Alex H. Krist

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

IMPORTANCE Colorectal cancer is the second leading cause of cancer death in the United States. In 2016, an estimated 134,000 persons will be diagnosed with the disease, and about 49,000 will die from it. Colorectal cancer is most frequently diagnosed among adults aged 65 to 74 years; the median age at death from colorectal cancer is 68 years. OBJECTIVE To update the 2008 US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation on screening for colorectal cancer. EVIDENCE REVIEW The USPSTF reviewed the evidence on the effectiveness of screening with colonoscopy, flexible sigmoidoscopy, computed tomography colonography, the guaiac-based fecal occult blood test, the fecal immunochemical test, the multitargeted stool DNA test, and the methylated SEPT9 DNA test in reducing the incidence of and mortality from colorectal cancer or all-cause mortality; the harms of these screening tests; and the test performance characteristics of these tests for detecting adenomatous polyps, advanced adenomas based on size, or both, as well as colorectal cancer. The USPSTF also commissioned a comparative modeling study to provide information on optimal starting and stopping ages and screening intervals across the different available screening methods. FINDINGS The USPSTF concludes with high certainty that screening for colorectal cancer in average-risk, asymptomatic adults aged 50 to 75 years is of substantial net benefit. Multiple screening strategies are available to choose from, with different levels of evidence to support their effectiveness, as well as unique advantages and limitations, although there are no empirical data to demonstrate that any of the reviewed strategies provide a greater net benefit. Screening for colorectal cancer is a substantially underused preventive health strategy in the United States. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The USPSTF recommends screening for colorectal cancer starting at age 50 years and continuing until age 75 years (A recommendation). The decision to screen for colorectal cancer in adults aged 76 to 85 years should be an individual one, taking into account the patients overall health and prior screening history (C recommendation).

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

DESCRIPTION Update of the 2009 US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation on screening for depression in adults. METHODS The USPSTF reviewed the evidence on the benefits and harms of screening for depression in adult populations, including older adults and pregnant and postpartum women; the accuracy of depression screening instruments; and the benefits and harms of depression treatment in these populations. POPULATION This recommendation applies to adults 18 years and older. RECOMMENDATION The USPSTF recommends screening for depression in the general adult population, including pregnant and postpartum women. Screening should be implemented with adequate systems in place to ensure accurate diagnosis, effective treatment, and appropriate follow-up. (B recommendation).

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 mortality in the United States, accounting for 1 of every 3 deaths among adults. Objective To update the 2008 US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation on screening for lipid disorders in adults. Evidence Review The USPSTF reviewed the evidence on the benefits and harms of screening for and treatment of dyslipidemia in adults 21 years and older; the benefits and harms of statin use in reducing CVD events and mortality in adults without a history of CVD events; whether the benefits of statin use vary by subgroup, clinical characteristics, or dosage; and the benefits of various treatment strategies in adults 40 years and older without a history of CVD events. Conclusions and Recommendations The USPSTF recommends initiating use of low- to moderate-dose statins in adults aged 40 to 75 years without a history of CVD who have 1 or more CVD risk factors (dyslipidemia, diabetes, hypertension, or smoking) and a calculated 10-year CVD event risk of 10% or greater (B recommendation). The USPSTF recommends that clinicians selectively offer low- to moderate-dose statins to adults aged 40 to 75 years without a history of CVD who have 1 or more CVD risk factors and a calculated 10-year CVD event risk of 7.5% to 10% (C recommendation). The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of initiating statin use in adults 76 years and older (I statement).

Screening for High Blood Pressure in Adults: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement

DESCRIPTION Update of the 2007 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) reaffirmation recommendation statement on screening for high blood pressure in adults. METHODS The USPSTF reviewed the evidence on the diagnostic accuracy of different methods for confirming a diagnosis of hypertension after initial screening and the optimal rescreening interval for diagnosing hypertension. POPULATION This recommendation applies to adults aged 18 years or older without known hypertension. RECOMMENDATION The USPSTF recommends screening for high blood pressure in adults aged 18 years or older. (A recommendation) The USPSTF recommends obtaining measurements outside of the clinical setting for diagnostic confirmation before starting treatment.

A Vision for Patient-Centered Health Information Systems

-cusesmuchofitsenergyontheuseofelectronicmedi-cal records by clinicians, but the use of informationtechnology by patients carries equal promise. Out-side of health care, the public routinely uses computers andsmartphonestoaccessinformationandperformtaskswithaclickofabutton.Patientsseeksimilareaseinaccessinghealthinformation, but health care has been slow to develop infor-mation tools for patients of comparable functionality.

Patient Education on Prostate Cancer Screening and Involvement in Decision Making

PURPOSE Many clinicians lack resources to engage patients in shared decision making for prostate cancer screening. We sought to evaluate whether previsit educational decision aids facilitate shared decision making. METHODS This randomized controlled study compared a Web-based and a paper-based decision aid with no previsit education. Men aged 50 to 70 years undergoing a health maintenance examination at a large family practice were enrolled. The primary outcome was patient-reported level of control over the decision to be screened. Secondary outcomes included frequency of screening, patient knowledge, decisional conflict, and time spent discussing screening. RESULTS A total of 497 men participated (75 control, 196 brochure, 226 Web site). Patients exposed to either aid were no more likely than control patients to report a collaborative decision: 36% of patients in each group reported equally sharing decision responsibility. Exposure to either decision aid increased patients’ involvement in decision making compared with the control condition (Web site, P = .03; brochure, P = .03). Only 46% of control patients reported an active decision-making role, compared with 56% of Web site and 54% of brochure patients. Patients exposed to a decision aid answered a greater percentage of knowledge questions correctly (54% control vs 69% Web site, P <.001, and vs 69% brochure, P <.001) and were less likely to be screened (94% control vs 86% Web site, P = .06, and vs 85% brochure, P = .04). CONCLUSIONS Patients in the decision aid groups were more informed and more engaged in the screening decision than their control counterparts. Exposure did not promote shared decision-making control, however. Whether shared decision making is the ideal model and how to measure its occurrence are subjects for further research.

The Relative Importance of Patient-Reported Barriers to Colorectal Cancer Screening

BACKGROUND Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates are suboptimal. The most important barriers identified by patients are poorly understood. A comprehensive assessment of barriers to all recommended modalities is needed. METHODS In 2007, a questionnaire was mailed to 6100 patients, aged 50-75 years, from 12 family medicine practices in the Virginia Ambulatory Care Outcomes Research Network. People aged 65-75 years and African Americans were oversampled. Patients were asked to rate 19-21 barriers to each of four recommended tests. In 2008, responses were coded on a 5-point scale; higher scores reflected stronger barrier endorsement. RESULTS The response rate was 55% (n=3357). Approximately 40% of respondents were aged >/=65 years, 30% were African-American, and 73% were adherent to screening. A clinicians failure to suggest screening and not knowing testing was necessary received the highest mean scores as barriers. Financial concerns and misconceptions were also cited. Barrier scores differed depending on whether respondents were never screened, overdue for screening, or adherent to guidelines. The top five barriers for each modality included test-specific barriers (e.g., handling stool, bowel preparation), which often outranked generic barriers to screening. Not knowing testing was necessary was a top barrier for all tests but colonoscopy. CONCLUSIONS Although physician advice and awareness of the need for screening are important, barriers to screening are not homogenous across tests, and test-specific barriers warrant consideration in designing strategies to improve screening rates. Barrier scores differ by screening status, highlighting the need to address prior screening experience. Evidence that patients are more familiar with colonoscopy than with other modalities suggests an opportunity to improve screening rates by educating patients about alternative tests.

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

Importance Based on year 2000 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention growth charts, approximately 17% of children and adolescents aged 2 to 19 years in the United States have obesity, and almost 32% of children and adolescents are overweight or have obesity. Obesity in children and adolescents is associated with morbidity such as mental health and psychological issues, asthma, obstructive sleep apnea, orthopedic problems, and adverse cardiovascular and metabolic outcomes (eg, high blood pressure, abnormal lipid levels, and insulin resistance). Children and adolescents may also experience teasing and bullying behaviors based on their weight. Obesity in childhood and adolescence may continue into adulthood and lead to adverse cardiovascular outcomes or other obesity-related morbidity, such as type 2 diabetes. Subpopulation Considerations Although the overall rate of child and adolescent obesity has stabilized over the last decade after increasing steadily for 3 decades, obesity rates continue to increase in certain populations, such as African American girls and Hispanic boys. These racial/ethnic differences in obesity prevalence are likely a result of both genetic and nongenetic factors (eg, socioeconomic status, intake of sugar-sweetened beverages and fast food, and having a television in the bedroom). Objective To update the 2010 US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation on screening for obesity in children 6 years and older. Evidence Review The USPSTF reviewed the evidence on screening for obesity in children and adolescents and the benefits and harms of weight management interventions. Findings Comprehensive, intensive behavioral interventions (≥26 contact hours) in children and adolescents 6 years and older who have obesity can result in improvements in weight status for up to 12 months; there is inadequate evidence regarding the effectiveness of less intensive interventions. The harms of behavioral interventions can be bounded as small to none, and the harms of screening are minimal. Therefore, the USPSTF concluded with moderate certainty that screening for obesity in children and adolescents 6 years and older is of moderate net benefit. Conclusions and Recommendation The USPSTF recommends that clinicians screen for obesity in children and adolescents 6 years and older and offer or refer them to comprehensive, intensive behavioral interventions to promote improvements in weight status. (B recommendation)

Putting It Together: Finding Success in Behavior Change Through Integration of Services

PURPOSE The purpose of this analysis and commentary was to explore the rationale for an integrated approach, within and outside the office, to help patients pursue healthy behaviors. METHODS We examined the role of integration, building on (1) patterns observed in a limited qualitative evaluation of 17 Prescription for Health projects, (2) several national policy initiatives, and (3) selected research literature on behavior change. RESULTS The interventions evaluated in Prescription for Health not only identified unhealthy behaviors and advised change, but also enabled patients to access information at home, use self-help methods, obtain intensive counseling, and receive follow-up. Few practices can replicate such a model with the limited staff and resources available in their offices. Comprehensive assistance can be offered to patients, however, by integrating what is feasible in the office with additional services available through the community and information media. CONCLUSIONS Blending diverse clinical and community services into a cohesive system requires an infrastructure that fosters integration. Such a system provides the comprehensive model on which the quality of both health promotion and chronic illness care depend. Integrating clinical and community services is only the first step toward the ideal of a citizen-centered approach, in which diverse sectors within the community—health care among them—work together to help citizens sustain healthy behaviors. The integration required to fulfill this ideal faces logistical challenges but may be the best way for a fragmented health care system to fully serve its patients.

Interactive Preventive Health Record to Enhance Delivery of Recommended Care: A Randomized Trial

PURPOSE Americans receive only one-half of recommended preventive services. Information technologies have been advocated to engage patients. We tested the effectiveness of an interactive preventive health record (IPHR) that links patients to their clinician’s record, explains information in lay language, displays tailored recommendations and educational resources, and generates reminders. METHODS This randomized controlled trial involved 8 primary care practices. Four thousand five hundred patients were randomly selected to receive a mailed invitation to use the IPHR or usual care. Outcomes were measured using patient surveys and electronic medical record data and included IPHR use and service delivery. Comparisons were made between invited and usual-care patients and between users and nonusers among those invited to use the IPHR. RESULTS At 4 and 16 months, 229 (10.2%) and 378 (16.8%) of invited patients used the IPHR. The proportion of patients up-to-date with all services increased between baseline and 16 months by 3.8% among intervention patients (from 11.4% to 15.2%, P <.001) and by 1.5% among control patients (from 11.1% to 12.6%, P = .07), a difference of 2.3% (P = .05). Greater increases were observed among patients who used the IPHR. At 16 months, 25.1% of users were up-to-date with all services, double the rate among nonusers. At 4 months, delivery of colorectal, breast, and cervical cancer screening increased by 19%, 15%, and 13%, respectively, among users. CONCLUSIONS Information systems that feature patient-centered functionality, such as the IPHR, have potential to increase preventive service delivery. Engaging more patients to use systems could have important public health benefits.