Search

OBJECTIVES: We have shown that, in a randomized trial comparing adherence to different colorectal cancer (CRC) screening strategies, participants assigned to either fecal occult blood testing (FOBT) or given a choice between FOBT and colonoscopy had significantly higher adherence than those assigned to colonoscopy during the first year. However, how adherence to screening changes over time is unknown. METHODS: In this trial, 997 participants were cluster randomized to one of the three screening strategies: (i) FOBT, (ii) colonoscopy, or (iii) a choice between FOBT and colonoscopy. Research assistants helped participants to complete testing only in the first year. Adherence to screening was defined as completion of three FOBT cards in each of 3 years after enrollment or completion of colonoscopy within the first year of enrollment. The primary outcome was adherence to assigned strategy over 3 years. Additional outcomes included identification of sociodemographic factors associated with adherence. RESULTS: Participants assigned to annual FOBT completed screening at a significantly lower rate over 3 years (14%) than those assigned to colonoscopy (38%, P

In this article, the American College of Physicians updates its 2017 recommendations on pharmacologic treatment of primary osteoporosis or low bone mass to prevent fractures in adults. These updated guidelines examine new evidence comparing therapies among all at-risk populations, including men. Description: This guideline updates the 2017 American College of Physicians (ACP) recommendations on pharmacologic treatment of primary osteoporosis or low bone mass to prevent fractures in adults. Methods: The ACP Clinical Guidelines Committee based these recommendations on an updated systematic review of evidence and graded them using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) system. Audience and Patient Population: The audience for this guideline includes all clinicians. The patient population includes adults with primary osteoporosis or low bone mass. Recommendation 1a: ACP recommends that clinicians use bisphosphonates for initial pharmacologic treatment to reduce the risk of fractures in postmenopausal females diagnosed with primary osteoporosis (strong recommendation; high-certainty evidence). Recommendation 1b: ACP suggests that clinicians use bisphosphonates for initial pharmacologic treatment to reduce the risk of fractures in males diagnosed with primary osteoporosis (conditional recommendation; low-certainty evidence). Recommendation 2a: ACP suggests that clinicians use the RANK ligand inhibitor (denosumab) as a second-line pharmacologic treatment to reduce the risk of fractures in postmenopausal females diagnosed with primary osteoporosis who have contraindications to or experience adverse effects of bisphosphonates (conditional recommendation; moderate-certainty evidence). Recommendation 2b: ACP suggests that clinicians use the RANK ligand inhibitor (denosumab) as a second-line pharmacologic treatment to reduce the risk of fractures in males diagnosed with primary osteoporosis who have contraindications to or experience adverse effects of bisphosphonates (conditional recommendation; low-certainty evidence). Recommendation 3: ACP suggests that clinicians use the sclerostin inhibitor (romosozumab, moderate-certainty evidence) or recombinant PTH (teriparatide, low-certainty evidence), followed by a bisphosphonate, to reduce the risk of fractures only in females with primary osteoporosis with very high risk of fracture (conditional recommendation). Recommendation 4: ACP suggests that clinicians take an individualized approach regarding whether to start pharmacologic treatment with a bisphosphonate in females over the age of 65 with low bone mass (osteopenia) to reduce the risk of fractures (conditional recommendation; low-certainty evidence). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Byline: Michael L. Volk, MD (Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, VA Health Services Research and Development Center for Practice Management and Outcomes Research, VA Ann [...]

A study compares the increases in spending on medical care and the gains in life expectancy in the United States from 1960 till 2000. It is concluded that the increase in medical care expenses since 1960 are of reasonable value, although the medical expenses since 1980 are associated with a high cost per year of life gained.

Description: The American College of Physicians (ACP) developed this guideline to provide clinical recommendations on the diagnosis and management of acute left-sided colonic diverticulitis in adults. This guideline is based on current best available evidence about benefits and harms, taken in the context of costs and patient values and preferences.Methods: The ACP Clinical Guidelines Committee (CGC) developed this guideline based on a systematic review on the use of computed tomography (CT) for the diagnosis of acute left-sided colonic diverticulitis and on management via hospitalization, antibiotic use, and interventional percutaneous abscess drainage. The systematic review evaluated outcomes that the CGC rated as critical or important. This guideline was developed using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) methodology.Target Audience and Patient Population: The target audience is all clinicians, and the target patient population is adults with suspected or known acute left-sided colonic diverticulitis.Recommendation1: ACP suggests that clinicians use abdominal CT imaging when there is diagnostic uncertainty in a patient with suspected acute left-sided colonic diverticulitis (conditional recommendation; low-certainty evidence).Recommendation2: ACP suggests that clinicians manage most patients with acute uncomplicated left-sided colonic diverticulitis in an outpatient setting (conditional recommendation; low-certainty evidence).Recommendation3: ACP suggests that clinicians initially manage select patients with acute uncomplicated left-sided colonic diverticulitis without antibiotics (conditional recommendation; low-certainty evidence). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Description: The American College of Physicians (ACP) developed this guideline to provide clinical recommendations on the role of colonoscopy for diagnostic evaluation of colorectal cancer (CRC) after a presumed diagnosis of acute left-sided colonic diverticulitis and on the role of pharmacologic, nonpharmacologic, and elective surgical interventions to prevent recurrence after initial treatment of acute complicated and uncomplicated left-sided colonic diverticulitis. This guideline is based on the current best available evidence about benefits and harms, taken in the context of costs and patient values and preferences.Methods: The ACP Clinical Guidelines Committee (CGC) based these recommendations on a systematic review on the role of colonoscopy after acute left-sided colonic diverticulitis and pharmacologic, nonpharmacologic, and elective surgical interventions after initial treatment. The systematic review evaluated outcomes rated by the CGC as critical or important. This guideline was developed using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) method.Target Audience and Patient Population: The target audience is all clinicians, and the target patient population is adults with recent episodes of acute left-sided colonic diverticulitis.Recommendation1: ACP suggests that clinicians refer patients for a colonoscopy after an initial episode of complicated left-sided colonic diverticulitis in patients who have not had recent colonoscopy (conditional recommendation; low-certainty evidence).Recommendation2: ACP recommends against clinicians using mesalamine to prevent recurrent diverticulitis (strong recommendation; high-certainty evidence).Recommendation3: ACP suggests that clinicians discuss elective surgery to prevent recurrent diverticulitis after initial treatment in patients who have either uncomplicated diverticulitis that is persistent or recurs frequently or complicated diverticulitis (conditional recommendation; low-certainty evidence). The informed decision whether or not to undergo surgery should be personalized based on a discussion of potential benefits, harms, costs, and patient's preferences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives. Little is known regarding the amount of time spent by unpaid caregivers providing help to elderly individuals for disabilities associated with diabetes mellitus (DM). We sought to obtain nationally representative estimates of the time, and associated cost, of informal caregiving provided to elderly individuals with diabetes, and to determine the complications of DM that contribute most significantly to the subsequent need for informal care. Methods. We estimated multivariable regression models using data from the 1993 Asset and Health Dynamics Among the Oldest Old Study, a nationally representative survey of people aged 70 or older (N = 7,443), to determine the weekly hours of informal caregiving and imputed cost of caregiver time for community-dwelling elderly individuals with and without a diagnosis of DM. Results. Those without DM received an average of 6.1 hr per week of informal care, those with DM taking no medications received 10.5 hr, those with DM taking oral medications received 10.1 hr, and those with DM taking insulin received 14.4 hr of care (p < .01). Disabilities related to heart disease, stroke, and visual impairment were important predictors of diabetes-related informal care. The total cost of informal caregiving for elderly individuals with diabetes in the United States was between $3 and $6 billion per year, similar to previous estimates of the annual paid long-term care costs attributable to DM. Discussion. Diabetes imposes a substantial burden on elderly individuals, their families, and society, both through increased rates of disability and the significant time that informal caregivers must spend helping address the associated functional limitations. Future evaluations of the costs of diabetes, and the cost-effectiveness of diabetes interventions, should consider the significant informal caregiving costs associated with the disease.