Search

Background Depression after acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is common and increases risks of adverse outcomes, but it remains unclear which depression features are most associated with major adverse cardiac events (MACE) and all-cause mortality (ACM). Purpose To examine whether a subtype of depression characterized by anhedonia and major depressive disorder (MDD) predicts 1-year MACE/ACM occurrence in ACS patients compared to no MDD history. We also consider other depression features in the literature as predictors. Methods Patients (N = 1,087) presenting to a hospital with ACS completed a self-report measure of current depressive symptoms in-hospital and a diagnostic interview assessing MDD within 1 week post-hospitalization. MACE/ACM events were assessed at 1-, 6-, and 12-month follow-ups. Cox regression models were used to examine the association of the anhedonic depression subtype and MDD without anhedonia with time to MACE/ACM, adjusting for sociodemographic and clinical covariates. Results There were 142 MACE/ACM events over the 12-month follow-up. The 1-year MACE/ACM in patients with anhedonic depression, compared to those with no MDD, was somewhat higher in an age-adjusted model (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.63, p = .08), but was not significant after further covariate adjustment (HR = 1.24, p = .47). Of the additional depression features, moderate-to-severe self-reported depressive symptoms significantly predicted the risk of MACE/ACM, even in covariate-adjusted models (HR = 1.72, p = .04), but the continuous measure of self-reported depressive symptoms did not. Conclusion The anhedonic depression subtype did not uniquely predict MACE/ACM as hypothesized. Moderate-to-severe levels of total self-reported depressive symptoms, however, may be associated with increased MACE/ACM risk, even after accounting for potential sociodemographic and clinical confounders.

Lay abstract Commonly, research studies seek to enroll large groups of individuals to test a new product or medication. However, the personalized trial/N-of-1 trial has a different goal. This is to focus on a single person and study their response to different treatments. Our focus group-based study of medical providers and racial and ethnic minority patients, sought to learn how personalized trials can be designed to include the life experiences and cultural considerations of members of minority populations. Participants noted factors such as the role of family, including educational programming or lifestyle changes in the trial, and the use of natural remedies (not prescribed by a physician) as specific cultural considerations. N-of-1 trials have the potential to change the way we deliver primary care and improve disparities, but we must design them to address the concerns of importance to minority populations.

OBJECTIVE Personalized trials have the potential to improve the precision of treatment selection and foster patient involvement in clinical decision making. Little is known about the attitudes of patients with multimorbidities. To address this, stakeholders designed and conducted a national survey that determined general attitudes and features of personalized trials that may increase their use among patients with multimorbidities in clinical and research practice. METHOD A multistakeholder collaboratory of patients, clinicians, scientists, methodologists, statisticians, and research disseminators designed a survey to determine the conditions, symptoms, and design attributes most applicable to personalized trials according to patients. A sample of U.S. patients with two or more prespecified personalized-trial-amenable chronic conditions completed the online survey. RESULTS Multimorbid participants (N = 501; M age = 56.1 years) showed that some conditions, symptoms or use cases for personalized trials include pain (57.6%), hypertension (38.8%), diabetes (28.8%), sleep problems (27.4%), and depression (23.0%). Overall, 82.0% of the participants with multimorbidities were interested in participating in personalized trials. The percentage that were interested varied by trial attributes, including physician involvement (86.4%), patient-driven treatment selection (88.0%), clinician blinding (59.2%), placebo treatment options (57.5%), and out-of-pocket costs (41.8%). CONCLUSION Participants with multimorbidities identified prevalent use cases that are suited to personalized trials. Participants also identified design features of such trials, including patient-driven treatment selection, active comparators, and nonblinding. This study demonstrates that eliciting input from a collaboratory and patients with multimorbidities can inform research priorities for this rapidly growing patient population and increase adoption by researchers and clinicians alike. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Impaired sleep for hospital patients is an all too common reality. Sleep disruptions due to unnecessary overnight vital sign monitoring are associated with delirium, cognitive impairment, weakened immunity, hypertension, increased stress, and mortality. It is also one of the most common complaints of hospital patients while imposing additional burdens on healthcare providers. Previous efforts to forgo overnight vital sign measurements and improve patient sleep used providers’ subjective stability assessment or utilized an expanded, thus harder to retrieve, set of vitals and laboratory results to predict overnight clinical risk. Here, we present a model that incorporates past values of a small set of vital signs and predicts overnight stability for any given patient-night. Using data obtained from a multi-hospital health system between 2012 and 2019, a recurrent deep neural network was trained and evaluated using ~2.3 million admissions and 26 million vital sign assessments. The algorithm is agnostic to patient location, condition, and demographics, and relies only on sequences of five vital sign measurements, a calculated Modified Early Warning Score, and patient age. We achieved an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.966 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.956–0.967) on the retrospective testing set, and 0.971 (95% CI 0.965–0.974) on the prospective set to predict overnight patient stability. The model enables safe avoidance of overnight monitoring for ~50% of patient-nights, while only misclassifying 2 out of 10,000 patient-nights as stable. Our approach is straightforward to deploy, only requires regularly obtained vital signs, and delivers easily actionable clinical predictions for a peaceful sleep in hospitals.

There is minimal information on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) in immunocompromised individuals. We have studied 10 patients treated at 12 adult care hospitals. Ten kidney transplant recipients tested positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) by polymerase chain reaction, and 9 were admitted. The median age was 57 (interquartile range [IQR] 47‐67), 60% were male, 40% Caucasian, and 30% Black/African American. Median time from transplant to COVID‐19 testing was 2822 days (IQR 1272‐4592). The most common symptom was fever, followed by cough, myalgia, chills, and fatigue. The most common chest X‐ray and computed tomography abnormality was multifocal patchy opacities. Three patients had no abnormal findings. Leukopenia was seen in 20% of patients, and allograft function was stable in 50% of patients. Nine patients were on tacrolimus and a mycophenolic antimetabolite, and 70% were on prednisone. Hospitalized patients had their antimetabolite agent stopped. All hospitalized patients received hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin. Three patients died (30%), and 5 (50%) developed acute kidney injury. Kidney transplant recipients infected with COVID‐19 should be monitored closely in the setting of lowered immunosuppression. Most individuals required hospitalization and presenting symptoms were similar to those of nontransplant individuals.

Background Age has been implicated as the main risk factor for COVID-19-related mortality. Our objective was to utilize administrative data to build an explanatory model accounting for geriatrics-focused indicators to predict mortality in hospitalized older adults with COVID-19. Methods Retrospective cohort study of adults age 65 and older (N = 4783) hospitalized with COVID-19 in the greater New York metropolitan area between 3/1/20-4/20/20. Data included patient demographics and clinical presentation. Stepwise logistic regression with Akaike Information Criterion minimization was used. Results The average age was 77.4 (SD = 8.4), 55.9% were male, 20.3% were African American, and 15.0% were Hispanic. In multivariable analysis, male sex (adjusted odds ration (adjOR) = 1.06, 95% CI:1.03-1.09); Asian race (adjOR = 1.08, CI:1.03-1.13); history of chronic kidney disease (adjOR = 1.05, CI:1.01-1.09) and interstitial lung disease (adjOR = 1.35, CI:1.28-1.42); low or normal body mass index (adjOR:1.03, CI:1.00-1.07); higher comorbidity index (adjOR = 1.01, CI:1.01-1.02); admission from a facility (adjOR = 1.14, CI:1.09-1.20); and mechanical ventilation (adjOR = 1.52, CI:1.43-1.62) were associated with mortality. While age was not an independent predictor of mortality, increasing age (centered at 65) interacted with hypertension (adjOR = 1.02, CI:0.98-1.07, reducing by a factor of 0.96 every 10 years); early Do-Not-Resuscitate (DNR, life-sustaining treatment preferences) (adjOR = 1.38, CI:1.22-1.57, reducing by a factor of 0.92 every 10 years); and severe illness on admission (at 65, adjOR = 1.47, CI:1.40-1.54, reducing by a factor of 0.96 every 10 years). Conclusion Our findings highlight that residence prior to admission, early DNR, and acute illness severity are important predictors of mortality in hospitalized older adults with COVID-19. Readily available administrative geriatrics-focused indicators that go beyond age can be utilized when considering prognosis.

To contribute to the national effort to combat the opioid crisis, the United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a scoping review to describe the state of evidence for the primary prevention of opioid misuse or use disorder in persons not yet prescribed opioids or not yet misusing opioids. Patnode CD et al., 2021 As found by the scoping review, sparse direct evidence focusing on primary care-relevant prevention interventions exists. The purpose of the current commentary is to describe the relevant research needed to effectively inform primary care providers and patients about how to reduce the risk for future opioid use disorder and opioid misuse and improve health outcomes in those not yet exposed to or misusing opioid medications.

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)

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.

Objective To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of screening for depression in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and no history of depression. Methods Cost-effectiveness analysis of a randomized trial enrolling 1500 patients with ACS between 2013 and 2017. Patients were randomized to no screening, screening and notifying the primary care provider (PCP), and screening, notifying the PCP, and providing enhanced depression treatment. Outcomes measured were Healthcare utilization, costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. Results 7.1% of patients screened positive for depressive symptoms. There was no significant difference in usage of mental health services, cardiovascular tests and procedures, and medications. Mean total costs in No Screen group ($7440), in Screen, Notify, and Treat group ($6745), and in Screen and Notify group ($6204). The difference was only significant in the Screen and Notify group versus the No Screen group (−$1236, 95% confidence interval -$2388 to -$96). Because mean QALYs were higher (+0.003 QALY in Screen and Notify; +0.004 QALYs in Screen, Notify, and Treat) and mean total costs were lower in both intervention groups, these interventions were cost-effective. There was substantial uncertainty because confidence intervals around cost differences were wide and QALY effects were small. Conclusion Depression screening strategies for patients with ACS may be modestly cost-effective.

Background: Health care systems in the United States are continuously expanding and contracting spaces to treat patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in intensive care units (ICUs). As a result, hospitals must effectively decontaminate and contain severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in constructed and deconstructed ICUs that care for patients with COVID-19. We assessed decontamination of a COVID-19 ICU and examined the containment efficacy of combined contact and droplet precautions in creating and maintaining a SARS-CoV-2–negative ICU “antechamber”. Methods: To examine the efficacy of chemical decontamination, we used high-density, semi-quantitative environmental sampling to detect SARS-CoV-2 on surfaces in a COVID-19 ICU and COVID-19 ICU antechamber. Quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction was used to measure viral RNA on surfaces. Viral location mapping revealed the distribution of viral RNA in the COVID-19 ICU and COVID-19 ICU antechamber. Results were further assessed using loop-mediated isothermal amplification. Results: We collected 224 surface samples pre-decontamination and 193 samples post-decontamination from a COVID-19 ICU and adjoining COVID-19 ICU antechamber. We found that 46% of antechamber objects were positive for SARS-CoV-2 pre-decontamination despite the construction of a swinging door barrier system, implementation of contact precautions, and installation of high-efficiency particulate air filters. The object positivity rate reduced to 32.1% and viral particle rate reduced by 95.4% following decontamination. Matched items had an average of 432.2 ± 2729 viral copies/cm2 pre-decontamination and 19.2 ± 118 viral copies/cm2 post-decontamination, demonstrating significantly reduced viral surface distribution (p &lt, 0.0001). Conclusions: Environmental sampling is an effective method for evaluating decontamination protocols and validating measures used to contain SARS-CoV-2 viral particles. While chemical decontamination effectively removes detectable viral RNA from surfaces, our approach to droplet/contact containment with an antechamber was not highly effective. These data suggest that hospitals should plan for the potential of aerosolized virions when creating strategies to contain SARS-CoV-2.

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)

Background: Age has been implicated as the main risk factor for COVID-19-related mortality. Our objective was to determine patient factors associated with mortality in hospitalized older adults with COVID-19. Methods: Retrospective cohort study of adults age 65+ (N=4,949) hospitalized with COVID-19 in the greater New York metropolitan area between 3/1/20-4/20/20. Data included patient demographics and clinical presentation. Multivariate logistic regression was used to evaluate associations. Results: Average age 77.3 (SD=8.4), 56.0% male, 20.8% African American, 15.1% Hispanic. In a multivariate analysis, male gender (OR=1.47), higher comorbidity index (OR=1.10), admission from a facility (lower baseline function; OR=1.71), early DNR (declining life-sustaining treatments, OR=2.45), and higher illness severity (higher MEWS, OR=6.26, and higher oxygen requirements, OR=15.00) were associated with mortality, while age was not (p = 0.22). Conclusion: Our findings highlight the need to look beyond age in hospitalized older adults with COVID-19 when considering prognosis and treatment decisions.

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).

To assess whether CC is more effective at reducing suicidal ideation in people with depression compared with usual care, and whether study and patient factors moderate treatment effects. We searched Medline, Embase, PubMed, PsycINFO, CINAHL, CENTRAL from inception to March 2020 for Randomised Controlled Trials (RCTs) that compared the effectiveness of CC with usual care in depressed adults, and reported changes in suicidal ideation at 4 to 6 months post-randomisation. Mixed-effects models accounted for clustering of participants within trials and heterogeneity across trials. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42020201747. We extracted data from 28 RCTs (11,165 patients) of 83 eligible studies. We observed a small significant clinical improvement of CC on suicidal ideation, compared with usual care (SMD, -0.11 [95%CI, -0.15 to -0.08]; I , 0·47% [95%CI 0.04% to 4.90%]). CC interventions with a recognised psychological treatment were associated with small reductions in suicidal ideation (SMD, -0.15 [95%CI -0.19 to -0.11]). CC was more effective for reducing suicidal ideation among patients aged over 65 years (SMD, - 0.18 [95%CI -0.25 to -0.11]). Primary care based CC with an embedded psychological intervention is the most effective CC framework for reducing suicidal ideation and older patients may benefit the most. [Abstract copyright: Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.]

Thromboembolic events, including venous thromboembolism (VTE) and arterial thromboembolism (ATE), and mortality from subclinical thrombotic events occur frequently in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) inpatients. Whether the risk extends postdischarge has been controversial. Our prospective registry included consecutive patients with COVID-19 hospitalized within our multihospital system from 1 March to 31 May 2020. We captured demographics, comorbidities, laboratory parameters, medications, postdischarge thromboprophylaxis, and 90-day outcomes. Data from electronic health records, health informatics exchange, radiology database, and telephonic follow-up were merged. Primary outcome was a composite of adjudicated VTE, ATE, and all-cause mortality (ACM). Principal safety outcome was major bleeding (MB). Among 4906 patients (53.7% male), mean age was 61.7 years. Comorbidities included hypertension (38.6%), diabetes (25.1%), obesity (18.9%), and cancer history (13.1%). Postdischarge thromboprophylaxis was prescribed in 13.2%. VTE rate was 1.55%; ATE, 1.71%; ΑCM, 4.83%; and MB, 1.73%. Composite primary outcome rate was 7.13% and significantly associated with advanced age (odds ratio [OR], 3.66; 95% CI, 2.84-4.71), prior VTE (OR, 2.99; 95% CI, 2.00-4.47), intensive care unit (ICU) stay (OR, 2.22; 95% CI, 1.78-2.93), chronic kidney disease (CKD; OR, 2.10; 95% CI, 1.47-3.0), peripheral arterial disease (OR, 2.04; 95% CI, 1.10-3.80), carotid occlusive disease (OR, 2.02; 95% CI, 1.30-3.14), IMPROVE-DD VTE score ≥4 (OR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.06-2.14), and coronary artery disease (OR, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.04-2.17). Postdischarge anticoagulation was significantly associated with reduction in primary outcome (OR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.47-0.81). Postdischarge VTE, ATE, and ACM occurred frequently after COVID-19 hospitalization. Advanced age, cardiovascular risk factors, CKD, IMPROVE-DD VTE score ≥4, and ICU stay increased risk. Postdischarge anticoagulation reduced risk by 46%.

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

Importance Approximately 20 million new cases of bacterial or viral sexually transmitted infections (STIs) occur each year in the US, and about one-half of these cases occur in persons aged 15 to 24 years. Rates of chlamydial, gonococcal, and syphilis infection continue to increase in all regions. Sexually transmitted infections are frequently asymptomatic, which may delay diagnosis and treatment and lead persons to unknowingly transmit STIs to others. Serious consequences of STIs include pelvic inflammatory disease, infertility, cancer, and AIDS. Objective To update its 2014 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a review of the evidence on the benefits and harms of behavioral counseling interventions for preventing STI acquisition. Population This recommendation statement applies to all sexually active adolescents and to adults at increased risk for STIs. Evidence Assessment The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that behavioral counseling interventions reduce the likelihood of acquiring STIs in sexually active adolescents and in adults at increased risk, including for example, those who have a current STI, do not use condoms, or have multiple partners, resulting in a moderate net benefit. Recommendation The USPSTF recommends behavioral counseling for all sexually active adolescents and for adults at increased risk for STIs. (B recommendation)

Importance An estimated 12% of adults 18 years or older and 8% of adolescents aged 12 to 17 years report unhealthy use of prescription or illegal drugs in the US. Objective To update its 2008 recommendation, the USPSTF commissioned reviews of the evidence on screening by asking questions about drug use and interventions for unhealthy drug use in adults and adolescents. Population This recommendation statement applies to adults 18 years or older, including pregnant and postpartum persons, and adolescents aged 12 to 17 years in primary care settings. This statement does not apply to adolescents or adults who have a currently diagnosed drug use disorder or are currently undergoing or have been referred for drug use treatment. This statement applies to settings and populations for which services for accurate diagnosis, effective treatment, and appropriate care can be offered or referred. Evidence Assessment In adults, the USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that screening by asking questions about unhealthy drug use has moderate net benefit when services for accurate diagnosis of unhealthy drug use or drug use disorders, effective treatment, and appropriate care can be offered or referred. In adolescents, because of the lack of evidence, the USPSTF concludes that the benefits and harms of screening for unhealthy drug use are uncertain and that the balance of benefits and harms cannot be determined. Recommendation The USPSTF recommends screening by asking questions about unhealthy drug use in adults 18 years or older. Screening should be implemented when services for accurate diagnosis, effective treatment, and appropriate care can be offered or referred. (Screening refers to asking questions about unhealthy drug use, not testing biological specimens.) (B recommendation) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for unhealthy drug use in adolescents. (I statement)

We report on the presentation and course of 33 children with multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children and confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection. Hemodynamic instability and cardiac dysfunction were prominent findings, with most patients exhibiting rapid resolution following anti-inflammatory therapy.

Importance In 2017, an estimated 7.9% of persons aged 12 to 17 years reported illicit drug use in the past month, and an estimated 50% of adolescents in the US had used an illicit drug by the time they graduated from high school. Young adults aged 18 to 25 years have a higher rate of current illicit drug use, with an estimated 23.2% currently using illicit drugs. Illicit drug use is associated with many negative health, social, and economic consequences and is a significant contributor to 3 of the leading causes of death among young persons (aged 10-24 years): unintentional injuries including motor vehicle crashes, suicide, and homicide. Objective To update its 2014 recommendation, the USPSTF commissioned a review of the evidence on the potential benefits and harms of interventions to prevent illicit drug use in children, adolescents, and young adults. Population This recommendation applies to children (11 years and younger), adolescents (aged 12-17 years), and young adults (aged 18-25 years), including pregnant persons. Evidence Assessment Because of limited and inadequate evidence, the USPSTF concludes that the benefits and harms of primary care–based interventions to prevent illicit drug use in children, adolescents, and young adults are uncertain and that the evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms. More research is needed. Recommendation The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of primary care–based behavioral counseling interventions to prevent illicit drug use, including nonmedical use of prescription drugs, in children, adolescents, and young adults. (I statement)

ObjectiveOur primary objective was to use initial data available to clinicians to characterize and predict survival for hospitalized coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. While clinical characteristics and mortality risk factors of COVID-19 patients have been reported, a practical survival calculator based on data from a diverse group of U.S. patients has not yet been introduced. Such a tool would provide timely and valuable guidance in decision-making during this global pandemic.DesignWe extracted demographic, laboratory, clinical, and treatment data from electronic health records and used it to build and test the predictive accuracy of a survival probability calculator referred to as “the Northwell COVID-19 Survival (‘NOCOS’) calculator.”Setting13 acute care facilities at Northwell Health served as the setting for this study.Participants5,233 hospitalized COVID-19–positive patients served as the participants for this study.Main outcome measuresThe NOCOS calculator was constructed using multivariate regression with L1 regularization (LASSO) to predict survival during hospitalization. Model predictive performance was measured using Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curves and the Area Under the Curve (AUC) of the calculators.ResultsPatient age, serum blood urea nitrogen, Emergency Severity Index, red cell distribution width, absolute neutrophil count, serum bicarbonate, and glucose were identified as the optimal predictors of survival by multivariate LASSO regression. The predictive performance of the NOCOS calculator had an AUC of 0.832, reaching 0.91 when updated for each patient daily, with stability assessed and maintained for 14 consecutive days. This outperformed other established models, including the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score (0.732).ConclusionsWe present a practical estimate of survival probability that outperforms other general risk models. The seven early predictors of in-hospital survival can help clinicians identify patients with increased probabilities of survival and provide critical decision support as COVID-19 spreads across the U.S.Trial registrationN/A

Evidence of popular interest in the interrelationships between mind, body, and heart disease dates to Ancient Grecian times and paved the way for modern-day scientific inquiry into the relationships between psychological comorbidities in coronary heart disease. Although the systematic evidence has suggested an association of poor medical prognosis and lower quality of life among patients with coronary heart disease with comorbid psychological conditions, the mechanisms are less well understood. In this selective review article, the epidemiology, mechanisms, screening, and treatment recommendations for 4 common psychological conditions (depression, anxiety, stress, and insomnia) comorbid with coronary heart disease are presented. We focus on the grand challenges and unprecedented opportunities for research in this area considering the methodological and technological innovations of the 21st century. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved).

Depression is associated with mortality in patients with cardiovascular risk factors. The frequency and severity of depression and the association between depression and cardiovascular events have sex-specific and ethnic differences. We conducted this study to evaluate the sex-specific difference in the association between depression and cardiovascular prognosis in patients with cardiovascular risk factors. We enrolled 4025 patients (64.7 ± 10.9 years, 53% women, 47% men) with cardiovascular risk factors in the Japan Morning Surge-Home Blood Pressure study. Depressive symptoms were assessed using the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI). The follow-up period was 47 ± 24 months. The primary end points were all-cause mortality and nonfatal cardiovascular events. The BDI scores and the prevalence of depression were significantly higher in women than in men. When a BDI score of 16 was the cutoff, the primary end points in the depression group (n = 217) were significantly higher than those in the nondepression group (n = 1677) among men (adjusted hazard ratio 1.76, 95% confidence interval: 1.17, 2.64; P = 0.007). In women, the primary end points in the depression and nondepression groups were similar when BDI scores of 16, 14, and 10 were the cutoffs. In conclusion, depression defined by a BDI score ≥16 was associated with cardiovascular events in men with cardiovascular risk factors.

While behavioral interventions can improve blood pressure (BP) in individuals with hypertension, getting such services to people who could benefit remains difficult. Workplace programs have potential as dissemination vehicles. The objective is to evaluate the effectiveness of a standardized stress management program delivered in groups at the workplace for reducing BP compared with enhanced usual care. This randomized controlled trial studied 92 urban medical center employees with hypertension randomized into two groups. The intervention was a 10-week group workshop on cognitive-behavioral coping skills. Enhanced usual care included self-help materials for BP reduction and physician referral. Intervention group participants’ systolic BP (SBP) decreased 7.5 mm Hg over controls between baseline and follow-up, from 149.1 (95% CI: 146.0–152.1) to 140.0 (95% CI: 134.7–145.2), p < .001. The differential change between intervention and enhanced usual care groups (Group × Time interaction) was 7.5 mm Hg (t = −2.05; p = .04). Diastolic BP reductions were not significantly different. Scores on measures of emotional exhaustion and depressive rumination showed significant improvements and correlated with reductions in SBP. There was no significant change in the usual care group. A standardized worksite group intervention produced clinically meaningful reductions in SBP in participants with hypertension.

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).

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)

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)

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).

OBJECTIVEPrevention ofClostridium difficileinfection (CDI) in acute-care hospitals is a priority for hospitals and clinicians. We performed a qualitative systematic review to update the evidence on interventions to prevent CDI published since 2009.DESIGNWe searched Ovid, MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, CINAHL, the ISI Web of Knowledge, and grey literature databases from January 1, 2009 to August 1, 2015.SETTINGWe included studies performed in acute-care hospitals.PATIENTS OR PARTICIPANTSWe included studies conducted on hospitalized patients that investigated the impact of specific interventions on CDI rates.INTERVENTIONSWe used the QI-Minimum Quality Criteria Set (QI-MQCS) to assess the quality of included studies. Interventions were grouped thematically: environmental disinfection, antimicrobial stewardship, hand hygiene, chlorhexidine bathing, probiotics, bundled approaches, and others. A meta-analysis was performed when possible.RESULTSOf 3,236 articles screened, 261 met the criteria for full-text review and 46 studies were ultimately included. The average quality rating was 82% according to the QI-MQCS. The most effective interventions, resulting in a 45% to 85% reduction in CDI, included daily to twice daily disinfection of high-touch surfaces (including bed rails) and terminal cleaning of patient rooms with chlorine-based products. Bundled interventions and antimicrobial stewardship showed promise for reducing CDI rates. Chlorhexidine bathing and intensified hand-hygiene practices were not effective for reducing CDI rates.CONCLUSIONSDaily and terminal cleaning of patient rooms using chlorine-based products were most effective in reducing CDI rates in hospitals. Further studies are needed to identify the components of bundled interventions that reduce CDI rates.Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol2017;38:476–482

Objective Shared decision-making (SDM) is increasingly promoted in the primary care setting, but depressive symptoms, which are associated with cognitive changes, may influence decision-making preferences. We sought to assess whether elevated depressive symptoms are associated with decision-making preference in patients with comorbid chronic illness. Methods We enrolled 195 patients ≥ 18 years old with uncontrolled hypertension from two urban, academic primary care clinics. Depressive symptoms were assessed using the 8-item Patient Health Questionnaire. Clinician-directed decision-making preference was assessed according to the Control Preference Scale. The impact of depressive symptoms on decision-making preference was assessed using generalized linear mixed models adjusted for age, gender, race, ethnicity, education, Medicaid status, Charlson Comorbidity Index, partner status, and clustering within clinicians. Results The mean age was 64.2 years; 72% were women, 77% Hispanic, 38% Black, and 33% had elevated depressive symptoms. Overall, 35% of patients preferred clinician-directed decision-making, 19% mostly clinician-directed, 39% shared, and 7% some or little clinician-input. Patients with (vs. without) elevated depressive symptoms were more likely to prefer clinician-directed decision-making (46% versus 29%; p = 0.02; AOR 2.51, 95% CI 1.30–4.85, p = 0.005). Remitted depressive symptoms (vs. never depressed) were not associated with preference. Conclusions Elevated depressive symptoms are associated with preference for clinician-directed decision-making. We suggest that clinicians should be aware of this effect when incorporating preference into their communication styles and take an active role in eliciting patient values and exchanging information about treatment choice, all important components of shared decision-making, particularly when patients are depressed.

Introduction Thromboembolic outcomes have emerged as an important issue in sick hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Multiple pathogenetic mechanisms for thrombosis have been implicated, including endothelial dysfunction, increased von Willebrand factor (vWF), interleukin-6 release, and activation of/interaction between macrophages, monocytes, endothelial cells, platelets and lymphocytes. The actual rate of arterial and venous thromboembolic events (ATE and VTE) in hospitalized patients with COVID-19, especially in the immediate post-hospital discharge period, has not been fully elucidated, with most of the data derived from retrospective studies with small sample sizes. Methods Against this background, we have designed and implemented an ongoing prospective registry (CORE-19) consisting of 11,249 consecutive hospitalized patients with COVID-19 from March 1st 2020 through May 31st 2020 using data derived from the Northwell Health System and the COVID-19 Research Consortium to study through 90-days post-discharge the rate of VTE and ATE, major bleeding, all-cause mortality, and other complications. We are capturing data of interest including demographic characteristics, co-morbidities, relevant medications, hospital setting, in-hospital treatment, thromboprophylaxis usage, key laboratory parameters, and 90-day thromboembolic and other key outcomes. A unified data repository (datamart) of hospitalized COVID-19 patients across multiple datasets from electronic health records, health informatics exchange, a dedicated radiology database, and a standardized data collection tool in REDCap, that includes telephonic calls up to 90 days post-discharge, is being implemented. A common data model (CDM) is utilized to ensure semantic interoperability between data originating from disparate sources. Northwell Health protocols stipulate the use of post-discharge low-molecular weight heparin, direct oral anticoagulants, or baby aspirin in hospitalized COVID-19 patients with high thrombotic risk features. Results Our cohort as of August 7, 2020 consists of complete follow up in 4,100 patients with a mean age of 61.0 years (SD: 17.0) with 54.7% males (Table 1). Preliminary data show an all-cause mortality rate of 4.29%, an overall thromboembolic rate of 3.51% (2.41% VTE and 1.10% ATE), a major bleeding rate of 1.61%, and a rehospitalization rate of 12.85%. Of patients with either DVT or PE post-discharge, 13.43% (9/67) died. The full dataset, including risk factors, comorbidities, key in-hospital and post-discharge medications including anticoagulant and antiplatelet agents, will be available at the time of presentation to the ASH congress. Conclusion Our ongoing registry is a large prospective study evaluating the rate of overall thromboembolic complications and all-cause mortality in hospitalized COVID-19 patients through 90 days post discharge. Current rates of thromboembolic events signify the importance of post-discharge surveillance and, potentially, post-discharge extended thromboprophylaxis, in this acutely ill medical population. Disclosures Allen: Bristol Myers Squibb: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Spyropoulos:Janssen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bayer, BMS, Portola, ATLAS Group: Consultancy; Janssen, Boehringer Ingelheim: Research Funding.

Short duration of sleep, defined as sleeping ≤7 h per night, is associated with poor cardiovascular disease (CVD) outcomes, including mortality [(1,2)][1]. There are known racial disparities for CVD [(3)][2] and for sleep health [(4)][3]. However, racial disparities in the context of short sleep

Background: Nonadherence to study protocols reduces the generalizability, validity, and statistical power of longitudinal studies. Purpose: To determine whether an automated electronically-delivered regret lottery would improve adherence to an intensive mHealth self-monitoring protocol as part of a longitudinal observational study. Methods: We enrolled 77 adults into a 52-week study requiring five daily ecologic momentary assessments (EMA) of stress and daily accelerometer use. We performed a pre/post single-arm study to evaluate the efficacy of a lottery intervention in improving adherence to this protocol. Midway through the study, participants were invited to enter a weekly regret lottery ($50 prize, expected value

Importance Pancreatic cancer is an uncommon cancer with an age-adjusted annual incidence of 12.9 cases per 100 000 person-years. However, the death rate is 11.0 deaths per 100 000 person-years because the prognosis of pancreatic cancer is poor. Although its incidence is low, pancreatic cancer is the third most common cause of cancer death in the United States. Because of the increasing incidence of pancreatic cancer, along with improvements in early detection and treatment of other types of cancer, it is estimated that pancreatic cancer may soon become the second-leading cause of cancer death in the United States. Objective To update the 2004 US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation on screening for pancreatic cancer. Evidence Review The USPSTF reviewed the evidence on the benefits and harms of screening for pancreatic cancer, the diagnostic accuracy of screening tests for pancreatic cancer, and the benefits and harms of treatment of screen-detected or asymptomatic pancreatic cancer. Findings The USPSTF found no evidence that screening for pancreatic cancer or treatment of screen-detected pancreatic cancer improves disease-specific morbidity or mortality, or all-cause mortality. The USPSTF found adequate evidence that the magnitude of the benefits of screening for pancreatic cancer in asymptomatic adults can be bounded as no greater than small. The USPSTF found adequate evidence that the magnitude of the harms of screening for pancreatic cancer and treatment of screen-detected pancreatic cancer can be bounded as at least moderate. The USPSTF reaffirms its previous conclusion that the potential benefits of screening for pancreatic cancer in asymptomatic adults do not outweigh the potential harms. Conclusions and Recommendation The USPSTF recommends against screening for pancreatic cancer in asymptomatic adults. (D recommendation)

ImportancePotentially harmful mutations of the breast cancer susceptibility 1 and 2 genes (BRCA1/2) are associated with increased risk for breast, ovarian, fallopian tube, and peritoneal cancer. For women in the United States, breast cancer is the most common cancer after nonmelanoma skin cancer and the second leading cause of cancer death. In the general population, BRCA1/2 mutations occur in an estimated 1 in 300 to 500 women and account for 5% to 10% of breast cancer cases and 15% of ovarian cancer cases.ObjectiveTo update the 2013 US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation on risk assessment, genetic counseling, and genetic testing for BRCA-related cancer.Evidence reviewThe USPSTF reviewed the evidence on risk assessment, genetic counseling, and genetic testing for potentially harmful BRCA1/2 mutations in asymptomatic women who have never been diagnosed with BRCA-related cancer, as well as those with a previous diagnosis of breast, ovarian, tubal, or peritoneal cancer who have completed treatment and are considered cancer free. In addition, the USPSTF reviewed interventions to reduce the risk for breast, ovarian, tubal, or peritoneal cancer in women with potentially harmful BRCA1/2 mutations, including intensive cancer screening, medications, and risk-reducing surgery.FindingsFor women whose family or personal history is associated with an increased risk for harmful mutations in the BRCA1/2 genes, or who have an ancestry associated with BRCA1/2 gene mutations, there is adequate evidence that the benefits of risk assessment, genetic counseling, genetic testing, and interventions are moderate. For women whose personal or family history or ancestry is not associated with an increased risk for harmful mutations in the BRCA1/2 genes, there is adequate evidence that the benefits of risk assessment, genetic counseling, genetic testing, and interventions are small to none. Regardless of family or personal history, the USPSTF found adequate evidence that the overall harms of risk assessment, genetic counseling, genetic testing, and interventions are small to moderate.Conclusions and recommendationThe USPSTF recommends that primary care clinicians assess women with a personal or family history of breast, ovarian, tubal, or peritoneal cancer or who have an ancestry associated with BRCA1/2 gene mutations with an appropriate brief familial risk assessment tool. Women with a positive result on the risk assessment tool should receive genetic counseling and, if indicated after counseling, genetic testing. (B recommendation) The USPSTF recommends against routine risk assessment, genetic counseling, or genetic testing for women whose personal or family history or ancestry is not associated with potentially harmful BRCA1/2 gene mutations. (D recommendation).

Importance An estimated 1.1 million individuals in the United States are currently living with HIV, and more than 700 000 persons have died of AIDS since the first cases were reported in 1981. In 2017, there were 38 281 new diagnoses of HIV infection reported in the United States; 81% of these new diagnoses were among males and 19% were among females. Although treatable, HIV infection has no cure and has significant health consequences. Objective To issue a new US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation on preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) for the prevention of HIV infection. Evidence Review The USPSTF reviewed the evidence on the benefits of PrEP for the prevention of HIV infection with oral tenofovir disoproxil fumarate monotherapy or combined tenofovir disoproxil fumarate and emtricitabine and whether the benefits vary by risk group, population subgroup, or regimen or dosing strategy; the diagnostic accuracy of risk assessment tools to identify persons at high risk of HIV acquisition; the rates of adherence to PrEP in primary care settings; the association between adherence and effectiveness of PrEP; and the harms of PrEP when used for HIV prevention. Findings The USPSTF found convincing evidence that PrEP is of substantial benefit in decreasing the risk of HIV infection in persons at high risk of HIV acquisition. The USPSTF also found convincing evidence that adherence to PrEP is highly associated with its efficacy in preventing the acquisition of HIV infection; thus, adherence to PrEP is central to realizing its benefit. The USPSTF found adequate evidence that PrEP is associated with small harms, including kidney and gastrointestinal adverse effects. The USPSTF concludes with high certainty that the magnitude of benefit of PrEP with oral tenofovir disoproxil fumarate–based therapy to reduce the risk of acquisition of HIV infection in persons at high risk is substantial. Conclusions and Recommendation The USPSTF recommends offering PrEP with effective antiretroviral therapy to persons at high risk of HIV acquisition. (A recommendation)

Importance Approximately 1.1 million persons in the United States are currently living with HIV, and more than 700 000 persons have died of AIDS since the first cases were reported in 1981. There were approximately 38 300 new diagnoses of HIV infection in 2017. The estimated prevalence of HIV infection among persons 13 years and older in the United States is 0.4%, and data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention show a significant increase in HIV diagnoses starting at age 15 years. An estimated 8700 women living with HIV give birth each year in the United States. HIV can be transmitted from mother to child during pregnancy, labor, delivery, and breastfeeding. The incidence of perinatal HIV infection in the United States peaked in 1992 and has declined significantly following the implementation of routine prenatal HIV screening and the use of effective therapies and precautions to prevent mother-to-child transmission. Objective To update the 2013 US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation on screening for HIV infection in adolescents, adults, and pregnant women. Evidence Review The USPSTF reviewed the evidence on the benefits and harms of screening for HIV infection in nonpregnant adolescents and adults, the yield of screening for HIV infection at different intervals, the effects of initiating antiretroviral therapy (ART) at a higher vs lower CD4 cell count, and the longer-term harms associated with currently recommended ART regimens. The USPSTF also reviewed the evidence on the benefits (specifically, reduced risk of mother-to-child transmission of HIV infection) and harms of screening for HIV infection in pregnant persons, the yield of repeat screening for HIV at different intervals during pregnancy, the effectiveness of currently recommended ART regimens for reducing mother-to-child transmission of HIV infection, and the harms of ART during pregnancy to the mother and infant. Findings The USPSTF found convincing evidence that currently recommended HIV tests are highly accurate in diagnosing HIV infection. The USPSTF found convincing evidence that identification and early treatment of HIV infection is of substantial benefit in reducing the risk of AIDS-related events or death. The USPSTF found convincing evidence that the use of ART is of substantial benefit in decreasing the risk of HIV transmission to uninfected sex partners. The USPSTF also found convincing evidence that identification and treatment of pregnant women living with HIV infection is of substantial benefit in reducing the rate of mother-to-child transmission. The USPSTF found adequate evidence that ART is associated with some harms, including neuropsychiatric, renal, and hepatic harms, and an increased risk of preterm birth in pregnant women. The USPSTF concludes with high certainty that the net benefit of screening for HIV infection in adolescents, adults, and pregnant women is substantial. Conclusions and Recommendation The USPSTF recommends screening for HIV infection in adolescents and adults aged 15 to 65 years. Younger adolescents and older adults who are at increased risk of infection should also be screened. (A recommendation) The USPSTF recommends screening for HIV infection in all pregnant persons, including those who present in labor or at delivery whose HIV status is unknown. (A recommendation)

Background Elevated depressive symptoms among survivors of acute coronary syndromes (ACS) confer recurrent cardiovascular events and mortality, worse quality of life, and higher healthcare costs. While multiple scientific groups advise routine depression screening for ACS survivors, no randomized trials exist to inform this screening recommendation. We aimed to assess the effect of screening for depression on change in quality of life over 18 months among ACS patients. Methods The Comparison of Depression Identification after Acute Coronary Syndrome on Quality of Life and Cost Outcomes (CODIACS-QoL) trial is a pragmatic, 3-arm trial that randomized ACS patients to 1) systematic depression screening using the 8-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-8) and if positive screen (PHQ-8 ≥ 10), notification of primary care providers (PCPs) and invitation to participate in centralized, patient-preference, stepped depression care (Screen, Notify, and Treat, N = 499); 2) systematic depression screening and PCP notification only (Screen and Notify, N = 501); and 3) usual care (No Screen, N = 500). Adults hospitalized for ACS in the previous 2–12 months without prior history of depression were eligible for participation. Key outcomes will be quality-adjusted life years (primary), cost of health care utilization, and depression-free days across 18 months. Results A total of 1500 patients were randomized in the CODIACS-QOL trial (28.3% women; 16.3% Hispanic; mean age 65.9 (11.5) years). Only 7% of ACS survivors had elevated depressive symptoms. Conclusions Using a novel randomization schema and pragmatic design principles, the CODIACS-QoL trial achieved its enrollment target. Eventual results of this trial will inform future depression screening recommendations in cardiac patients. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT 01993017).

Objectives Depression frequently co-occurs with multiple chronic diseases in complex, costly, and dangerous patterns of multimorbidity. The field of health psychology may benefit from evaluating the temporal characteristics of depression's associations with common diseases, and from determining whether depression is a central connector in multimorbid disease clusters. The present review addresses these issues by focusing on 4 of the most prevalent diseases: hypertension, ischemic heart disease, arthritis, and diabetes. Method Study 1 assessed how prior chronic disease diagnoses were associated with current depression in a large, cross-sectional, population-based study. It assessed depression's centrality using network analysis accounting for disease prevalence. Study 2 presents a systematic scoping review evaluating the extent to which depression was prospectively associated with the onset of the 4 prevalent chronic diseases. Results In Study 1 depression had the fourth highest betweenness centrality ranking of 26 network nodes and centrally connected many existing diseases and unhealthy behaviors. In Study 2 depression was associated with subsequent incidence of ischemic heart disease and diabetes across multiple meta-analyses. Insufficient information was available about depression's prospective associations with incident hypertension and arthritis. Conclusions Depression is central in patterns of multimorbidity and is associated with incident disease for several of the most common chronic diseases, justifying the focus on screening and treatment of depression in those at risk for developing chronic disease. Future research should investigate the mediating and moderating roles of health behaviors in the association between depression and the staggered emergence over time of clusters of multimorbid chronic diseases. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

BACKGROUND: There are substantial differences in the effects of blood pressure (BP) medications in individual patients. Yet, the current standard approach to prescribing BP medications is not personalized. OBJECTIVE: To determine the feasibility of individualizing the selection of BP medications through pragmatic personalized (i.e., N-of-1) trials. DESIGN: Series of N-of-1 trials. SETTING: Outpatient. PATIENTS: Hypertensive adults prescribed none or one BP medication. INTERVENTION: Participation in a flexible, open-label personalized trial of two to three BP medications (NCT02744456). MEASUREMENTS: BP was measured twice per day with a validated home BP device. Frequency and severity of side effects were assessed at the end of the day via an electronic questionnaire. Patients’ BP medication preference was assessed after reviewing BP lowering and side effect results with a study clinician. Feasibility was assessed by determining the proportion of patients who adhered to self-assessments. Benefit was assessed by asking patients to rate the helpfulness of participation and whether they would recommend personalized trials to other hypertensive patients. KEY RESULTS: Of ten patients enrolled, two dropped out prior to initiation, one discovered white coat hypertension through ambulatory BP monitoring, and seven (mean age 58 years, 71% of women) completed personalized trials. All seven were compliant with home BP monitoring and side effect tracking. All seven recommended personalized trials of BP medications to others. Thiazides were preferred by three patients, renin-angiotensin system–blocking agents by two patients, a combination of thiazide and beta-blocker by one patient, and any of three classes by one patient. CONCLUSIONS: Personalized trials of BP medications were feasible and led to improved treatment precision. Heterogeneity of patient preferences and of therapeutic BP response for first-line BP medications can be determined through a personalized trial approach. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s11606-019-04831-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.