Search

Background: The European Society of Cardiology guidelines recommend (Class IA) single-time-point screening for atrial fibrillation (AF) using pulse palpation. The role of pulse palpation for AF detection has not been validated against electrocardiogram (ECG) recordings. We aimed to study the validity of AF screening using self-pulse palpation compared with an ECG recording conducted at the same time using a handheld ECG 3 times a day for 2 weeks., Methods and Findings: In this cross-sectional screening study, patients 65 years of age and older attending 4 primary care centers (PCCs) outside Stockholm County were invited to take part in AF screening from July 2017 to December 2018. Patients were included irrespective of their reason for visiting the PCC. Handheld intermittent ECGs 3 times per day were offered to patients without AF for a period of 2 weeks, and patients were instructed in how to take their own pulse at the same time. A total of 1,010 patients (mean age 73 years, 61% female, with an average CHA2DS2-VASc score 2.9) participated in the study, and 27 (2.7%, 95% CI 1.8%-3.9%) new cases of AF were detected. Anticoagulants (ACs) could be initiated in 26 (96%, 95% CI 81%-100%) of these cases. A total of 53,782 simultaneous ECG recordings and pulse measurements were registered. AF was verified in 311 ECG recordings, of which the pulse was palpated as irregular in 77 recordings (25%, 95% CI 20%-30% sensitivity per measurement occasion). Of the 27 AF cases, 15 cases felt an irregular pulse on at least one occasion (56%, 95% CI 35%-75% sensitivity per individual). 187 individuals without AF felt an irregular pulse on at least one occasion. The specificity per measurement occasion and per individual was (98%, 95% CI 98%-98%) and (81%, 95% CI 78%-83%), respectively., Conclusions: AF screening using self-pulse palpation 3 times daily for 2 weeks has lower sensitivity compared with simultaneous intermittent ECG. Thus, it may be better to screen for AF using intermittent ECG without stepwise screening using pulse palpation. A limitation of this model could be the reduced availability of handheld ECG recorders in primary care centers., Competing Interests: I have read the journal's policy, and the authors of this manuscript have the following competing interests: MR has received research grants, lecture and consulting honoraria from the following sources: Abbott, Carl Bennett AB, Bristol Myers Squibb, Medtronic, MSD, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, and Zenicor. FA has received lecture fees from Bristol-Myers-Squibb, Pfizer, Boehringer-Ingelheim, and Bayer. All other authors declared no conflict of interest.

Background: Atrial fibrillation (AF), the most common arrhythmia in clinical practice, is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality. Screening for AF in asymptomatic patients has been proposed as a way of reducing the burden of the disease by detecting people who would benefit from prophylactic anticoagulation therapy before the onset of symptoms. However, for screening to be an effective intervention, it must improve the detection of AF and provide benefit for those detected earlier as a result of screening., Objectives: This review aims to answer the following questions.Does systematic screening increase the detection of AF compared with routine practice? Which combination of screening population, strategy and test is most effective for detecting AF compared with routine practice? What safety issues and adverse events may be associated with individual screening programmes? How acceptable is the intervention to the target population? What costs are associated with systematic screening for AF?, Search Methods: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (Ovid) and EMBASE (Ovid) up to 11 November 2015. We searched other relevant research databases, trials registries and websites up to December 2015. We also searched reference lists of identified studies for potentially relevant studies, and we contacted corresponding authors for information about additional published or unpublished studies that may be relevant. We applied no language restrictions., Selection Criteria: Randomised controlled trials comparing screening for AF with routine practice in people 40 years of age and older were eligible. Two review authors (PM and CT) independently selected trials for inclusion., Data Collection and Analysis: Two review authors (PM and CT) independently assessed risk of bias and extracted data. We used odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to present results for the primary outcome, which is a dichotomous variable. As we identified only one study for inclusion, we performed no meta-analysis. We used the GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation Working Group) method to assess the quality of the evidence and GRADEPro to create a 'Summary of findings' table., Main Results: One cluster-randomised controlled trial met the inclusion criteria for this review. This study compared systematic screening (by invitation to have an electrocardiogram (ECG)) and opportunistic screening (pulse palpation during a general practitioner (GP) consultation for any reason, followed by an ECG if pulse was irregular) versus routine practice (normal case finding on the basis of clinical presentation) in people 65 years of age or older.Results show that both systematic screening and opportunistic screening of people over 65 years of age are more effective than routine practice (OR 1.57, 95% CI 1.08 to 2.26; and OR 1.58, 95% CI 1.10 to 2.29, respectively; both moderate-quality evidence). We found no difference in the effectiveness of systematic screening and opportunistic screening (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.37; low-quality evidence). A subgroup analysis found that systematic screening and opportunistic screening were more effective in men (OR 2.68, 95% CI 1.51 to 4.76; and OR 2.33, 95% CI 1.29 to 4.19, respectively) than in women (OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.62; and OR 1.2, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.93, respectively). No adverse events associated with screening were reported.The incremental cost per additional case detected by opportunistic screening was GBP 337, compared with GBP 1514 for systematic screening. All cost estimates were based on data from the single included trial, which was conducted in the UK between 2001 and 2003., Authors' Conclusions: Evidence suggests that systematic screening and opportunistic screening for AF increase the rate of detection of new cases compared with routine practice. Although these approaches have comparable effects on the overall AF diagnosis rate, the cost of systematic screening is significantly greater than the cost of opportunistic screening from the perspective of the health service provider. Few studies have investigated effects of screening in other health systems and in younger age groups; therefore, caution needs to be exercised in relation to transferability of these results beyond the setting and population in which the included study was conducted.Additional research is needed to examine the effectiveness of alternative screening strategies and to investigate the effects of the intervention on risk of stroke for screened versus non-screened populations.

Atrial fibrillation (AF) may occur in the absence of identifiable causes, co-morbidities or structural cardiac disease (lone AF). Silent AF is common and patients may have a completely asymptomatic arrhythmia or may experience both symptomatic and asymptomatic AF episodes. It has been estimated that among patients with recognized AF, one third has no appreciable symptoms. In contemporary clinical practice, AF remains largely underdiagnosed and 25% of patients with AF-associated cardioembolic stroke have not been previously diagnosed with AF. The strategies for AF screening include opportunistic and systematic screening. Several methods for AF detection are nowadays available: from very simple (pulse palpation) to more advanced technologies proposed for ambulatory external monitoring of variable time duration. In patients previously implanted with cardiac electrical devices with an atrial lead, according to current clinical indications, the ability to continuously detect AF and to monitor its evolution is magnified, and AF burden can be precisely measured and monitored along with time. Similar information on AF burden can be also obtained by implantation of subcutaneous cardiac monitors that rely on the analysis of consecutive RR intervals for the diagnosis of AF. The prognosis is generally favorable for patients presenting with lone AF, but adverse outcomes, including stroke and thromboembolic events may occur at long term, in association with aging, or the development of underlying heart disease, or progression from paroxysmal to permanent AF. In this respect, the role of new technologies and diagnostic tools for AF detection and monitoring should be fully defined.

Background: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common arrhythmia in clinical practice and is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality. Screening for AF in asymptomatic patients has been proposed as a way of reducing the burden of the disease by detecting people who would benefit from prophylactic anticoagulation therapy prior to the onset of symptoms. However, for screening to be an effective intervention it must improve the detection of AF and provide benefit for those who are detected earlier as a result of screening., Objectives: The primary objective of this review was to examine whether screening programmes increase the detection of new cases of AF compared to routine practice. The secondary objectives were to identify which combination of screening strategy and patient population is most effective, as well as assessing any safety issues associated with screening, its acceptability within the target population and the costs involved., Search Methods: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) on The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE (Ovid) and EMBASE (Ovid) up to March 2012. Other relevant research databases, trials registries and websites were searched up to June 2012. Reference lists of identified studies were also searched for potentially relevant studies and we contacted corresponding authors for information about additional published or unpublished studies that may be relevant. No language restrictions were applied., Selection Criteria: Randomised controlled trials, controlled before and after studies and interrupted time series studies comparing screening for AF with routine practice in people aged 40 years and over were eligible. Two authors (PM, CT or MF) independently selected the trials for inclusion., Data Collection and Analysis: Assessment of risk of bias and data extraction were performed independently by two authors (PM, CT). Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used to present the results for the primary outcome, which is a dichotomous variable. Since only one included study was identified, no meta-analysis was performed., Main Results: One cluster randomised controlled trial met the inclusion criteria for this review. This study compared systematic screening (by invitation to have an electrocardiogram (ECG)) and opportunistic screening (pulse palpation during a general practitioner (GP) consultation for any reason followed by an ECG if pulse was irregular) to routine practice (normal case finding on the basis of clinical presentation) in people aged 65 years or older. The risk of bias in the included study was judged to be low.Both systematic and opportunistic screening of people over the age of 65 years are more effective than routine practice (OR 1.57, 95% CI 1.08 to 2.26 and OR 1.58, 95% CI 1.10 to 2.29, respectively). The number needed to screen in order to detect one additional case compared to routine practice was 172 (95% CI 94 to 927) for systematic screening and 167 (95% CI 92 to 806) for opportunistic screening. Both systematic and opportunistic screening were more effective in men (OR 2.68, 95% CI 1.51 to 4.76 and OR 2.33, 95% CI 1.29 to 4.19, respectively) than in women (OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.62 and OR 1.2, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.93, respectively). No data on the effectiveness of screening in different ethnic or socioeconomic groups were available. There were insufficient data to compare the effectiveness of screening programmes in different healthcare settings.Systematic screening was associated with a better overall uptake rate than opportunistic screening (53% versus 46%) except in the ≥ 75 years age group where uptake rates were similar (43% versus 42%). In both screening programmes men were more likely to participate than women (57% versus 50% in systematic screening, 49% versus 41% in opportunistic screening) and younger people (65 to 74 years) were more likely to participate than people aged 75 years and over (61% versus 43% systematic, 49% versus 42% opportunistic). No adverse events associated with screening were reported.The incremental cost per additional case detected by opportunistic screening was GBP 337, compared to GBP 1514 for systematic screening. All cost estimates were based on data from the single included trial, which was conducted in the UK between 2001 and 2003., Authors' Conclusions: Systematic and opportunistic screening for AF increase the rate of detection of new cases compared with routine practice. While both approaches have a comparable effect on the overall AF diagnosis rate, the cost of systematic screening is significantly more than that of opportunistic screening from the perspective of the health service provider. The lack of studies investigating the effect of screening in other health systems and younger age groups means that caution needs to be exercised in relation to the transferability of these results beyond the setting and population in which the included study was conducted.Additional research is needed to examine the effectiveness of alternative screening strategies and to investigate the effect of the intervention on the risk of stroke for screened versus non-screened populations.

Background: Although prostate cancer screening by measurement of serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and digital rectal examination (DRE) is common in clinical practice, the impact of such screening on prostate cancer-specific mortality remains uncertain., Methods: Data from a population-based case-control study in King County, Washington, among men aged 50-64 years (706 cases, 645 controls) were used to examine the relationships between PSA and DRE screening and fatal prostate cancer and other-cause mortality. Incident cases were diagnosed in 1993-1996, identified via the Seattle-Puget Sound SEER cancer registry and followed for vital status through 1 June 2007. Controls were ascertained by random digit dialing and frequency age-matched to cases. The screening variable used in this analysis was self-reported receipt of one or more PSA and/or DRE tests performed as part of a routine checkup in the five-year period before diagnosis or reference date., Results: A smaller proportion of men with fatal prostate cancer had one or more PSA and/or DRE screening tests compared to controls, resulting in an adjusted odds ratios (OR) of 0.38 (95% CI 0.19-0.77). There was no association, however, between PSA and/or DRE screening and other-cause mortality (OR = 1.02; 95% CI 0.51-2.02)., Conclusions: Results of this study suggest a reduction in prostate cancer-specific mortality associated with PSA and/or DRE screening in middle-aged men. Findings should be interpreted cautiously, however, as results are based on observational data. Further, the study was not able to separate the relative efficacy of PSA versus DRE screening.

The present study investigated the histological prevalence of subclinical prostatic disease in a canine mixed-breed population. The reliability of digital rectal examination (DRE) as a screening test for subclinical prostatic disease was also evaluated. DRE was performed on 500 male dogs (age range 1 to 21 years) before the dogs died of diseases not related to the prostate. Necropsies of these dogs were performed and prostates were collected for histological evaluation. The overall prevalence of subclinical prostatic disease was 75.6%. The most prevalent subclinical prostatic diseases were benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) (44.8%), prostatitis (23.6%) and prostatic neoplasia (3.6%). The prevalence of subclinical BPH and prostatic neoplasia increased with age but that of prostatitis was not influenced by age. The prevalence of subclinical BPH and prostatitis were higher in intact than castrated dogs. DRE had a high specificity (75%) and positive predictive value (87%), but a low sensitivity (53%) and negative predictive value (34%).

Background: The potential role of prostate cancer screening in reducing mortality is uncertain. To examine whether screening with the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test or digital rectal examination is associated with reduced prostate cancer mortality, we conducted a population-based case-control study in 4 health maintenance organizations., Methods: Cases were 769 health plan members who died because of prostate adenocarcinoma during the years 1997-2001. We randomly selected 929 controls from the health plan membership and matched them to cases on health plan, age, race, and membership history. Medical records were used to document all screening tests in the 10 years before and including the date on which prostate cancer was first suspected., Results: Among white participants, 62% of cases and 69% of controls had a least 1 screening PSA test or digital rectal examination (odds ratio = 0.73; 95% confidence interval = 0.55-0.97). The corresponding proportions for blacks were 59% and 61% (1.0; 0.59-1.4). Most screening tests were digital rectal examinations; therefore, in the subgroup with no history of PSA screening, the association between digital rectal screening and prostate cancer mortality was similar to the overall association (0.65 [0.48-0.88] among whites; 0.86 [0.53-1.4] among blacks). Very few men received screening PSA without screening digital rectal examination (6% of cases and 7% of controls among whites)., Conclusions: Digital rectal screening was associated with a reduced risk of death due to prostate cancer in our population. Because of several data limitations, this study could not accurately estimate the effect of PSA screening separate from digital rectal examination.

Breast cancer is commonly diagnosed at late stages in countries with limited resources. Efforts aimed at early detection can reduce the stage at diagnosis, potentially improving the odds of survival and cure, and enabling simpler and more cost-effective treatment. Early detection of breast cancer entails both early diagnosis in symptomatic women and screening in asymptomatic women. Key prerequisites for early detection are ensuring that women are supported in seeking care and that they have access to appropriate, affordable diagnostic tests and treatment. We therefore propose the following sequential action plan: 1) promote the empowerment of women to obtain health care, 2) develop infrastructure for the diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer, 3) begin early detection efforts through breast cancer education and awareness, and 4) when resources permit, expand early detection efforts to include mammographic screening. Public education and awareness can promote earlier diagnosis, and these goals can be achieved in simple and cost-effective ways, such as dissemination of messages through mass media. All women have the right to education about breast cancer, but it must be culturally appropriate and targeted and tailored to the specific population. When resources become available for screening, they should be invested in screening mammography, as it is the only modality that has thus far been shown to reduce breast cancer mortality. Clinical breast examination (CBE) and breast self-examination (BSE) are important components of routine breast care in countries with access to mammography and are important for general breast health education in all countries. However, the evidence does not support the use of CBE and BSE as lifesaving screening methods at this time, recognizing that data from countries with very limited resource are lacking. When widespread screening is not possible, screening can begin in an institution, city, or region, or by targeting screening to women at highest risk. A pilot program can be an ideal way to define the best approach to screening. To succeed, early detection efforts must include the health care providers with whom women have contact; these providers may be physicians, nurses, midwives, traditional healers, or others. There are tremendous differences among and within countries, and a program to promote early detection must be tailored to each country's unique situation.

Clinical breast examination (CBE) refers to the traditional technique of physical examination of the breast by a health care provider. The examination comprises both systematic inspection and palpation of the nipple, breast, and lymph-draining regions in the axillae and supraclavicular and infraclavicular fossae. CBE is the least studied of the modalities for breast cancer screening. Whereas recommendations for mammography and breast self-examination (BSE) can be based on the findings of randomized screening trials, there have been no randomized trials of CBE alone on which to base recommendations. However, there is considerable indirect evidence from studies that CBE can be recommended as a method for detecting breast cancer for public health benefit. The examination by itself is inexpensive, as no special equipment is required. It is easy to perform, it can be readily taught to health care providers, and it can be offered ubiquitously. CBE should be part of any program for early detection of breast cancer worldwide, provided that follow-up medical and oncology care is available. Physicians and women should be informed about the advantages and disadvantages of this modality, especially as there are no data from randomized trials about the contribution of CBE in detecting breast cancer at an early stage and the absolute benefit of this modality in reducing breast cancer mortality and improving quality of life. Further research on CBE should be promoted, especially in countries with limited resources, to evaluate its efficacy and effectiveness in relation to age, ethnicity, and race.

Objectives: As the benefit of clinical breast examination (CBE) over that of screening mammography alone in reducing breast cancer mortality is uncertain, it is informative to monitor its contribution to interim measures of effectiveness of a screening programme. Here, the contribution of CBE to screening mammography in the early detection of breast cancer was evaluated., Setting: Four Canadian organised breast cancer screening programmes., Methods: Women aged 50-69 receiving dual screening (CBE and mammography) (n = 300,303) between 1996 and 1998 were followed up between screen and diagnosis. Outcomes assessed by mode of detection (CBE alone, mammography alone, or both CBE and mammography) included referral rate, positive predictive value, pathological features of tumours (size, nodal status, morphology), and cancer detection rates overall and for small cancers (< or = 10 mm or node-negative). Heterogeneity in findings across programmes was also assessed., Results: On first versus subsequent screen, CBE alone resulted in 28.5-36.7% of referrals, and 4.6-5.9% of cancers compared with 52.6-60.1% of referrals and 60.0-64.3% of cancers for mammography alone. Among cancers detected by CBE, 83.6-88.6% were also detected by mammography, whereas for mammographically detected cancers only 31.7-37.2% were also detected by CBE. On average, CBE increased the rate of detection of small invasive cancers by 2-6% over rates if mammography was the sole detection method. Without CBE, programmes would be missing three cancers for every 10,000 screens and 3-10 small invasive cancers in every 100,000 screens., Conclusions: Inclusion of CBE in an organised programme contributes minimally to early detection.

According to the frequency of appearance, prostatic carcinoma is said to be the fourth new growth tumour in men in Poland. Course of prostatic cancer in early period is symptomless therefore the number of death because of the prostatic cancer is still being increased. The improvement of this situation in our country might be done by introducing the mass, screening studies. Since 1.09.2000 to 31.12.2000 a preventive programme of diagnosis prostatic gland diseases has been performed by the Department of Pathophysiology Medical College Jagiellonian University in Cracow. 8089 men 50-69 years old (mean 60.2 +/- 5.83) were investigated. In the first step, digital per rectum examination (DRE), serum PSA level determination, urine test and IPSS questionnaire were carried out. The abnormal results (an increase of PSA above 4 ng/ml and/or or a palpable nodule in the per rectum examination) allowed to select 284 patients, who in the second stage underwent transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) and the biopsy. Presence of early prostatic carcinoma has been diagnosed and confirmed in 28 patients. The possibly tentative diagnosis of cancer was considered in 1383 patients. In the light of our results we must underline that these screening procedures seems to be important, especially respecting to the fact of possibility early diagnosis of prostatic cancer.

Objective: The large increase in the incidence of prostate cancer is largely due to testing of serum levels of prostate-specific antigen (PSA). Little is known about how PSA testing is used in clinical practice outside of screening programmes. Essentially, PSA can be used in the health check-ups of men without symptoms as a form of non-systematic screening or in the work-up of symptomatic patients. The aim of this study was to investigate the cause of initiating a work-up leading to a diagnosis of prostate cancer, with emphasis on T1c tumours., Material and Methods: Data on the cause of initiation of work-up leading to a diagnosis of prostate cancer were retrieved from the National Prostate Cancer Registry for 6361 incident cases in tumour category T1c and local stages T2, T3 and T4 registered in Sweden in 2000., Results: For 1496 cases in tumour category T1c (non-palpable tumours detected during work-up of elevated PSA), the cause of PSA testing was health check-ups in 32% of cases, work-up of symptoms suspected to emanate from the prostate in 51% and other causes/not reported in 17%. For all stages combined, the cause of initiation of the diagnostic work-up was health check-ups in 18% of cases, symptoms in 68% and other causes/not reported in 14%., Conclusion: Non-systematic screening using PSA testing has been introduced in Sweden. However, prostate cancer is still most commonly diagnosed during the work-up of symptomatic patients.

Background: To date, there have been no published guidelines, either locally or nationally, to advise nurse practitioners on training and assessment in breast and axillary examination. This study is a prospective audit of the clinical competence of a nurse practitioner in breast and axillary clinical examination, following an 18-month period of clinical training and supervision by two consultant breast surgeons., Conclusion: The results of the audit show that the nurse achieved a high level of concordance with the findings of consultant breast surgeons. This training and audit process could be incorporated into the training and assessment of future nurse practitioners in this specialist area.

Objectives: The evaluation of the screening procedures for prostate cancer (PCa) was a part of the protocol of the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC), section Rotterdam, The Netherlands. We sought to establish an improved strategy for the early detection of PCa using a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) cutoff of 3.0 ng/mL or greater as the only indication for prostate biopsy with omission of the digital rectal examination (DRE)., Methods: In June 1996, 8612 men, 55 to 74 years old, were randomized to screening and were screened within the ERSPC Rotterdam by a PSA level of 4.0 ng/mL or greater or positive DRE or transrectal ultrasound findings as the indication for biopsy. Four hundred thirty men had PCa. Those treated by radical prostatectomy provided the tumor characteristics considered essential for a change in the screening strategies. Various options were evaluated and predictions made by logistic regression analyses. The protocol change was implemented in February 1997. Another 7943 men were screened according to the new protocol (PSA 3.0 ng/mL or greater). The resulting data were used to compare the two protocols., Results: The detection rate (proportion of PCa in those screened) turned out to be very similar, with rates of 5.0 and 4.7 at a PSA cutoff of 4.0 ng/mL or greater and 3.0 ng/mL or greater, respectively. This was due to a much larger number of cases of PCa per biopsy in the PSA range of 3 to 3.9 ng/mL than expected. The positive predictive value of the PSA range 3.0 to 3.9 ng/mL in the two protocols was 18.0% and 6.4%, respectively. Tumor characteristics were studied on radical prostatectomy specimens from the original protocol. PCa detected with the new screening regimen had a similar distribution of Gleason scores but a larger proportion of confined disease. Tumor volumes were smaller in patients with PSA levels of less than 2.9 ng/mL; the proportion of "minimal disease" in that group was 50% compared with 28% in the group with a PSA level between 3.0 and 3.9 ng/mL., Conclusions: Lowering the biopsy indication to a PSA cutoff of 3.0 ng/mL or greater without a DRE improved the positive predictive value from 18.2% to 24.3%. The number of biopsies necessary to detect 1 case of PCa accordingly changed from 5.2 to 3.4. The overall characteristics of the cases detected at that PSA cutoff differed very little from those detected with the regimen based on PSA, DRE, and transrectal ultrasound.

Objective: To evaluate the prevalence of palpable nodules or skin depigmentation as rapid indicators of onchocerciasis epidemicity in at-risk communities., Method: We examined data collected in Benue State on 11035 individuals in 32 villages to evaluate these rapid assessment methods., Results: The prevalence of palpable nodules correlates more closely with microfilarial prevalence (r=0.68, P<0.001) and community microfilarial load (r=0.64, P<0.001) than the prevalences of skin depigmentation or other potential rapid indicators. The recommended cut-off value for palpable nodules of 20% or more in males aged >20 years had a sensitivity of 94% and specificity of 50% compared to a cut-off of 40% or more for microfilarial prevalence in all ages. This would mean that in these 32 villages 17 of 18 would have been correctly identified for treatment, and a further 7 at lesser risk would have been targeted for treatment., Conclusions: Skin snipping and parasitological examination can be replaced by the simpler method of palpating onchocercal nodules to identify communities at serious risk of onchocerciasis. This has important operational benefits for onchocerciasis control programmes.

Background: The American Cancer Society-National Prostate Cancer Detection Project (ACS-NPCDP) is a multidisciplinary evaluation of early prostate cancer detection interventions. This report summarizes the experience of the investigators to date and describes the overall and relative performance of the different detection modalities studied in this project., Methods: Two thousand nine hundred ninety-nine men aged 55 to 70 years at entry who were not already under evaluation for prostate cancer were recruited to participate in up to 5 annual examinations by prostate specific antigen (PSA), digital rectal examination (DRE), and transrectal ultrasound (TRUS). In the course of 5 years of intervention, ACS-NPCDP investigators have completed 9937 examinations, recommended 1215 biopsies, and detected 203 cancers., Results: Loss to cohort follow-up was greatest in the first year. Overall, TRUS led to twice the number of recommendations for biopsy compared with DRE (8.9% versus 4.4%). Elevated PSA was observed in 13.0% of 9535 measurements performed. The overall cancer detection rate declined significantly during the five years of intervention. Detection was significantly associated with age and symptom status at entry. DRE had lower sensitivity compared with TRUS or PSA, particularly in later years of follow-up. The specificity of TRUS was lower than that for DRE. PSA was elevated in 69.2% of examinations that led to cancer detection, compared with only 10.9% when cancer was not found. PSA level, PSA density, and PSA change were all related to the presence of cancer. Less than 6% of the cancers detected in this study were clinically advanced at the time of diagnosis., Conclusions: These data quantify the yield of early cancer detection that may be expected when PSA, DRE, and TRUS are used in populations comparable to the men participating in the ACS-NPCDP. Continued follow-up and further research is needed to assess whether men receiving early prostate cancer interventions benefit as a result.

Purpose/objectives: To describe current prostate cancer screening methods and to address the controversies surrounding their use., Data Sources: Published articles, abstracts, books, and press releases; personal communication., Data Synthesis: Controversy exists about whether efforts to conduct mass screenings for prostate cancer are of value given the related costs and the inability of such screenings to distinguish between indolent and aggressive tumors. The American Cancer Society (ACS) has added prostate cancer to its "Guidelines for the Cancer-Related Checkup" but does not recommend these guidelines for mass screenings. Preliminary findings of the ACS National Prostate Cancer Detection Study have shown that digital rectal examination (DRE) and transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) have the best positive predictive value when the prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level is greater than 4 ng/ml., Conclusions: Despite concern over the rising incidence of prostate cancer, the effectiveness of DRE, PSA, and TRUS in screening for early detection of prostate cancer remains controversial., Implications for Nursing Practice: As the public becomes more aware of the controversies surrounding prostate cancer screening, nurses are finding that they play a vital role in the educational process. By understanding the abilities and deficiencies of the current screening methods, nurses can offer men concrete information about DRE, PSA, and TRUS. They can reinforce the importance of early detection for high-risk populations, as well as suggest strategies for encouraging compliance.

This study describes the accuracy of Leopold maneuvers as a screening procedure for fetal malpresentation. The frequency of fetal malpresentation ranges from 15 percent at 32 weeks to 4 percent at term. We prospectively determined fetal presentation by performing Leopold maneuvers on 150 women, followed by a fetal ultrasound examination for comparison. Experienced certified nurse-midwives performed the maneuvers with high sensitivity (88%), specificity (94%), positive predictive value (74%), and negative predictive value (97%) in a population with a 17 percent frequency of fetal malpresentation. We conclude that the maneuvers used by experienced clinicians can be effective as a screening tool for fetal malpresentation, particularly in settings where ultrasound may not be readily available.

Of 9,026 males aged 50-69 years, 1,494 were randomly selected and invited to participate in a programme including two screenings for carcinoma of the prostate by digital rectal examination performed in 1987 and 1990. The remaining 7,532 served as a control group. Of the selected persons, 78% accepted the invitation to the first screening round and 70% to the second one. Carcinoma of the prostate was suspected in 45 of 1,163 men examined at the first screening round and in 42 of 953 at the second round. Carcinoma was confirmed by fine-needle aspiration biopsy in 13 cases from the first and in 7 from the second round. In the study group, 17.4 carcinomas were diagnosed per 1,000 men and in the control group 8.6 per 1,000 men. The screening cost was 1,640 pounds per detected cancer and 2,343 pounds per detected and potentially cured cancer. Screening for carcinoma of the prostate by digital rectal examination can be organised with a high population acceptance, and at a reasonable cost. The impact of screening on mortality in prostatic cancer remains uncertain.

Breast self-examination (BSE) behavior was analyzed in 89,835 participants in the National Breast Screening Study (NBSS) of whom 64,619 were eligible for annual rescreening and 25,216 were followed by mail after a single screen exam. Among those eligible for rescreening, BSE competence scores based on seven BSE criteria significantly improved over time and correlated directly with reported BSE frequencies. Among all participants, the proportion reporting BSE frequencies of greater than or equal to 12/year increased over time from approximately 20% on entry to 50% to 64% at final screen. Similarly, reports of zero frequency diminished from 50% to 10% to 15%. Variables such as educational status, age (fifth versus sixth decades), eligibility for mammography, smoking history, and ethnic origin had negligible or no influence on BSE competence. However, women with first-degree relatives with breast cancer had significantly higher BSE scores. NBSS experience suggests that most women who enter screening programs will upgrade their BSE skills if subjected to brief episodes of repeated BSE instruction.

From May to September 1987, 221 women of over 45 years of age were examined by transvaginal ultrasound at the Department of Gynaecology (Gynaecological Hospital) of the University of Marburg. Transvaginal ultrasound proved to be significantly superior to clinical examination, since palpation had resulted in "NAD" findings in all cases. The average diameter and the volume of postmenopausal ovaries, determined by transabdominal sonographic studies, were easily confirmed by the new method. In 6% of the 221 patients, pathological findings of the ovaries were clinically "NAD". Since the usefulness of transabdominal ultrasound in screening for ovarian cancer has already been confirmed by other authors, this pilot study aims at providing an opportunity to test transvaginal ultrasound also in a large ovarian cancer screening programme by furnishing the essential basic research data. Age-adapted average ovarian sizes and significant differences in size between the right and the left ovary were used to differentiate between normal and pathological findings as well as changes in the ovarian parenchymal patterns.

A study cohort of 8214 women was formed from all participants in the Canadian National Breast Screening Study who attended their first three screens after the introduction of a structured evaluation protocol involving eight criteria for breast self-examination (BSE). Self-reported BSE frequency was collected by questionnaire at all three screens. Breast self-examination instruction preceded breast exam at each screen but BSE evaluation occurred only at the second and third screen. Reported monthly BSE frequency increased from 18% to 51% to 55% on first, second, and third screens, respectively. The proportion claiming to do no BSE fell correspondingly: 52%, 16%, and 11%. Compliance with each of the seven other BSE criteria was significantly greater at the third screen than at the second. The mean number of these criteria performed at screen 3 was 5.1 compared with 4.4 at screen 2; older women performed as well as younger. The mean number of criteria performed was associated with BSE frequency at screen 3. The authors conclude that women's BSE behavior can be altered, and that integration of BSE evaluation and instruction into routine medical exams seems feasible and potentially useful.