < .05 compared with White members). Screening completion was similar by sex; older members were substantially more likely to be up to date with CRC screening both before and at the end of the screening process.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cohort study of a CRC screening program, sequential automated and personalized strategies each contributed to substantial increases in screening completion in all demographic groups. These findings suggest that such programs may potentially reduce differences in CRC screening completion across demographic groups.

Projected Colorectal Cancer Incidence and Mortality Based on Observed Adherence to Colonoscopy and Sequential Stool-Based Screening

INTRODUCTION

Modeling supporting recommendations for colonoscopy and stool-based colorectal cancer (CRC) screening tests assumes 100% sequential participant adherence. The impact of observed adherence on the long-term effectiveness of screening is unknown. We evaluated the effectiveness of a program of screening colonoscopy every 10 years vs annual high-sensitivity guaiac-based fecal occult blood testing (HSgFOBT) using observed sequential adherence data.

METHODS

The MIcrosimulation SCreening ANalysis (MISCAN) model used observed sequential screening adherence, HSgFOBT positivity, and diagnostic colonoscopy adherence in HSgFOBT-positive individuals from the National Colonoscopy Study (single-screening colonoscopy vs ≥4 HSgFOBT sequential rounds). We compared CRC incidence and mortality over 15 years with no screening or 10 yearly screening colonoscopy vs annual HSgFOBT with 100% and differential observed adherence from the trial.

RESULTS

Without screening, simulated incidence and mortality over 15 years were 20.9 (95% probability interval 15.8-26.9) and 6.9 (5.0-9.2) per 1,000 participants, respectively. In the case of 100% adherence, only screening colonoscopy was predicted to result in lower incidence; however, both tests lowered simulated mortality to a similar level (2.1 [1.6-2.9] for screening colonoscopy and 2.5 [1.8-3.4] for HSgFOBT). Observed adherence for screening colonoscopy (83.6%) was higher than observed sequential HSgFOBT adherence (73.1% first round; 49.1% by round 4), resulting in lower simulated incidence and mortality for screening colonoscopy (14.4 [10.8-18.5] and 2.9 [2.1-3.9], respectively) than HSgFOBT (20.8 [15.8-28.1] and 3.9 [2.9-5.4], respectively), despite a 91% adherence to diagnostic colonoscopy with FOBT positivity. The relative risk of CRC mortality for screening colonoscopy vs HSgFOBT was 0.75 (95% probability interval 0.68-0.80). Findings were similar in sensitivity analyses with alternative assumptions for repeat colonoscopy, test performance, risk, age, and projection horizon.

DISCUSSION

Where sequential adherence to stool-based screening is suboptimal and colonoscopy is accessible and acceptable-as observed in the national colonoscopy study, microsimulation, comparative effectiveness, screening recommendations.

The Effect of Adding Physician Recommendation in Digitally-Enabled Outreach for COVID-19 Vaccination in Socially/Economically Disadvantaged Populations Subtitle: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Introduction

People from backgrounds that are economically/socially disadvantaged experienced disproportionately high COVID-19 death rates and had lower vaccination rates. Effective outreach strategies for increasing vaccine uptake during the pandemic are not fully known. Among patients receiving care at a Federally Qualified Health Center, we tested whether community engaged digitally-enabled outreach increased COVID vaccine uptake.

Study Design Setting and Participants

A 3-parallel-arm randomized controlled trial with a hybrid effectiveness-implementation design was conducted among patients ≥18 years old on study enrollment during 2021 with 1,650 assigned in 3:10:20 ratio; 2,328 were later selected for two subsequent implementation rounds.

Interventions

From April 13 to June 10, 2021, patients were proactively sent a text-messaging invitation to make an appointment for vaccination as part of the routine practice (Arm 1, n=150) with added personalized clinician recommendation alone (Arm 2, n=500) or with an explicit nudge for answers to frequently asked questions (Arm 3, n=1,000). Further implementation used messaging addressing vaccine hesitancy (n=1,323) or adverse reactions to vaccines (n=1,005).

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was the completion of the first SARS-Cov-2 vaccine dose determined at 14, 30 and 90 days after outreach.

Results

Of 1,650 patients in effectiveness Arms, 61% was female. Vaccination rates for Arms 1, 2, and 3, were 6% (n=9), 5.4% (n=27) and 3.3% (n=33) at 14 days, and 11.5% (n=17), 11.6% (n=58), and 8.5% (n=85) at 90 days, respectively, which were similar in pairwise comparisons. At 90 days, vaccination rates were similar across the two implementation rounds (3.9% vs. 3.6%) and were similar to the rate (3.3%) among patients who were not selected for intervention arms or implementation rounds (n=8,671).

Conclusions

Digitally-enabled outreach that included SMS messaging outreach augmented with clinician recommendations did not improve COVID-19 vaccination rates.

Trial Registration

This study is registered at ClinicalTrails.gov Identifier: NC-T04952376.

Advancing health equity through social care interventions

OBJECTIVE

To use evidence on addressing racism in social care intervention research to create a framework for advancing health equity for all populations with marginalized social identities (e.g., race, gender, and sexual orientation). Such groups have disproportionate social needs (e.g., food insecurity) and negative social determinants of health (SDOH; e.g., poverty). We recommend how the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) could advance health equity for marginalized populations through social care research and care delivery.

DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SETTING

This commentary is informed by a literature review of social care interventions that were affiliated with healthcare systems; input from health equity researchers, policymakers, and community leaders attending the AHRQ Health Equity Summit; and consensus of the authors.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

We recommend that AHRQ: (1) create an ecosystem that values research on SDOH and the effectiveness and implementation of social care interventions in the healthcare sector; (2) work with other federal agencies to (a) develop position statements with actionable recommendations about racism and other systems that perpetuate marginalization based on social identity and (b) develop aligned, complementary approaches to research and care delivery that address social marginalization; (3) advance both inclusive care delivery and inclusive research teams; (4) advance understanding of racism as a social determinant of health and effective strategies to mitigate its adverse impact on health; (5) advance the creation and scaling of effective strategies for addressing SDOH in healthcare systems, particularly in co-creation with community partners; and (6) require social care intervention researchers to use methods that advance our understanding of social health equity.

CONCLUSIONS

AHRQ, as a federal agency, could help advance health equity using a range of strategies, including using the agency's levers to ensure AHRQ stakeholders examine and address the unique experiences of socially marginalized populations in SDOH and social care intervention research.

Time to Endoscopy or Colonoscopy Among Adults Younger Than 50 Years With Iron-Deficiency Anemia and/or Hematochezia in the VHA

Importance

To date, the diagnostic test completion rate and the time to diagnostic endoscopy or colonoscopy among adults with iron-deficiency anemia (IDA) and/or hematochezia have not been well characterized.

Objective

To evaluate the diagnostic test completion rate and the time to diagnostic testing among veterans younger than 50 years with IDA and/or hematochezia.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cohort study was conducted within the Veterans Health Administration between October 1, 1999, and December 31, 2019, among US veterans aged 18 to 49 years from 2 separate cohorts: those with a diagnosis of IDA (n = 59 169) and those with a diagnosis of hematochezia (n = 189 185). Statistical analysis was conducted from August 2021 to August 2023.

Exposures

Diagnostic testing factors included age, sex, race and ethnicity, Veterans Health Administration geographic region, and hemoglobin test value (IDA cohort only).

Main Outcomes and Measures

Primary outcomes of diagnostic testing were (1) bidirectional endoscopy after diagnosis of IDA and (2) colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy after diagnosis of hematochezia. The association between diagnostic testing factors and diagnostic test completion was examined using Poisson models.

Results

There were 59 169 veterans with a diagnosis of IDA (mean [SD] age, 40.7 [7.1] years; 30 502 men [51.6%]), 189 185 veterans with a diagnosis of hematochezia (mean [SD] age, 39.4 [7.6] years; 163 690 men [86.5%]), and 2287 veterans with IDA and hematochezia (mean [SD] age, 41.6 [6.9] years; 1856 men [81.2%]). The cumulative 2-year diagnostic workup completion rate was 22% (95% CI, 22%-22%) among veterans with IDA and 40% (95% CI, 40%-40%) among veterans with hematochezia. Veterans with IDA were mostly aged 40 to 49 years (37 719 [63.7%]) and disproportionately Black (24 480 [41.4%]). Women with IDA (rate ratio [RR], 0.42; 95% CI, 0.40-0.43) had a lower likelihood of diagnostic test completion compared with men with IDA. Black (RR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.62-0.68) and Hispanic (RR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.82-0.94) veterans with IDA were less likely to receive diagnostic testing compared with White veterans with IDA. Veterans with hematochezia were mostly White (105 341 [55.7%]). Among veterans with hematochezia, those aged 30 to 49 years were more likely to receive diagnostic testing than adults younger than 30 years of age (age 30-39 years: RR, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.12-1.18; age 40-49 years: RR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.33-1.40). Hispanic veterans with hematochezia were less likely to receive diagnostic testing compared with White veterans with hematochezia (RR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.93-0.98).

Conclusions and Relevance

In the cohorts of veterans younger than 50 years with IDA and/or hematochezia, the diagnostic test completion rate was low. Follow-up was less likely among female, Black, and Hispanic veterans with IDA and Hispanic veterans with hematochezia. Optimizing timely follow-up across social and demographic groups may contribute to improving colorectal cancer outcomes and mitigate disparities.

Impact of a scalable training program on the quality of colonoscopy performance and risk of postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Endoscopist adenoma detection rates (ADRs) vary widely and are associated with patients' risk of postcolonoscopy colorectal cancers (PCCRCs). However, few scalable physician-directed interventions demonstrably both improve ADR and reduce PCCRC risk.

METHODS

Among patients undergoing colonoscopy, we evaluated the influence of a scalable online training on individual-level ADRs and PCCRC risk. The intervention was a 30-minute, interactive, online training, developed using behavior change theory, to address factors that potentially impede detection of adenomas. Analyses included interrupted time series analyses for pretraining versus posttraining individual-physician ADR changes (adjusted for temporal trends) and Cox regression for associations between ADR changes and patients' PCCRC risk.

RESULTS

Across 21 endoscopy centers and all 86 eligible endoscopists, ADRs increased immediately by an absolute 3.13% (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.31-4.94) in the 3-month quarter after training compared with .58% per quarter (95% CI, .40-.77) and 0.33% per quarter (95% CI, .16-.49) in the 3-year pretraining and posttraining periods, respectively. Posttraining ADR increases were higher among endoscopists with pretraining ADRs below the median. Among 146,786 posttraining colonoscopies (all indications), each 1% absolute increase in screening ADR posttraining was associated with a 4% decrease in their patients' PCCRC risk (hazard ratio, .96; 95% CI, .93-.99). An ADR increase of ≥10% versus <1% was associated with a 55% reduced risk of PCCRC (hazard ratio, .45; 95% CI, .24-.82).

CONCLUSIONS

A scalable, online behavior change training intervention focused on modifiable factors was associated with significant and sustained improvements in ADR, particularly among endoscopists with lower ADRs. These ADR changes were associated with substantial reductions in their patients' risk of PCCRC.

Patient and Health Care Professional Perspectives on Stigma in Integrated Behavioral Health: Barriers and Recommendations

PURPOSE

Stigma related to mental health is well documented and a major barrier to using mental and physical health care. Integrated behavioral health (IBH) in primary care, in which behavioral/mental health care services are located within a primary care setting, may reduce the experience of stigma. The purpose of this study was to assess the opinions of patients and health care professionals about mental illness stigma as a barrier to engagement with IBH and to gain insight into strategies to reduce stigma, encourage discussion of mental health, and increase uptake of IBH care.

METHODS

We conducted semistructured interviews with 16 patients referred to IBH in a prior year and 15 health care professionals (12 primary care physicians and 3 psychologists). Interviews were transcribed and inductively coded separately by 2 coders for common themes and subthemes under the topic headings of barriers, facilitators, and recommendations.

RESULTS

We identified 10 converging themes from interviews with patients and the health care professionals, representing important complementary perspectives, with respect to barriers, facilitators, and recommendations. Barriers included professionals, families, and the public as sources of stigma, as well as self-stigma or avoidance, or internalizing negative stereotypes. Facilitators and recommendations included normalizing discussion of mental health and mental health care-seeking action, using patient-centered and empathetic communication strategies, sharing by health care professionals of their own experiences, and tailoring the discussion of mental health to patients' preferred understanding.

CONCLUSIONS

Health care professionals can help reduce perceptions of stigma by having conversations with patients that normalize mental health discussion, use patient-centered communication, promote professional self-disclosure, and are tailored to patients' preferred understanding.

The Current State of Antiracism Curricula in Undergraduate and Graduate Medical Education: A Qualitative Study of US Academic Health Centers

PURPOSE

We undertook a study to evaluate the current state of pedagogy on antiracism, including barriers to implementation and strengths of existing curricula, in undergraduate medical education (UME) and graduate medical education (GME) programs in US academic health centers.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional study with an exploratory qualitative approach using semistructured interviews. Participants were leaders of UME and GME programs at 5 institutions participating in the Academic Units for Primary Care Training and Enhancement program and 6 affiliated sites from November 2021 to April 2022.

RESULTS

A total of 29 program leaders from the 11 academic health centers participated in this study. Three participants from 2 institutions reported the implementation of robust, intentional, and longitudinal antiracism curricula. Nine participants from 7 institutions described race and antiracism-related topics integrated into health equity curricula. Only 9 participants reported having "adequately trained" faculty. Participants mentioned individual, systemic, and structural barriers to implementing antiracism-related training in medical education such as institutional inertia and insufficient resources. Fear related to introducing an antiracism curriculum and undervaluing of this curriculum relative to other content were identified. Through learners and faculty feedback, antiracism content was evaluated and included in UME and GME curricula. Most participants identified learners as a stronger voice for transformation than faculty; antiracism content was mainly included in health equity curricula.

CONCLUSIONS

Inclusion of antiracism in medical education requires intentional training, focused institutional policies, enhanced foundational awareness of the impact of racism on patients and communities, and changes at the level of institutions and accreditation bodies.

Impact of Stigma on Clinician Training for Opioid Use Disorder Care: A Qualitative Study in a Primary Care Learning Collaborative

PURPOSE

We undertook a study to examine how stigma influences the uptake of training on medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) in primary care academic programs.

METHODS

We conducted a qualitative study of 23 key stakeholders responsible for implementing MOUD training in their academic primary care training programs that were participants in a learning collaborative in 2018. We assessed barriers to and facilitators of successful program implementation and used an integrated approach to develop a codebook and analyze the data.

RESULTS

Participants represented the family medicine, internal medicine, and physician assistant fields, and they included trainees. Most participants described clinician and institutional attitudes, misperceptions, and biases that enabled or hindered MOUD training. Perceptions included concerns that patients with OUD are "manipulative" or "drug seeking." Elements of stigma in the origin domain (ie, beliefs by primary care clinicians or the community that OUD is a choice and not a disease), the enacted domain (eg, hospital bylaws banning MOUD and clinicians declining to obtain an X-Waiver to prescribe MOUD), and the intersectional domain (eg, inadequate attention to patient needs) were perceived as major barriers to MOUD training by most respondents. Participants described strategies that improved the uptake of training, including giving attention to clinician concerns, clarifying the biology of OUD, and ameliorating clinician fears of being ill equipped to provide care for patients.

CONCLUSIONS

OUD-related stigma was commonly reported in training programs and impeded the uptake of MOUD training. Potential strategies to address stigma in the training context, beyond providing content on effective evidence-based treatments, include addressing the concerns of primary care clinicians and incorporating the chronic care framework into OUD treatment.

Supporting Mental Health and Psychological Resilience Among the Health Care Workforce: Gaps in the Evidence and Urgency for Action

Since the COVID-19 pandemic started, health care workers have faced various challenges to their mental health due to extreme working conditions. Yet these workers have continued to deliver care in the face of stressors and death among their patients, family, and social networks. The pandemic highlighted weaknesses within our health care work environment, especially pertaining to a need to provide increased psychological resilience to clinicians. There has been little research to determine the best practices for psychological health in workplaces and interventions to improve psychological resilience. Although some studies have attempted to provide solutions, there are noteworthy gaps in the literature on effective interventions to use in the time of crisis. The most common include an absence of preintervention data concerning the overall mental well-being of health care workers, inconsistent application of interventions, and a lack of standard assessment tools across studies. There is an urgent need for system-level strategies that not only transform the way workplaces are organized, but also destigmatize, recognize, support, and treat mental health conditions among health care workers. There is also need for more evidence-based resources to improve resilience on the job, and thereby increase clinicians' capacity to address new medical crises. Doing so may mitigate rates of burnout and other psychological conditions in times of crisis among health care workers.

Factors Associated With COVID-19 Vaccine Acceptance Among Patients Receiving Care at a Federally Qualified Health Center

BACKGROUND

COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in the United States is high, with at least 63 million unvaccinated individuals to date. Socioeconomically disadvantaged populations experience lower COVID-19 vaccination rates despite facing a disproportionate COVID-19 burden.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine acceptance among under-resourced, adult patients.

METHODS

Participants were patients receiving care at a Federally Qualified Health Center (FQHC) in St. Paul, Minnesota. Data were collected via multiple modes over 2 phases in 2020 (self-administered electronic survey) and 2021 (study team-administered survey by telephone, self-administered written survey) to promote diversity and inclusion for study participation. The primary outcome was COVID-19 vaccine acceptance. Using logistic regression analysis, associations between vaccine acceptance and factors including risk perception, concerns about the COVID-19 vaccine, social determinants of health (SDOH), co-morbidities, pandemic-induced hardships, and stress were assessed by adjusted odds ratios (AORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI).

RESULTS

One hundred sixty-eight patients (62.5% female; mean age [SD]: 49.9 [17.4] years; 32% <$20 000 annual household income; 69%

CONCLUSIONS

Our study in a socioeconomically disadvantaged population suggests that risk perception is associated with an increased likelihood of vaccine acceptance, while concerns about the COVID-19 vaccine are associated with a lower likelihood of vaccine acceptance. As these factors could impact vaccine uptake, consistent, innovative, and context-specific risk communication strategies may improve vaccine coverage in this population.

Collapse

Key Words

• COVID
• COVID-19 vaccines
• Federally Qualified Health Center
• community health
• health disparities
• health promotion
• prevention
• social determinants of health
• underserved communities
• vaccine hesitancy

Collapse

MESH Headings

• Adult
• Humans
• Female
• Adolescent
• Male
• COVID-19 Vaccines/therapeutic use
• COVID-19/prevention & control
• Communication
• Electronics
• Health Facilities
• Vaccination

Collapse

Grants

• KL2 TR002379 NCATS NIH HHS
• R21 MD013490 NIMHD NIH HHS
• UL1 TR000135 NCATS NIH HHS
• National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences
• National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
• American Heart Association

Collapse

Inclusionary Trials: A Review of Lessons Not Learned

The COVID-19 pandemic revealed weaknesses in the public health infrastructure of the United States, including persistent barriers to engaging marginalized communities toward inclusion in clinical research, including trials. Inclusive participation in clinical trials is crucial for promoting vaccine confidence, public trust, and addressing disparate health outcomes. A long-standing body of literature describes the value of community-based participatory research in increasing marginalized community participation in research. Community-based participatory research emphasizes shared leadership with community members in all phases of the research process, including in the planning and implementation, interpretation, and dissemination. Shared leadership between academic and industry with marginalized communities can assist with inclusive participation in vaccine trials and increase public trust in the development of the vaccines and other therapies used during public emergencies. Nevertheless, epidemiologic and clinical research do not yet have a strong culture of community partnership in the scientific process, which takes time to build and therefore may be difficult to develop and rapidly scale to respond to the pandemic. We outline practices that contribute to a lack of inclusive participation and suggest steps that trialists and other researchers can take to increase marginalized communities' participation in research. Practices include planning for community engagement during the planning and recruitment phases, having regular dialogues with communities about their priorities, supporting them throughout a study, and navigating complex structural determinants of health. Additionally, we discuss how research institutions can support inclusive practices by reexamining their policies to increase participation in clinical trials and instilling institutional trustworthiness.

Enrolling people of color to evaluate a practice intervention: lessons from the shared decision-making for atrial fibrillation (SDM4AFib) trial

Background

Trial recruitment of Black, indigenous, and people of color (BIPOC) is key for interventions that interact with socioeconomic factors and cultural norms, preferences, and values. We report on our experience enrolling BIPOC participants into a multicenter trial of a shared decision-making intervention about anticoagulation to prevent strokes, in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF).

Methods

We enrolled patients with AF and their clinicians in 5 healthcare systems (three academic medical centers, an urban/suburban community medical center, and a safety-net inner-city medical center) located in three states (Minnesota, Alabama, and Mississippi) in the United States. Clinical encounters were randomized to usual care with or without a shared decision-making tool about anticoagulation.

Analysis

We analyzed BIPOC patient enrollment by site, categorized reasons for non-enrollment, and examined how enrollment of BIPOC patients was promoted across sites.

Results

Of 2247 patients assessed, 922 were enrolled of which 147 (16%) were BIPOC patients. Eligible Black participants were significantly less likely (p < .001) to enroll (102, 11%) than trial-eligible White participants (185, 15%). The enrollment rate of BIPOC patients varied by site. The inclusion and prioritization of clinical practices that care for more BIPOC patients contributed to a higher enrollment rate into the trial. Specific efforts to reach BIPOC clinic attendees and prioritize their enrollment had lower yield.

Conclusions

Best practices to optimize the enrollment of BIPOC participants into trials that examined complex and culturally sensitive interventions remain to be developed. This study suggests a high yield from enrolling BIPOC patients from practices that prioritize their care.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02905032).

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-022-08399-z.

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).

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.

Development and evaluation of safety and effectiveness of novel cancer screening tests for routine clinical use with applications to multicancer detection technologies

Multicancer screening is a promising approach to improving the detection of preclinical disease, but current technologies have limited ability to identify precursor or early stage lesions, and approaches for developing the evidentiary chain are unclear. Frameworks to enable development and evaluation from discovery through evidence of clinical effectiveness are discussed.

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).

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).

Incorporation of Social Risk in US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendations and Identification of Key Challenges for Primary Care

IMPORTANCE

In its mission to improve health, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recognizes the strong relationship between a person's health and social and economic circumstances as well as persistent inequities in health care delivery.

OBJECTIVE

To assess how social risks have been considered in USPSTF recommendation statements and identify current gaps in evidence needed to expand the systematic inclusion of social risks in future recommendations.

EVIDENCE

The USPSTF commissioned a technical brief that reviewed existing literature on screening and interventions for social risk factors and also audited the 85 USPSTF recommendation statements active as of December 2019 to determine how social risks were addressed in clinical preventive services recommendations.

FINDINGS

Among the 85 USPSTF recommendation statements reviewed, 14 were focused on preventive services that considered health-related social risks. Social risks were commonly referenced in parts of USPSTF recommendations, with 57 of 85 recommendations including some comment on social risks within the recommendation statement, although many comments were not separate prevention services. Social risks were commented on in USPSTF recommendations as part of risk assessment, as a marker of worse health outcomes from the condition of focus, as a consideration for clinicians when implementing the preventive service, and as a research need or gap on the topic.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This report identified how social risks have been considered in the USPSTF recommendation statements. It serves as a benchmark and foundation for ongoing work to advance the goal of ensuring that health equity and social risks are incorporated in USPSTF methods and recommendations.

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).

Behavioral Counseling Interventions for Healthy Weight and Weight Gain in Pregnancy: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement

IMPORTANCE

The prevalence of overweight and obesity is increasing among persons of childbearing age and pregnant persons. In 2015, almost half of all persons began pregnancy with overweight (24%) or obesity (24%). Reported rates of overweight and obesity are higher among Black, Alaska Native/American Indian, and Hispanic women and lower among White and Asian women. Excess weight at the beginning of pregnancy and excess gestational weight gain have been associated with adverse maternal and infant health outcomes such as a large for gestational age infant, cesarean delivery, or preterm birth.

OBJECTIVE

The USPSTF commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the benefits and harms of behavioral counseling interventions to prevent adverse health outcomes associated with obesity during pregnancy and to evaluate intermediate outcomes, including excess gestational weight gain. This is a new recommendation.

POPULATION

Pregnant adolescents and adults in primary care settings.

EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT

The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that behavioral counseling interventions aimed at promoting healthy weight gain and preventing excess gestational weight gain in pregnancy have a moderate net benefit for pregnant persons.

RECOMMENDATION

The USPSTF recommends that clinicians offer pregnant persons effective behavioral counseling interventions aimed at promoting healthy weight gain and preventing excess gestational weight gain in pregnancy. (B recommendation).

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

IMPORTANCE

Colorectal cancer is the third leading cause of cancer death for both men and women, with an estimated 52 980 persons in the US projected to die of colorectal cancer in 2021. Colorectal cancer is most frequently diagnosed among persons aged 65 to 74 years. It is estimated that 10.5% of new colorectal cancer cases occur in persons younger than 50 years. Incidence of colorectal cancer (specifically adenocarcinoma) in adults aged 40 to 49 years has increased by almost 15% from 2000-2002 to 2014-2016. In 2016, 26% of eligible adults in the US had never been screened for colorectal cancer and in 2018, 31% were not up to date with screening.

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 colorectal cancer in adults 40 years or older. The review also examined whether these findings varied by age, sex, or race/ethnicity. In addition, as in 2016, the USPSTF commissioned a report from the Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network Colorectal Cancer Working Group to provide information from comparative modeling on how estimated life-years gained, colorectal cancer cases averted, and colorectal cancer deaths averted vary by different starting and stopping ages for various screening strategies.

POPULATION

Asymptomatic adults 45 years or older at average risk of colorectal cancer (ie, no prior diagnosis of colorectal cancer, adenomatous polyps, or inflammatory bowel disease; no personal diagnosis or family history of known genetic disorders that predispose them to a high lifetime risk of colorectal cancer [such as Lynch syndrome or familial adenomatous polyposis]).

EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT

The USPSTF concludes with high certainty that screening for colorectal cancer in adults aged 50 to 75 years has substantial net benefit. The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that screening for colorectal cancer in adults aged 45 to 49 years has moderate net benefit. The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that screening for colorectal cancer in adults aged 76 to 85 years who have been previously screened has small net benefit. Adults who have never been screened for colorectal cancer are more likely to benefit.

RECOMMENDATION

The USPSTF recommends screening for colorectal cancer in all adults aged 50 to 75 years. (A recommendation) The USPSTF recommends screening for colorectal cancer in adults aged 45 to 49 years. (B recommendation) The USPSTF recommends that clinicians selectively offer screening for colorectal cancer in adults aged 76 to 85 years. Evidence indicates that the net benefit of screening all persons in this age group is small. In determining whether this service is appropriate in individual cases, patients and clinicians should consider the patient's overall health, prior screening history, and preferences. (C recommendation).

Screening for Hypertension in Adults: US Preventive Services Task Force Reaffirmation Recommendation Statement

IMPORTANCE

Hypertension is a prevalent condition that affects approximately 45% of the adult US population and is the most commonly diagnosed condition at outpatient office visits. Hypertension is a major contributing risk factor for heart failure, myocardial infarction, stroke, and chronic kidney disease.

OBJECTIVE

To reaffirm its 2015 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the benefits and harms of screening for hypertension in adults, the accuracy of office blood pressure measurement for initial screening, and the accuracy of various confirmatory blood pressure measurement methods.

POPULATION

Adults 18 years or older without known hypertension.

EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT

Using a reaffirmation deliberation process, the USPSTF concludes with high certainty that screening for hypertension in adults has substantial net benefit.

RECOMMENDATION

The USPSTF recommends screening for hypertension in adults 18 years or older with office blood pressure measurement. The USPSTF recommends obtaining blood pressure measurements outside of the clinical setting for diagnostic confirmation before starting treatment. (A recommendation).

Screening for Vitamin D Deficiency in Adults: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement

IMPORTANCE

Vitamin D is a fat-soluble vitamin that performs an important role in calcium homeostasis and bone metabolism and also affects many other cellular regulatory functions outside the skeletal system. Vitamin D requirements may vary by individual; thus, no one serum vitamin D level cutpoint defines deficiency, and no consensus exists regarding the precise serum levels of vitamin D that represent optimal health or sufficiency.

OBJECTIVE

To update its 2014 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review on screening for vitamin D deficiency, including the benefits and harms of screening and early treatment.

POPULATION

Community-dwelling, nonpregnant adults who have no signs or symptoms of vitamin D deficiency or conditions for which vitamin D treatment is recommended.

EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT

The USPSTF concludes that the overall evidence on the benefits of screening for vitamin D deficiency is lacking. Therefore, the balance of benefits and harms of screening for vitamin D deficiency 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 vitamin D deficiency in asymptomatic adults. (I statement).

Screening for Hearing Loss in Older Adults: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement

IMPORTANCE

Age-related sensorineural hearing loss is a common health problem among adults. Nearly 16% of US adults 18 years or older report difficulty hearing. The prevalence of perceived hearing loss increases with age. Hearing loss can adversely affect an individual's quality of life and ability to function independently and has been associated with increased risk of falls, hospitalizations, social isolation, and cognitive decline.

OBJECTIVE

To update its 2012 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review on screening for hearing loss in adults 50 years or older.

POPULATION

Asymptomatic adults 50 years or older with age-related hearing loss.

EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT

Because of a lack of evidence, the USPSTF concludes that the benefits and harms of screening for hearing loss in asymptomatic older adults are uncertain and that 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 hearing loss in older adults. (I statement).

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

IMPORTANCE

Lung cancer is the second most common cancer and the leading cause of cancer death in the US. In 2020, an estimated 228 820 persons were diagnosed with lung cancer, and 135 720 persons died of the disease. The most important risk factor for lung cancer is smoking. Increasing age is also a risk factor for lung cancer. Lung cancer has a generally poor prognosis, with an overall 5-year survival rate of 20.5%. However, early-stage lung cancer has a better prognosis and is more amenable to treatment.

OBJECTIVE

To update its 2013 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review on the accuracy of screening for lung cancer with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) and on the benefits and harms of screening for lung cancer and commissioned a collaborative modeling study to provide information about the optimum age at which to begin and end screening, the optimal screening interval, and the relative benefits and harms of different screening strategies compared with modified versions of multivariate risk prediction models.

POPULATION

This recommendation statement applies to adults aged 50 to 80 years who have a 20 pack-year smoking history and currently smoke or have quit within the past 15 years.

EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT

The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that annual screening for lung cancer with LDCT has a moderate net benefit in persons at high risk of lung cancer based on age, total cumulative exposure to tobacco smoke, and years since quitting smoking.

RECOMMENDATION

The USPSTF recommends annual screening for lung cancer with LDCT in adults aged 50 to 80 years who have a 20 pack-year smoking history and currently smoke or have quit within the past 15 years. Screening should be discontinued once a person has not smoked for 15 years or develops a health problem that substantially limits life expectancy or the ability or willingness to have curative lung surgery. (B recommendation) This recommendation replaces the 2013 USPSTF statement that recommended annual screening for lung cancer with LDCT in adults aged 55 to 80 years who have a 30 pack-year smoking history and currently smoke or have quit within the past 15 years.

Community-Engaged Approaches for Minority Recruitment Into Clinical Research: A Scoping Review of the Literature

Underrepresentation of racial and ethnic minority populations in clinical research persists in the United States, highlighting the unmet ideals of generalizability and equity of research findings and products. Previous systematic reviews exploring various facets of this phenomenon concluded that community engagement with minority groups may effectively promote recruitment and retention, but the ways in which community-engaged approaches have been used for recruitment have not been examined. We performed a scoping review of the literature to identify studies of community-engaged recruitment processes. The search resulted in 2842 articles, of which 66 met inclusion criteria. These articles demonstrated a relatively large literature base of descriptive studies conveying details of community engagement approaches to enhance recruitment of minority research participants. We summarize key aspects of current practices across the spectrum of community engagement. A gap in the literature is the relative lack of the comparative studies among different engagement strategies.

The Disproportionate Impact of COVID-19 on Racial and Ethnic Minorities in the United States

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has disproportionately affected racial and ethnic minority groups, with high rates of death in African American, Native American, and LatinX communities. Although the mechanisms of these disparities are being investigated, they can be conceived as arising from biomedical factors as well as social determinants of health. Minority groups are disproportionately affected by chronic medical conditions and lower access to healthcare that may portend worse COVID-19 outcomes. Furthermore, minority communities are more likely to experience living and working conditions that predispose them to worse outcomes. Underpinning these disparities are long-standing structural and societal factors that the COVID-19 pandemic has exposed. Clinicians can partner with patients and communities to reduce the short-term impact of COVID-19 disparities while advocating for structural change.

Establishing a SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) Drive-Through Collection Site: A Community-Based Participatory Research Partnership With a Federally Qualified Health Center

The COVID-19 pandemic has disproportionately affected underserved and minority populations in the United States. This is partially attributable to limited access to diagnostic testing from deeply rooted structural inequities precipitating higher infection and mortality rates. We describe the process of establishing a drive-through collection site by leveraging an academic-community partnership between a medical institution and a federally qualified health center in Minnesota. Over 10 weeks, 2006 COVID-19 tests were provided to a socioeconomically disadvantaged population of racial/ethnic minorities and low-income essential workers.

Potential Disparities by Sex and Race or Ethnicity in Lung Cancer Screening Eligibility Rates

BACKGROUND

Criteria for low-dose CT scan lung cancer screening vary across guidelines. Knowledge of the eligible pool across demographic groups can enable policy and programmatic decision-making, particularly for disproportionately affected populations.

RESEARCH QUESTION

What are the eligibility rates for low-dose CT scan screening according to sex and race or ethnicity and how do these rates relate to corresponding lung cancer incidence rates?

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

This was a cross-sectional study using data from the 2015 National Health Interview Survey adult and cancer control supplement files. In addition to eligibility rates, the ratio of the eligibility rate to the lung cancer incidence rate in a given population group (eligibility to incidence [E-I] ratio) also was determined. Guidelines assessed were: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, National Comprehensive Cancer Network, and US Preventive Services Task Force current or with expansion of age and smoking or quit thresholds. We also assessed a risk model (PLCO_M2012 risk model).

RESULTS

Total numbers eligible based on current guidelines ranged from 8.3 to 13.3 million, representing 8.3% to 13.4% of the US population 50 to 80 years of age, and up to 17.5 million with expanded criteria. Overall eligibility rates on average were about 10 percentage points higher for men than women. For both men and women, and both overall and among ever smokers, non-Hispanic Whites had the highest eligibility rates across all guidelines, followed generally by non-Hispanic Blacks, and then Asians and Hispanics. Among both men and women, non-Hispanic Whites had the highest E-I ratios across all guidelines; non-Hispanic Black men had higher lung cancer incidence, but 30% to 50% lower E-I ratios, than non-Hispanic White men.

INTERPRETATION

Screening eligibility rates vary widely across guidelines, with disparities evident in E-I ratios, including among non-Hispanic Black men, despite higher lung cancer burden. Consideration of smoking duration in risk assessment criteria may address current disparities.

Screening for Asymptomatic Carotid Artery Stenosis: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement

IMPORTANCE

Carotid artery stenosis is atherosclerotic disease that affects extracranial carotid arteries. Asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis refers to stenosis in persons without a history of ischemic stroke, transient ischemic attack, or other neurologic symptoms referable to the carotid arteries. The prevalence of asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis is low in the general population but increases with age.

OBJECTIVE

To determine if its 2014 recommendation should be reaffirmed, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a reaffirmation evidence review. The reaffirmation update focused on the targeted key questions on the potential benefits and harms of screening and interventions, including revascularization procedures designed to improve carotid artery blood flow, in persons with asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis.

POPULATION

This recommendation statement applies to adults without a history of transient ischemic attack, stroke, or other neurologic signs or symptoms referable to the carotid arteries.

EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT

The USPSTF found no new substantial evidence that could change its recommendation and therefore concludes with moderate certainty that the harms of screening for asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis outweigh the benefits.

RECOMMENDATION

The USPSTF recommends against screening for asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis in the general adult population. (D recommendation).

Interventions for Tobacco Smoking Cessation in Adults, Including Pregnant Persons: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement

IMPORTANCE

Tobacco use is the leading preventable cause of disease, disability, and death in the US. In 2014, it was estimated that 480 000 deaths annually are attributed to cigarette smoking, including second hand smoke exposure. Smoking during pregnancy can increase the risk of numerous adverse pregnancy outcomes (eg, miscarriage and congenital anomalies) and complications in the offspring (including sudden infant death syndrome and impaired lung function in childhood). In 2019, an estimated 50.6 million US adults (20.8% of the adult population) used tobacco; 14.0% of the US adult population currently smoked cigarettes and 4.5% of the adult population used electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes). Among pregnant US women who gave birth in 2016, 7.2% reported smoking cigarettes while pregnant.

OBJECTIVE

To update its 2015 recommendation, the USPSTF commissioned a review to evaluate the benefits and harms of primary care interventions on tobacco use cessation in adults, including pregnant persons.

POPULATION

This recommendation statement applies to adults 18 years or older, including pregnant persons.

EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT

The USPSTF concludes with high certainty that the net benefit of behavioral interventions and US Food and Drug Associated (FDA)-approved pharmacotherapy for tobacco smoking cessation, alone or combined, in nonpregnant adults who smoke is substantial. The USPSTF concludes with high certainty that the net benefit of behavioral interventions for tobacco smoking cessation on perinatal outcomes and smoking cessation in pregnant persons is substantial. The USPSTF concludes that the evidence on pharmacotherapy interventions for tobacco smoking cessation in pregnant persons is insufficient because few studies are available, and the balance of benefits and harms cannot be determined. The USPSTF concludes that the evidence on the use of e-cigarettes for tobacco smoking cessation in adults, including pregnant persons, is insufficient, and the balance of benefits and harms cannot be determined. The USPSTF has identified the lack of well-designed, randomized clinical trials on e-cigarettes that report smoking abstinence or adverse events as a critical gap in the evidence.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The USPSTF recommends that clinicians ask all adults about tobacco use, advise them to stop using tobacco, and provide behavioral interventions and FDA-approved pharmacotherapy for cessation to nonpregnant adults who use tobacco. (A recommendation) The USPSTF recommends that clinicians ask all pregnant persons about tobacco use, advise them to stop using tobacco, and provide behavioral interventions for cessation to pregnant persons who use tobacco. (A recommendation) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of pharmacotherapy interventions for tobacco cessation in pregnant persons. (I statement) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of e-cigarettes for tobacco cessation in adults, including pregnant persons. The USPSTF recommends that clinicians direct patients who use tobacco to other tobacco cessation interventions with proven effectiveness and established safety. (I statement).

Young-onset colorectal cancer risk among individuals with iron-deficiency anaemia and haematochezia

OBJECTIVE

Young-onset colorectal cancer (YCRC) incidence is rising. Scant data exist on YCRC risk after presentation with concerning symptoms such as iron-deficiency anaemia (IDA) or haematochezia. We examined the association between IDA and YCRC, and haematochezia and YCRC.

DESIGN

Cohort study of US Veterans aged 18-49 years receiving Veterans Health Administration (VHA) care 1999-2016. IDA analytic cohort was created matching individuals without incident IDA to those with IDA 4:1 based on sex, birth year and first VHA visit date (n=239 000). We used this approach to also create a distinct haematochezia analytic cohort (n=653 740). Incident YCRC was ascertained via linkage to cancer registry and/or cause-specific mortality data. We computed cumulative incidence, risk difference (RD) and HRs using Cox models in each cohort.

RESULTS

Five-year YCRC cumulative incidence was 0.45% among individuals with IDA versus 0.05% without IDA (RD: 0.39%, 95% CI: 0.33%-0.46%), corresponding to an HR of 10.81 (95% CI: 8.15-14.33). Comparing IDA versus no IDA, RD was 0.78% for men (95% CI: 0.64%-0.92%) and 0.08% for women (95% CI: 0.03%-0.13%), and RD increased by age from 0.14% for <30 years to 0.53% for 40-49 years. YCRC cumulative incidence was 0.33% among individuals with haematochezia versus 0.03% without haematochezia (RD: 0.30%, 95% CI: 0.26%-0.33%), corresponding to an HR of 10.66 (95% CI: 8.76-12.97). Comparing haematochezia versus no haematochezia, RD increased by age from 0.04% for <30 years to 0.43% for 40-49 years.

CONCLUSION

Colonoscopy should be strongly considered in adults aged <50 years with IDA or haematochezia without a clinically confirmed alternate source.

Screening for Hepatitis B Virus Infection in Adolescents and Adults: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement

IMPORTANCE

An estimated 862 000 persons in the US are living with chronic infection with hepatitis B virus (HBV). Persons born in regions with a prevalence of HBV infection of 2% or greater, such as countries in Africa and Asia, the Pacific Islands, and parts of South America, often become infected at birth and account for up to 95% of newly reported chronic infections in the US. Other high-prevalence populations include persons who inject drugs; men who have sex with men; persons with HIV infection; and sex partners, needle-sharing contacts, and household contacts of persons with chronic HBV infection. Up to 60% of HBV-infected persons are unaware of their infection, and many remain asymptomatic until onset of cirrhosis or end-stage liver disease.

OBJECTIVE

To update its 2014 recommendation, the USPSTF commissioned a review of new randomized clinical trials and cohort studies published from 2014 to August 2019 that evaluated the benefits and harms of screening and antiviral therapy for preventing intermediate outcomes or health outcomes and the association between improvements in intermediate outcomes and health outcomes. New key questions focused on the yield of alternative HBV screening strategies and the accuracy of tools to identify persons at increased risk.

POPULATION

This recommendation statement applies to asymptomatic, nonpregnant adolescents and adults at increased risk for HBV infection, including those who were vaccinated before being screened for HBV infection.

EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT

The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that screening for HBV infection in adolescents and adults at increased risk for infection has moderate net benefit.

RECOMMENDATION

The USPSTF recommends screening for HBV infection in adolescents and adults at increased risk for infection. (B recommendation).

Emergency Preparedness and Risk Communication Among African American Churches: Leveraging a Community-Based Participatory Research Partnership COVID-19 Initiative

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) crisis has disproportionately affected the African American population. To mitigate the disparities, we deployed an emergency preparedness strategy within an existing community-based participatory research (CBPR) partnership among African American churches to disseminate accurate COVID-19 information. We used the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Crisis and Emergency Risk Communication framework to conduct a needs assessment, distribute emergency preparedness manuals, and deliver COVID-19–related messaging among African American churches via electronic communication platforms. A needs assessment showed that the top 3 church emergency resource needs were financial support, food and utilities, and COVID-19 health information. During an 8-week period (April 3–May 31, 2020), we equipped 120 churches with emergency preparedness manuals and delivered 230 messages via social media (Facebook) and email. For reach, we estimated that 6,539 unique persons viewed content on the Facebook page, and for engagement, we found 1,260 interactions (eg, likes, loves, comments, shares, video views, post clicks). Emails from community communication leaders reached an estimated 12,000 church members. CBPR partnerships can be effectively leveraged to promote emergency preparedness and communicate risk among under-resourced communities during a pandemic.

Should This Patient Be Screened for Pancreatic Cancer? : Grand Rounds Discussion From Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center

Because pancreatic cancer is typically advanced at the time of diagnosis, it has a very low 5-year survival rate and may become the second leading cause of cancer death in the United States. A screening program to find early-stage pancreatic cancer is needed but has been challenging to develop because of the lack of an effective screening test. In 2019, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force performed an evidence review and updated its guidance, confirming its 2004 "D" recommendation against routine screening for average-risk patients. Here, 2 experts review the updated guideline and recent evidence and discuss whether a patient with a family history of pancreatic cancer should undergo screening.

Behavioral Counseling Interventions to Promote a Healthy Diet and Physical Activity for Cardiovascular Disease Prevention in Adults With Cardiovascular Risk Factors: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement

IMPORTANCE

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is a leading cause of death in the US. Known modifiable risk factors for CVD include smoking, overweight and 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 cardiovascular morbidity and mortality than those who do not. All persons, regardless of their CVD risk status, benefit from healthy eating behaviors and appropriate physical activity.

OBJECTIVE

To update its 2014 recommendation, the USPSTF commissioned a review of the evidence on behavioral counseling to promote a healthy diet and physical activity for CVD prevention in adults with cardiovascular risk factors.

POPULATION

This recommendation statement applies to adults 18 years or older with known hypertension or elevated blood pressure, those with dyslipidemia, or those who have mixed or multiple risk factors such as metabolic syndrome or an estimated 10-year CVD risk of 7.5% or greater. Adults with other known modifiable cardiovascular risk factors such as abnormal blood glucose levels, obesity, and smoking are not included in this recommendation.

EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT

The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that behavioral counseling interventions have a moderate net benefit on CVD risk in adults at increased risk for CVD.

RECOMMENDATION

The USPSTF recommends offering or referring adults with CVD risk factors to behavioral counseling interventions to promote a healthy diet and physical activity. (B recommendation).

Framework and Strategies to Eliminate Disparities in Colorectal Cancer Screening Outcomes

Preventable differences in colorectal cancer (CRC) mortality across racial/ethnic, economic, geographic, and other groups can be eliminated by assuring equitable access and quality across the care continuum, but few interventions have been demonstrated to do so. Multicomponent strategies designed with a health equity framework may be effective. A health equity framework takes into account social determinants of health, multilevel influences (policy, community, delivery, and individual levels), screening processes, and community engagement. Effective strategies for increasing screening uptake include patient navigation and other interventions for structural barriers, reminders and clinical decision support, and data to continuously track metrics and guide targets for improvement. Community resource gaps should be addressed to assure high-quality services irrespective of racial/ethnic and socioeconomic status. One model combinespopulation-based proactive outreach screening with screening delivery at in-person or virtual points of contact, as well as community engagement. Patient- and provider-based behavioral interventions may be considered for increasing screening demand and delivery. Providing a choice of screening tests is recommended for CRC screening, and access to colonoscopy is required for completion of the CRC screening process.