Lucy N. Marion

Screening for colorectal cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement.

DESCRIPTION Update of the 2002 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation statement on screening for colorectal cancer. METHODS To update its recommendation, the USPSTF commissioned 2 studies: 1) a targeted systematic evidence review on 4 selected questions relating to test characteristics and benefits and harms of screening technologies, and 2) a decision analytic modeling analysis using population modeling techniques to compare the expected health outcomes and resource requirements of available screening modalities when used in a programmatic way over time. RECOMMENDATIONS The USPSTF recommends screening for colorectal cancer using fecal occult blood testing, sigmoidoscopy, or colonoscopy in adults, beginning at age 50 years and continuing until age 75 years. The risks and benefits of these screening methods vary. (A recommendation). The USPSTF recommends against routine screening for colorectal cancer in adults 76 to 85 years of age. There may be considerations that support colorectal cancer screening in an individual patient. (C recommendation). The USPSTF recommends against screening for colorectal cancer in adults older than age 85 years. (D recommendation). The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient to assess the benefits and harms of computed tomographic colonography and fecal DNA testing as screening modalities for colorectal cancer. (I statement).

Aspirin for the Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement

DESCRIPTION Update of the 2002 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation about the use of aspirin for the prevention of coronary heart disease. METHODS Review of the literature since 2002, focusing on new evidence on the benefits and harms of aspirin for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease, including myocardial infarction and stroke. The new evidence was reviewed and synthesized according to sex. RECOMMENDATIONS Encourage men age 45 to 79 years to use aspirin when the potential benefit of a reduction in myocardial infarctions outweighs the potential harm of an increase in gastrointestinal hemorrhage. (A recommendation) Encourage women age 55 to 79 years to use aspirin when the potential benefit of a reduction in ischemic strokes outweighs the potential harm of an increase in gastrointestinal hemorrhage. (A recommendation) Evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of aspirin for cardiovascular disease prevention in men and women 80 years or older. (I statement) Do not encourage aspirin use for cardiovascular disease prevention in women younger than 55 years and in men younger than 45 years. (D recommendation).

Screening and Treatment for Major Depressive Disorder in Children and Adolescents: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement

DESCRIPTION. This is an update of the 2002 US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation on screening for child and adolescent major depressive disorder. METHODS. The US Preventive Services Task Force weighed the benefits and harms of screening and treatment for major depressive disorder in children and adolescents, incorporating new evidence addressing gaps in the 2002 recommendation statement. Evidence examined included the benefits and harms of screening, the accuracy of primary care–feasible screening tests, and the benefits and risks of treating depression by using psychotherapy and/or medications in patients aged 7 to 18 years. RECOMMENDATIONS. Screen adolescents (12–18 years of age) for major depressive disorder when systems are in place to ensure accurate diagnosis, psychotherapy (cognitive-behavioral or interpersonal), and follow-up (B recommendation). Evidence is insufficient to warrant a recommendation to screen children (7–11 years of age) for major depressive disorder (I statement).

Using nontraditional risk factors in coronary heart disease risk assessment: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement.

DESCRIPTION New recommendation from the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) on the use of nontraditional, or novel, risk factors in assessing the coronary heart disease (CHD) risk of asymptomatic persons. METHODS Systematic reviews were conducted of literature since 1996 on 9 proposed nontraditional markers of CHD risk: high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, ankle-brachial index, leukocyte count, fasting blood glucose, periodontal disease, carotid intima-media thickness, coronary artery calcification score on electron-beam computed tomography, homocysteine, and lipoprotein(a). The reviews followed a hierarchical approach aimed at determining which factors could practically and definitively reassign persons assessed as intermediate-risk according to their Framingham score to either a high-risk or low-risk strata, and thereby improve outcomes by means of aggressive risk-factor modification in those newly assigned to the high-risk stratum. RECOMMENDATION The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of using the nontraditional risk factors studied to screen asymptomatic men and women with no history of CHD to prevent CHD events. (I statement).

Screening for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease using spirometry: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement.

DESCRIPTION New U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation about screening for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) using spirometry. METHODS The USPSTF weighed the benefits (prevention of > or =1 exacerbation and improvement in respiratory-related health status measures) and harms (time and effort required by both patients and the health care system, false-positive screening tests, and adverse effects of subsequent unnecessary therapy) of COPD screening identified in the accompanying review of the evidence. The USPSTF did not consider the financial costs of spirometry testing or COPD therapies. RECOMMENDATION Do not screen adults for COPD using spirometry. (Grade D recommendation).

Screening for Lipid Disorders in Children: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement

The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) concludes that the evidence is insufficient to recommend for or against routine screening for lipid disorders in infants, children, adolescents, or young adults (up to age 20) (I recommendation). ### Importance There is good evidence that children with lipid disorders (dyslipidemia) are at risk for becoming adults with lipid disorders. ### Detection For children with familial dyslipidemia, the group most likely to benefit from screening, use of family history in screening may be inaccurate because of variability of definitions and unreliability of information. Serum lipid levels are accurate screening tests for childhood dyslipidemia, although many children with multifactorial types of dyslipidemia would have normal lipid levels in adulthood. Fifty percent of children and adolescents with dyslipidemia will have dyslipidemia as adults. ### Benefits of Detection and Early Treatment* Trials of statin drugs in children with monogenic dyslipidemia (defined below in “Clinical Considerations”) indicate improved total cholesterol (TC), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) measures. For children with multifactorial types of dyslipidemia, there is no evidence that diet or exercise interventions in childhood lead to improved lipid profiles or better health outcomes in adulthood. ### Harms of Detection and Early Treatment Potential harms of screening may include labeling of children whose dyslipidemia would not persist into adulthood or cause health problems, although evidence is lacking. Adverse effects from lipid-lowering medications and low-fat diets, including potential long-term harms, have been inadequately evaluated in children. ### USPSTF Assessment The USPSTF was unable to determine the balance between potential benefits and harms for routinely screening children and adolescents for dyslipidemia. Address correspondence to Ned Calonge, MD, MPH, Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, 4300 Cherry Creek Dr S, Denver, CO 80246. E-mail: ned.calonge{at}state.co.us

Behavioral counseling to prevent sexually transmitted infections: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement.

DESCRIPTION New U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendations about behavioral counseling of adolescents and adults to prevent sexually transmitted infections (STIs). METHODS The USPSTF reviewed the evidence on the benefits and harms of counseling. The review included studies evaluating behavioral counseling interventions conducted in primary settings, those judged feasible in primary care, and those to which patients might be referred from primary care. RECOMMENDATIONS The USPSTF recommends high-intensity behavioral counseling for all sexually active adolescents and for adults at increased risk for STIs. (B recommendation) Current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of behavioral counseling to prevent STIs in non-sexually active adolescents and in adults not at increased risk for STIs. (I statement).

Primary care interventions to promote breastfeeding: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement.

DESCRIPTION Update of a 2003 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation on counseling to promote breastfeeding. METHODS The USPSTF evaluated the results of a systematic review, conducted by the Tufts-New England Medical Center Evidence-based Practice Center, of literature published since January 2007 on primary care-initiated, -conducted, or -referable activities to promote and support breastfeeding. RECOMMENDATION The USPSTF recommends interventions during pregnancy and after birth to promote and support breastfeeding (Grade B recommendation).

Screening for speech and language delay in preschool children: Recommendation statement US Preventive Services Task Force

The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) concludes that the evidence is insufficient to recommend for or against routine use of brief, formal screening instruments in primary care to detect speech and language delay in children up to 5 years of age (I recommendation; see Appendix 1). Speech and language delay affects 5% to 8% of preschool children, often persists into the school years, and may be associated with lowered school performance and psychosocial problems. The USPSTF found insufficient evidence that brief, formal screening instruments that are suitable for use in primary care for assessing speech and language development can accurately identify children who would benefit from further evaluation and intervention. Fair evidence suggests that interventions can improve the results of short-term assessments of speech and language skills; however, no studies have assessed long-term outcomes. Furthermore, no studies have assessed any additional benefits that may be gained by treating children who are identified through brief, formal screening who would not be identified by addressing clinical or parental concerns. No studies have addressed the potential harms of screening or interventions for speech and language delays, such as labeling, parental anxiety, or unnecessary evaluation and intervention. Thus, the USPSTF could not determine the balance of benefits and harms of using brief, formal screening instruments to screen for speech and language delay in the primary care setting. Address correspondence to Ned Calonge, MD, MPH, US Preventive Services Task Force, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, 540 Gaither Rd, Rockville, MD 20850. E-mail: uspstf{at}ahrq.gov

Design of a cluster-randomized controlled trial of a diabetes prevention program within African–American churches: The Fit Body and Soul study

Evidence from varied community settings has shown that the Group Lifestyle Balance (GLB) Program and other adaptations of the Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP) intervention are effective in lowering diabetes risk. Most DPP data originated from studies of pre-diabetic whites, with only sparse evidence of the effect of DPP in African Americans (AAs) in community settings. This paper describes the design, methods, baseline characteristics and cost effective measures, of a single-blinded, cluster-randomized trial of a faith-based adaptation of the GLB program, Fit Body and Soul (FBAS). The major aims are to test efficacy and cost utility of FBAS in twenty AA churches. Randomization occurred at the church level and 604 AA overweight/obese (BMI≥25kg/m(2)) adults with fasting plasma glucose range from normal to pre-diabetic received either FBAS or a health-education comparison program. FBAS is a group-based, multi-level intervention delivered by trained church health advisors (health professionals from within the church), with the goal of ≥7% weight loss, achieved through increasing physical activity, healthy eating and behavior modification. The primary outcome is weight change at 12weeks post intervention. Secondary outcomes include hemoglobin A1C, fasting plasma glucose, waist circumference, blood pressure, physical activity level, quality of life measures, and cost-effectiveness. FBAS is the largest known cohort of AAs enrolled in a faith-based DPP translation. Reliance on health professionals from within the church for program implementation and the cost analysis are unique aspects of this trial. The design provides a model for faith-based DPPs and holds promise for program sustainability and widespread dissemination.