-
Journal of Vascular Surgery Jan 2022Management of carotid bifurcation stenosis in stroke prevention has been the subject of extensive investigations, including multiple randomized controlled trials. The... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Management of carotid bifurcation stenosis in stroke prevention has been the subject of extensive investigations, including multiple randomized controlled trials. The proper treatment of patients with carotid bifurcation disease is of major interest to vascular surgeons and other vascular specialists. In 2011, the Society for Vascular Surgery published guidelines for the treatment of carotid artery disease. At the time, several randomized trials, comparing carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS), were reported. Since the 2011 guidelines, several studies and a few systematic reviews comparing CEA and CAS have been reported, and the role of medical management has been reemphasized. In the present publication, we have updated and expanded on the 2011 guidelines with specific emphasis on five areas: (1) is CEA recommended over maximal medical therapy for low-risk patients; (2) is CEA recommended over transfemoral CAS for low surgical risk patients with symptomatic carotid artery stenosis of >50%; (3) the timing of carotid intervention for patients presenting with acute stroke; (4) screening for carotid artery stenosis in asymptomatic patients; and (5) the optimal sequence of intervention for patients with combined carotid and coronary artery disease. A separate implementation document will address other important clinical issues in extracranial cerebrovascular disease. Recommendations are made using the GRADE (grades of recommendation assessment, development, and evaluation) approach, as was used for other Society for Vascular Surgery guidelines. The committee recommends CEA as the first-line treatment for symptomatic low-risk surgical patients with stenosis of 50% to 99% and asymptomatic patients with stenosis of 70% to 99%. The perioperative risk of stroke and death in asymptomatic patients must be <3% to ensure benefit for the patient. In patients with recent stable stroke (modified Rankin scale score, 0-2), carotid revascularization is considered appropriate for symptomatic patients with >50% stenosis and should be performed as soon as the patient is neurologically stable after 48 hours but definitely <14 days after symptom onset. In the general population, screening for clinically asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis in patients without cerebrovascular symptoms or significant risk factors for carotid artery disease is not recommended. In selected asymptomatic patients with an increased risk of carotid stenosis, we suggest screening for clinically asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis as long as the patients would potentially be fit for and willing to consider carotid intervention if significant stenosis is discovered. For patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis of 50% to 99%, who require both CEA and coronary artery bypass grafting, we suggest CEA before, or concomitant with, coronary artery bypass grafting to potentially reduce the risk of stroke and stroke/death. The sequencing of the intervention depends on the clinical presentation and institutional experience.
Topics: Cardiovascular Agents; Carotid Stenosis; Clinical Decision-Making; Consensus; Endarterectomy, Carotid; Endovascular Procedures; Evidence-Based Medicine; Humans; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 34153348
DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2021.04.073 -
Current Reviews in Musculoskeletal... Dec 2019Forward head posture (FHP) is the most common cervical postural fault in the sagittal plane that is found with different severity levels in almost all populations.... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE OF REVIEW
Forward head posture (FHP) is the most common cervical postural fault in the sagittal plane that is found with different severity levels in almost all populations. Despite claims that FHP may be related to neck pain, this relation seems to be controversial. Thus, our purpose is to determine whether FHP differs between asymptomatic subjects and those with neck pain and to investigate if there is a relationship between head posture and neck pain.
RECENT FINDINGS
A total of 15 cross-sectional studies were eligible for inclusion for this systematic review and meta-analysis. Ten studies compared FHP between a group of asymptomatic participants and a group of participants with neck pain and an overall mean difference (MD) of 4.84 (95% CI = 0.14, 9.54), indicating a significant between-group difference, contrary to adolescent (MD = - 1.05; 95% CI = - 4.23, 2.12). Eight studies showed significant negative correlations between FHP and neck pain intensity (r = - 0.55; 95% CI = - 0.69, - 0.36) as well as disability (r = - 0.42; 95% CI = - 0.54, - 0.28) in adults and older adults, while in adolescents, only lifetime prevalence and doctor visits due to neck pain were significant predictors for FHP. This systematic review found that age played an important role as a confounding factor in the relation between FHP and neck pain. Also, the results showed that adults with neck pain show increased FHP when compared to asymptomatic adults and that FHP is significantly correlated with neck pain measures in adults and older adults. No association was found between FHP and most of neck pain measures in adolescents.
PubMed: 31773477
DOI: 10.1007/s12178-019-09594-y -
Cureus Dec 2022Urinary tract infection (UTI) is common in older adults, mainly due to several age-related risk factors. Symptoms of UTI are atypical in the elderly population, like... (Review)
Review
Urinary tract infection (UTI) is common in older adults, mainly due to several age-related risk factors. Symptoms of UTI are atypical in the elderly population, like hypotension, tachycardia, urinary incontinence, poor appetite, drowsiness, frequent falls, and delirium. UTI manifests more commonly and specifically for this age group as delirium or confusion in the absence of a fever. This systematic review aims to highlight the relationship between UTI and delirium in the elderly population by understanding the pathologies individually and collectively. A systematic review is conducted by searching PubMed with regular keywords and major Medical Subject Heading (MeSH) keywords, Science Direct, and Google Scholar. The inclusion criteria consisted of studies based on male and female human populations above the age of 65 in the English language, available in full text published between 2017 and 2022. However, the exclusion criteria were animal studies, clinical trials, literature published before 2017, and papers published in any other language except English. A total of 106 articles were identified, and nine final studies were selected after a quality assessment, following which a valid relationship between delirium and UTI was identified in this systematic review.
PubMed: 36632270
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.32321 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jan 2022Paediatric flat feet are a common presentation in primary care; reported prevalence approximates 15%. A minority of flat feet can hurt and limit gait. There is no... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Paediatric flat feet are a common presentation in primary care; reported prevalence approximates 15%. A minority of flat feet can hurt and limit gait. There is no optimal strategy, nor consensus, for using foot orthoses (FOs) to treat paediatric flat feet.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the benefits and harms of foot orthoses for treating paediatric flat feet.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase to 01 September 2021, and two clinical trials registers on 07 August 2020.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We identified all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of FOs as an intervention for paediatric flat feet. The outcomes included in this review were pain, function, quality of life, treatment success, and adverse events. Intended comparisons were: any FOs versus sham, any FOs versus shoes, customised FOs (CFOs) versus prefabricated FOs (PFOs).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We followed standard methods recommended by Cochrane.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 16 trials with 1058 children, aged 11 months to 19 years, with flexible flat feet. Distinct flat foot presentations included asymptomatic, juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA), symptomatic and developmental co-ordination disorder (DCD). The trial interventions were FOs, footwear, foot and rehabilitative exercises, and neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES). Due to heterogeneity, we did not pool the data. Most trials had potential for selection, performance, detection, and selective reporting bias. No trial blinded participants. We present the results separately for asymptomatic (healthy children) and symptomatic (children with JIA) flat feet. The certainty of evidence was very low to low, downgraded for bias, imprecision, and indirectness. Three comparisons were evaluated across trials: CFO versus shoes; PFO versus shoes; CFO versus PFO. Asymptomatic flat feet 1. CFOs versus shoes (1 trial, 106 participants): low-quality evidence showed that CFOs result in little or no difference in the proportion without pain (10-point visual analogue scale (VAS)) at one year (risk ratio (RR) 0.85, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.67 to 1.07); absolute decrease (11.8%, 95% CI 4.7% fewer to 15.8% more); or on withdrawals due to adverse events (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.19); absolute effect (3.4% more, 95% CI 4.1% fewer to 13.1% more). 2. PFOs versus shoes (1 trial, 106 participants): low to very-low quality evidence showed that PFOs result in little or no difference in the proportion without pain (10-point VAS) at one year (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.16); absolute effect (4.7% fewer, 95% CI 18.9% fewer to 12.6% more); or on withdrawals due to adverse events (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.23). 3. CFOs versus PFOs (1 trial, 108 participants): low-quality evidence found no difference in the proportion without pain at one year (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.18); absolute effect (7.4% fewer, 95% CI 22.2% fewer to 11.1% more); or on withdrawal due to adverse events (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.12). Function and quality of life (QoL) were not assessed. Symptomatic (JIA) flat feet 1. CFOs versus shoes (1 trial, 28 participants, 3-month follow-up): very low-quality evidence showed little or no difference in pain (0 to 10 scale, 0 no pain) between groups (MD -1.5, 95% CI -2.78 to -0.22). Low-quality evidence showed improvements in function with CFOs (Foot Function Index - FFI disability, 0 to 100, 0 best function; MD -18.55, 95% CI -34.42 to -2.68), child-rated QoL (PedsQL, 0 to 100, 100 best quality; MD 12.1, 95% CI -1.6 to 25.8) and parent-rated QoL (PedsQL MD 9, 95% CI -4.1 to 22.1) and little or no difference between groups in treatment success (timed walking; MD -1.33 seconds, 95% CI -2.77 to 0.11), or withdrawals due to adverse events (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.11 to 2.94); absolute difference (9.7% fewer, 20.5 % fewer to 44.8% more). 2. PFOs versus shoes (1 trial, 25 participants, 3-month follow-up): very low-quality evidence showed little or no difference in pain between groups (MD 0.02, 95% CI -1.94 to 1.98). Low-quality evidence showed no difference between groups in function (FFI-disability MD -4.17, 95% CI -24.4 to 16.06), child-rated QoL (PedsQL MD -3.84, 95% CI -19 to 11.33), or parent-rated QoL (PedsQL MD -0.64, 95% CI -13.22 to 11.94). 3. CFOs versus PFOs (2 trials, 87 participants): low-quality evidence showed little or no difference between groups in pain (0 to 10 scale, 0 no pain) at 3 months (MD -1.48, 95% CI -3.23 to 0.26), function (FFI-disability MD -7.28, 95% CI -15.47 to 0.92), child-rated QoL (PedsQL MD 8.6, 95% CI -3.9 to 21.2), or parent-rated QoL (PedsQL MD 2.9, 95% CI -11 to 16.8).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Low to very low-certainty evidence shows that the effect of CFOs (high cost) or PFOs (low cost) versus shoes, and CFOs versus PFOs on pain, function and HRQoL is uncertain. This is pertinent for clinical practice, given the economic disparity between CFOs and PFOs. FOs may improve pain and function, versus shoes in children with JIA, with minimal delineation between costly CFOs and generic PFOs. This review updates that from 2010, confirming that in the absence of pain, the use of high-cost CFOs for healthy children with flexible flat feet has no supporting evidence, and draws very limited conclusions about FOs for treating paediatric flat feet. The availability of normative and prospective foot development data, dismisses most flat foot concerns, and negates continued attention to this topic. Attention should be re-directed to relevant paediatric foot conditions, which cause pain, limit function, or reduce quality of life. The agenda for researching asymptomatic flat feet in healthy children must be relegated to history, and replaced by a targeted research rationale, addressing children with indisputable foot pathology from discrete diagnoses, namely JIA, cerebral palsy, congenital talipes equino varus, trisomy 21 and Charcot Marie Tooth. Whether research resources should continue to be wasted on studying flat feet in healthy children that do not hurt, is questionable. Future updates of this review will address only relevant paediatric foot conditions.
Topics: Child; Flatfoot; Foot Orthoses; Humans; Pain; Pain Measurement; Quality of Life
PubMed: 35080267
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006311.pub4 -
Journal of Microbiology, Immunology,... Feb 2021Since the outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in late December 2019, it has brought significant harm and challenges to over 200 countries and regions around...
Since the outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in late December 2019, it has brought significant harm and challenges to over 200 countries and regions around the world. However, there is increasing evidence that many patients with COVID-19 are asymptomatic or have only mild symptoms, but they are able to transmit the virus to others. There are difficulties in screening for asymptomatic infections, which makes it more difficult for national prevention and control of this epidemic. This article reviews the characteristics, treatment, and outcomes of asymptomatic infections with COVID-19, hoping it would be helpful for early prevention and control of this severe public health threat worldwide.
Topics: Asymptomatic Infections; COVID-19; COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing; Disease Outbreaks; Humans; SARS-CoV-2; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 32425996
DOI: 10.1016/j.jmii.2020.05.001 -
Acta Clinica Croatica Dec 2021Congenital long QT syndrome (LQTS) is a disorder of myocardial repolarization defined by a prolonged QT interval on electrocardiogram (ECG) that can cause ventricular... (Review)
Review
Congenital long QT syndrome (LQTS) is a disorder of myocardial repolarization defined by a prolonged QT interval on electrocardiogram (ECG) that can cause ventricular arrhythmias and lead to sudden cardiac death. LQTS was first described in 1957 and since then its genetic etiology has been researched in many studies, but it is still not fully understood. Depending on the type of monogenic mutation, LQTS is currently divided into 17 subtypes, with LQT1, LQT2, and LQT3 being the most common forms. Based on the results of a prospective study, it is suggested that the real prevalence of congenital LQTS is around 1:2000. Clinical manifestations of congenital LQTS include LQTS-attributable syncope, aborted cardiac arrest, and sudden cardiac death. Many patients with congenital LQTS will remain asymptomatic for life. The initial diagnostic evaluation of congenital LQTS includes obtaining detailed personal and multi-generation family history, physical examination, series of 12-lead ECG recordings, and calculation of the LQTS diagnostic score, called Schwartz score. Patients are also advised to undertake 24-hour ambulatory monitoring, treadmill/cycle stress testing, and LQTS genetic testing for definitive confirmation of the diagnosis. Currently available treatment options include lifestyle modifications, medication therapy with emphasis on beta-blockers, device therapy and surgical therapy, with beta-blockers being the first-line treatment option, both in symptomatic and asymptomatic patients.
Topics: Arrhythmias, Cardiac; Death, Sudden, Cardiac; Electrocardiography; Genotype; Humans; Long QT Syndrome; Prospective Studies
PubMed: 35734489
DOI: 10.20471/acc.2021.60.04.22 -
The Lancet. Infectious Diseases Jan 2020Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD) is a fatal disease presenting with rapidly progressive dementia, and most patients die within a year of clinical onset. CJD poses a...
Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (CJD) is a fatal disease presenting with rapidly progressive dementia, and most patients die within a year of clinical onset. CJD poses a potential risk of iatrogenic transmission, as it can incubate asymptomatically in humans for decades before becoming clinically apparent. In this Review, we sought evidence to understand the current iatrogenic risk of CJD to public health by examining global evidence on all forms of CJD, including clinical incidence and prevalence of subclinical disease. We found that although CJD, particularly iatrogenic CJD, is rare, the incidence of sporadic CJD is increasing. Incubation periods as long as 40 years have been observed, and all genotypes have now been shown to be susceptible to CJD. Clinicians and surveillance programmes should maintain awareness of CJD to mitigate future incidences of its transmission. Awareness is particularly relevant for sporadic CJD, which occurs in older people in whom clinical presentation could resemble rapidly developing dementia.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Creutzfeldt-Jakob Syndrome; Female; Humans; Iatrogenic Disease; Incidence; Infectious Disease Incubation Period; Male; Middle Aged; Prevalence; Risk Assessment; Young Adult
PubMed: 31876504
DOI: 10.1016/S1473-3099(19)30615-2 -
Chiropractic & Manual Therapies 2019Muscle energy techniques are applied to reduce pain and increase range of motion. These are applied to a variety of pathological conditions and on asymptomatic subjects.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Muscle energy techniques are applied to reduce pain and increase range of motion. These are applied to a variety of pathological conditions and on asymptomatic subjects. There is however limited knowledge on their effectiveness and which protocol may be the most beneficial.
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this review is to determine the efficacy of muscle energy techniques (MET) in symptomatic and asymptomatic subjects.
DESIGN
Systematic Review.
METHODS
A literature search was performed using the following database: Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, NLM Pubmed and ScienceDirect. Studies regarding MET in asymptomatic and symptomatic patients were considered for investigation. The main outcomes took into account range of motion, chronic and acute pain and trigger points. Two trained investigators independently screened eligible studies according to the eligibility criteria, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Randomized control trials (RCT's) were analyzed for quality using the PEDro scale.
RESULTS
A total of 26 studies were considered eligible and included in the quantitative synthesis: 14 regarding symptomatic patients and 12 regarding asymptomatic subjects. Quality assessment of the studies through the PEDro scale observed a "moderate to high" quality of the included records.
CONCLUSIONS
MET are an effective treatment for reducing chronic and acute pain of the lower back. MET are also effective in treating chronic neck pain and chronic lateral epicondylitis. MET can be applied to increase range of motion of a joint when a functional limitation is present. Other techniques seem to be more appropriate compared to MET for trigger points.
Topics: Acute Pain; Asymptomatic Diseases; Chronic Pain; Humans; Manipulation, Osteopathic; Muscles; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Range of Motion, Articular; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 31462989
DOI: 10.1186/s12998-019-0258-7 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jan 2022Paediatric flat feet are a common presentation in primary care; reported prevalence approximates 15%. A minority of flat feet can hurt and limit gait. There is no... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Paediatric flat feet are a common presentation in primary care; reported prevalence approximates 15%. A minority of flat feet can hurt and limit gait. There is no optimal strategy, nor consensus, for using foot orthoses (FOs) to treat paediatric flat feet.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the benefits and harms of foot orthoses for treating paediatric flat feet.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase to 01 September 2021, and two clinical trials registers on 07 August 2020.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We identified all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of FOs as an intervention for paediatric flat feet. The outcomes included in this review were pain, function, quality of life, treatment success, and adverse events. Intended comparisons were: any FOs versus sham, any FOs versus shoes, customised FOs (CFOs) versus prefabricated FOs (PFOs).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We followed standard methods recommended by Cochrane.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 16 trials with 1058 children, aged 11 months to 19 years, with flexible flat feet. Distinct flat foot presentations included asymptomatic, juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA), symptomatic and developmental co-ordination disorder (DCD). The trial interventions were FOs, footwear, foot and rehabilitative exercises, and neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES). Due to heterogeneity, we did not pool the data. Most trials had potential for selection, performance, detection, and selective reporting bias. No trial blinded participants. We present the results separately for asymptomatic (healthy children) and symptomatic (children with JIA) flat feet. The certainty of evidence was very low to low, downgraded for bias, imprecision, and indirectness. Three comparisons were evaluated across trials: CFO versus shoes; PFO versus shoes; CFO versus PFO. Asymptomatic flat feet 1. CFOs versus shoes (1 trial, 106 participants): low-quality evidence showed that CFOs result in little or no difference in the proportion without pain (10-point visual analogue scale (VAS)) at one year (risk ratio (RR) 0.85, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.67 to 1.07); absolute decrease (11.8%, 95% CI 4.7% fewer to 15.8% more); or on withdrawals due to adverse events (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.19); absolute effect (3.4% more, 95% CI 4.1% fewer to 13.1% more). 2. PFOs versus shoes (1 trial, 106 participants): low to very-low quality evidence showed that PFOs result in little or no difference in the proportion without pain (10-point VAS) at one year (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.16); absolute effect (4.7% fewer, 95% CI 18.9% fewer to 12.6% more); or on withdrawals due to adverse events (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.23). 3. CFOs versus PFOs (1 trial, 108 participants): low-quality evidence found no difference in the proportion without pain at one year (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.18); absolute effect (7.4% fewer, 95% CI 22.2% fewer to 11.1% more); or on withdrawal due to adverse events (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.12). Function and quality of life (QoL) were not assessed. Symptomatic (JIA) flat feet 1. CFOs versus shoes (1 trial, 28 participants, 3-month follow-up): very low-quality evidence showed little or no difference in pain (0 to 10 scale, 0 no pain) between groups (MD -1.5, 95% CI -2.78 to -0.22). Low-quality evidence showed improvements in function with CFOs (Foot Function Index - FFI disability, 0 to 100, 0 best function; MD -18.55, 95% CI -34.42 to -2.68), child-rated QoL (PedsQL, 0 to 100, 100 best quality; MD 12.1, 95% CI -1.6 to 25.8) and parent-rated QoL (PedsQL MD 9, 95% CI -4.1 to 22.1) and little or no difference between groups in treatment success (timed walking; MD -1.33 seconds, 95% CI -2.77 to 0.11), or withdrawals due to adverse events (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.11 to 2.94); absolute difference (9.7% fewer, 20.5 % fewer to 44.8% more). 2. PFOs versus shoes (1 trial, 25 participants, 3-month follow-up): very low-quality evidence showed little or no difference in pain between groups (MD 0.02, 95% CI -1.94 to 1.98). Low-quality evidence showed no difference between groups in function (FFI-disability MD -4.17, 95% CI -24.4 to 16.06), child-rated QoL (PedsQL MD -3.84, 95% CI -19 to 11.33), or parent-rated QoL (PedsQL MD -0.64, 95% CI -13.22 to 11.94). 3. CFOs versus PFsO (2 trials, 87 participants): low-quality evidence showed little or no difference between groups in pain (0 to scale, 0 no pain) at 3 months (MD -1.48, 95% CI -3.23 to 0.26), function (FFI-disability MD -7.28, 95% CI -15.47 to 0.92), child-rated QoL (PedsQL MD 8.6, 95% CI -3.9 to 21.2), or parent-rated QoL (PedsQL MD 2.9, 95% CI -11 to 16.8).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Low to very low-certainty evidence shows that the effect of CFOs (high cost) or PFOs (low cost) versus shoes, and CFOs versus PFOs on pain, function and HRQoL is uncertain. This is pertinent for clinical practice, given the economic disparity between CFOs and PFOs. FOs may improve pain and function, versus shoes in children with JIA, with minimal delineation between costly CFOs and generic PFOs. This review updates that from 2010, confirming that in the absence of pain, the use of high-cost CFOs for healthy children with flexible flat feet has no supporting evidence, and draws very limited conclusions about FOs for treating paediatric flat feet. The availability of normative and prospective foot development data, dismisses most flat foot concerns, and negates continued attention to this topic. Attention should be re-directed to relevant paediatric foot conditions, which cause pain, limit function, or reduce quality of life. The agenda for researching asymptomatic flat feet in healthy children must be relegated to history, and replaced by a targeted research rationale, addressing children with indisputable foot pathology from discrete diagnoses, namely JIA, cerebral palsy, congenital talipes equino varus, trisomy 21 and Charcot Marie Tooth. Whether research resources should continue to be wasted on studying flat feet in healthy children that do not hurt, is questionable. Future updates of this review will address only relevant paediatric foot conditions.
Topics: Child; Flatfoot; Foot Orthoses; Humans; Pain; Pain Measurement; Quality of Life
PubMed: 35029841
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006311.pub3 -
JAMA May 2023In the US, tuberculosis remains an important preventable disease, including active tuberculosis, which may be infectious, and latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI), which...
IMPORTANCE
In the US, tuberculosis remains an important preventable disease, including active tuberculosis, which may be infectious, and latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI), which is asymptomatic and not infectious but can later progress to active disease. The precise prevalence rate of LTBI in the US is difficult to determine; however, estimated prevalence is about 5.0%, or up to 13 million persons. Incidence of tuberculosis varies by geography and living accommodations, suggesting an association with social determinants of health.
OBJECTIVE
To update its 2016 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review on LTBI screening and treatment in asymptomatic adults seen in primary care, as well as the accuracy of LTBI screening tests.
POPULATION
Asymptomatic adults 18 years or older at increased risk for tuberculosis.
EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT
The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that there is a moderate net benefit in preventing active tuberculosis disease by screening for LTBI in persons at increased risk for tuberculosis infection.
RECOMMENDATION
The USPSTF recommends screening for LTBI in populations at increased risk. (B recommendation).
Topics: Adult; Humans; Latent Tuberculosis; Mass Screening; Risk Assessment; Tuberculosis; United States; Social Determinants of Health
PubMed: 37129649
DOI: 10.1001/jama.2023.4899