Adults

Screening for Intimate Partner Violence and Caregiver Abuse of Older or Vulnerable Adults

Author/s: 
US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement, Michael Silverstein, John B Wong, Esa M Davis, David Chelmow, Tumaini Rucker Coker, Alicia Fernandez, Ericka Gibson, Carlos Roberto Jaén, Marie Krousel-Wood, Sei Lee, Wanda K Nicholson, Goutham Rao, John M Ruiz, James Stevermer, Joel Tsevat, Sandra Millon Underwood, Sarah Wiehe

IMPORTANCE: Intimate partner violence (IPV) affects millions of US residents across the lifespan and is often unrecognized. Abuse of older or vulnerable adults by a caregiver or someone else they may trust is common and can result in significant injury, death, and long-term adverse health consequences.
OBJECTIVE: The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the benefits and harms of screening for IPV, abuse of older adults, and abuse of vulnerable adults.
POPULATION: The recommendation on screening for IPV applies to adolescents and adults who are pregnant or postpartum, and women of reproductive age. The recommendation on screening in older and vulnerable adults applies to persons without recognized signs and symptoms of abuse or neglect.
EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT: The USPSTF concludes that screening for IPV in women of reproductive age, including those who are pregnant and postpartum, and providing or referring those who screen positive to multicomponent interventions has a moderate net benefit. The USPSTF concludes that the benefits and harms of screening for caregiver abuse and neglect in older or vulnerable adults are uncertain and that the balance of benefits and harms cannot be determined.
RECOMMENDATION: The USPSTF recommends that clinicians screen for IPV in women of reproductive age, including those who are pregnant and postpartum. (B recommendation) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for caregiver abuse and neglect in older or vulnerable adults.

Adrenal Insufficiency in Adults: A Review

Author/s: 
Anand Vaidya, James Findling, Irina Bancos

Importance: Adrenal insufficiency is a syndrome of cortisol deficiency and is categorized as primary, secondary, or glucocorticoid induced. Although primary and secondary adrenal insufficiency are rare, affecting less than 279 per 1 million individuals, glucocorticoid-induced adrenal insufficiency is common.

Observations: Primary adrenal insufficiency, which involves deficiency of all adrenocortical hormones, is caused by autoimmune destruction, congenital adrenal hyperplasia, pharmacological inhibition (eg, high doses of azole antifungal therapy), infection (eg, tuberculosis, fungal infections), or surgical removal of adrenal cortical tissue. Secondary adrenal insufficiency is caused by disorders affecting the pituitary gland, such as tumors, hemorrhage, inflammatory or infiltrative conditions (eg, hypophysitis, sarcoidosis, hemochromatosis), surgery, radiation therapy, or medications that suppress corticotropin production, such as opioids. Glucocorticoid-induced adrenal insufficiency is caused by administration of supraphysiological doses of glucocorticoids. Patients with adrenal insufficiency typically present with nonspecific symptoms, including fatigue (50%-95%), nausea and vomiting (20%-62%), and anorexia and weight loss (43%-73%). Glucocorticoid-induced adrenal insufficiency should be suspected in patients who have recently tapered or discontinued a supraphysiological dose of glucocorticoids. Early-morning (approximately 8 am) measurements of serum cortisol, corticotropin, and dehydroepiandrosterone sulfate (DHEAS) are used to diagnose adrenal insufficiency. Primary adrenal insufficiency is typically characterized by low morning cortisol levels (<5 µg/dL), high corticotropin levels, and low DHEAS levels. Patients with secondary and glucocorticoid-induced adrenal insufficiency typically have low or intermediate morning cortisol levels (5-10 µg/dL) and low or low-normal corticotropin and DHEAS levels. Patients with intermediate early-morning cortisol levels should undergo repeat early-morning cortisol testing or corticotropin stimulation testing (measurement of cortisol before and 60 minutes after administration of cosyntropin, 250 µg). Treatment of adrenal insufficiency involves supplemental glucocorticoids (eg, hydrocortisone, 15-25 mg daily, or prednisone, 3-5 mg daily). Mineralocorticoids (eg, fludrocortisone, 0.05-0.3 mg daily) should be added for patients with primary adrenal insufficiency. Adrenal crisis, a syndrome that can cause hypotension and shock, hyponatremia, altered mental status, and death if untreated, can occur in patients with adrenal insufficiency who have inadequate glucocorticoid therapy, acute illness, and physical stress. Therefore, all patients with adrenal insufficiency should be instructed how to increase glucocorticoids during acute illness and prescribed injectable glucocorticoids (eg, hydrocortisone, 100 mg intramuscular injection) to prevent or treat adrenal crisis.

Conclusions and relevance: Although primary and secondary adrenal insufficiency are rare, glucocorticoid-induced adrenal insufficiency is a common condition. Diagnosis of adrenal insufficiency involves early-morning measurement of cortisol, corticotropin, and DHEAS. All patients with adrenal insufficiency should be treated with glucocorticoids and instructed how to prevent and treat adrenal crisis.

Management of Depression in Adults: A Review

Author/s: 
Gregory E Simon, Nathalie Moise, David C Mohr

Importance: Approximately 9% of US adults experience major depression each year, with a lifetime prevalence of approximately 17% for men and 30% for women.

Observations: Major depression is defined by depressed mood, loss of interest in activities, and associated psychological and somatic symptoms lasting at least 2 weeks. Evaluation should include structured assessment of severity as well as risk of self-harm, suspected bipolar disorder, psychotic symptoms, substance use, and co-occurring anxiety disorder. First-line treatments include specific psychotherapies and antidepressant medications. A network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials reported cognitive therapy, behavioral activation, problem-solving therapy, interpersonal therapy, brief psychodynamic therapy, and mindfulness-based psychotherapy all had at least medium-sized effects in symptom improvement over usual care without psychotherapy (standardized mean difference [SMD] ranging from 0.50 [95% CI, 0.20-0.81] to 0.73 [95% CI, 0.52-0.95]). A network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials reported 21 antidepressant medications all had small- to medium-sized effects in symptom improvement over placebo (SMD ranging from 0.23 [95% CI, 0.19-0.28] for fluoxetine to 0.48 [95% CI, 0.41-0.55] for amitriptyline). Psychotherapy combined with antidepressant medication may be preferred, especially for more severe or chronic depression. A network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials reported greater symptom improvement with combined treatment than with psychotherapy alone (SMD, 0.30 [95% CI, 0.14-0.45]) or medication alone (SMD, 0.33 [95% CI, 0.20-0.47]). When initial antidepressant medication is not effective, second-line medication treatment includes changing antidepressant medication, adding a second antidepressant, or augmenting with a nonantidepressant medication, which have approximately equal likelihood of success based on a network meta-analysis. Collaborative care programs, including systematic follow-up and outcome assessment, improve treatment effectiveness, with 1 meta-analysis reporting significantly greater symptom improvement compared with usual care (SMD, 0.42 [95% CI, 0.23-0.61]).

Conclusions and relevance: Effective first-line depression treatments include specific forms of psychotherapy and more than 20 antidepressant medications. Close monitoring significantly improves the likelihood of treatment success.

Keywords 

Screening for Depression and Suicide Risk in Adults US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement

Author/s: 
US Preventive Services Task Force, Barry, M. J., Nicholson, W. K., Silverstein, M., Chelmow, D., Coker, T. R., Davidson, K. W., Davis, E. M., Donahue, K. E., Jaén, C. R., Li, L., Ogedegbe, G., Pbert, L., Rao, G., Ruiz, J. M., Stevermer, J. J., Tsevat, J., Underwood, S. M., Wong, J. B.

IMPORTANCE Major depressive disorder (MDD), a common mental disorder in the US, may
have substantial impact on the lives of affected individuals. If left untreated, MDD can
interfere with daily functioning and can also be associated with an increased risk of
cardiovascular events, exacerbation of comorbid conditions, or increased mortality.

OBJECTIVE The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic
review to evaluate benefits and harms of screening, accuracy of screening, and benefits and
harms of treatment of MDD and suicide risk in asymptomatic adults that would be applicable
to primary care settings.

POPULATION Asymptomatic adults 19 years or older, including pregnant and postpartum
persons. Older adults are defined as those 65 years or older.

EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that screening for
MDD in adults, including pregnant and postpartum persons and older adults, has a moderate
net benefit. The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient on the benefit and harms
of screening for suicide risk in adults, including pregnant and postpartum persons and older
adults.

RECOMMENDATION The USPSTF recommends screening for depression in the adult
population, including pregnant and postpartum persons and older adults. (B
recommendation) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess
the balance of benefits and harms of screening for suicide risk in the adult population,
including pregnant and postpartum persons and older adults. (I statement)

Effects of Tai Chi or Conventional Exercise on Central Obesity in Middle-Aged and Older Adults : A Three-Group Randomized Controlled Trial

Author/s: 
Siu, P. M., Yu, A. P., Chin, E. C., Yu, D. S., Hui, S. S., Woo, J., Fong, D. Y., Wei, G. X., Irwin, M. R.

Background: Central obesity is a major manifestation of metabolic syndrome, which is a common health problem in middle-aged and older adults.

Objective: To examine the therapeutic efficacy of tai chi for management of central obesity.

Design: Randomized, controlled, assessor-blinded trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03107741).

Setting: A single research site in Hong Kong between 27 February 2016 and 28 February 2019.

Participants: Adults aged 50 years or older with central obesity.

Intervention: 543 participants were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1 ratio to a control group with no exercise intervention (n = 181), conventional exercise consisting of aerobic exercise and strength training (EX group) (n = 181), and a tai chi group (TC group) (n = 181). Interventions lasted 12 weeks.

Measurements: Outcomes were assessed at baseline, week 12, and week 38. The primary outcome was waist circumference (WC). Secondary outcomes were body weight; body mass index; high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), triglyceride, and fasting plasma glucose levels; blood pressure; and incidence of remission of central obesity.

Results: The adjusted mean difference in WC from baseline to week 12 in the control group was 0.8 cm (95% CI, -4.1 to 5.7 cm). Both intervention groups showed reductions in WC relative to control (adjusted mean differences: TC group vs. control, -1.8 cm [CI, -2.3 to -1.4 cm]; P < 0.001; EX group vs. control: -1.3 cm [CI, -1.8 to -0.9 cm]; P < 0.001); both intervention groups also showed reductions in body weight (P < 0.05) and attenuation of the decrease in HDL-C level relative to the control group. The favorable changes in WC and body weight were maintained in both the TC and EX groups, whereas the beneficial effect on HDL-C was only maintained in the TC group at week 38.

Limitations: High attrition and no dietary intervention.

Conclusion: Tai chi is an effective approach to reduce WC in adults with central obesity aged 50 years or older.

Primary funding source: Health and Medical Research Fund.

Cancer Prevalence and Risk Stratification in Adults Presenting With Hematuria: A Population-Based Cohort Study

Author/s: 
Takeuchi, Mitsuru, McDonald, Jennifer S., Takahashi, Naoki, Frank, Igor, Thompson, R. H., King, Bernard F., Kawashima, Akira

Abstract

Objective

To calculate the prevalence of renal cell carcinoma (RCC), upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma (UT-UC), and lower urinary tract urothelial carcinoma (LT-UC) in patients with gross asymptomatic microhematuria (AMH) and symptomatic microhematuria (SMH).

Patients and Methods

This study was a population-based retrospective descriptive study. The study was approved by both the Mayo Clinic Institutional Review Board and the Olmsted Medical Center Institutional Review Board, and the population used was Olmsted County residents. A total of 4453 patients who presented with an initial episode of hematuria from January 1, 2000, through December 30, 2010, were included. Of the 4453 patients (median age, 58 years; interquartile range, 44.6-73.3 years), 1487 (33.4%) had gross hematuria, 2305 (51.8%) had AMH, and 661 (14.8%) had SMH.

Results

In the 1487 patients with gross hematuria, the prevalence of RCC, UT-UC, and LT-UC was 1.3%, 0.8%, and 9.0%, respectively. In the 2305 patients with AMH, the prevalence of RCC, UT-UC, and LT-UC was 0.2%, 0.3%, and 1.6%, respectively. In the 661 patients with SMH, the prevalence of RCC, UT-UC, and LT-UC was 0.6%, 0.2%, and 0.3%, respectively. Age was the most relevant risk factor for any hematuria type.

Conclusion

This unique cohort study reported that the prevalence of RCC or UC in patients with AMH and SMH was low, especially in the young cohort, and a large number of intense work-ups, such as cystoscopy and computed tomography urography, currently conducted could be omitted if stratified by hematuria type and age.

Interventions for Tobacco Smoking Cessation in Adults, Including Pregnant Persons: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement

Author/s: 
US Preventative Services task Force

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

Subscribe to Adults