Guidelines

The American Cancer Society recommends all U.S. adults at average risk of colorectal cancer (CRC) undergo screening starting at age 45 years.

That update to ACS recommendations is based on an increasing burden of CRC in younger individuals, microsimulation modeling results, and a “reasonable expectation” that screening tests will perform as well in adults aged 45-49 years as they do in older adults, members of the ACS Guideline Development Group said in the guideline, which was published in CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians.

Starting screening at age 45 contrasts with recommendations from the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF), which in 2016 gave an “A” recommendation for CRC screening from 50 to 75 years of age. At the time, the USPSTF noted a modest increase in life-years gained by starting earlier, based on microsimulation modeling. But it concluded that available evidence best supported starting at age 50.

The updated ACS guidelines are based in part on a modeling study that the authors say extends the previous analysis conducted for the USPSTF.

“The recommendation places a high value on the potential years of life saved, addresses anticipated rising incidence going forward, and is expected to contribute to the reduction in disparities in incidence before age 50 years in some racial groups,” the ACS guideline authors added.

The recommendation to start screening at age 45 is a “qualified” recommendation, the authors said, given the limitations of the current evidence base. Most studies to date have been focused on older individuals, in keeping with long-standing recommendations to start screening at age 50.

The move downward in screening age recommendation acknowledges one of the most “significant and disturbing” developments in CRC, the guideline’s authors said: the marked increase in incidence among younger individuals.

While CRC incidence and mortality have been declining in adults aged 55 years and older, recent studies cited in the ACS guideline document show a 51% increase in incidence from 1994 to 2014 – and an 11% increase in mortality from 2005 to 2015 – for adults younger than 55 years.

The current age-specific incidence rate for adults 45-49 years is 31.4 per 100,000, compared with 58.4 per 100,000 in adults 50-54 years. However, the ACS guideline authors said the higher rate in the older cohort is partly influenced by more frequent screening. “The true underlying risk in adults aged 45-49 years is likely closer to the risk in adults aged 50-54 years than the most recent age-specific rates would suggest,” they wrote.

Since patients in this age range have not been routinely screened before, the ACS recommendation is based on modeling. Now we need to analyze the outcomes of early screening to identify which patients will benefit most. Choices for screening include either a structural examination or a high-sensitivity stool-based test, according to the guideline, which doesn’t state a preference for any particular test.

The AGA, in their statement in response, noted that with CRC rates rising in people younger than age 50, it is appropriate to consider beginning routine screening at age 45. The statement continues “Since patients in this age range have not been previously routinely screened, the ACS recommendation is based on modeling. Now we need to analyze the outcomes of early screening to identify which patients will benefit most.”

In addition to Dr. Wolf, members of the ACS Guideline Development Group received no compensation.

SOURCE: Wolf AMD et al. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018 May 30. doi: 10.3322/caac.21457.

The American Cancer Society recommends all U.S. adults at average risk of colorectal cancer (CRC) undergo screening starting at age 45 years.

That update to ACS recommendations is based on an increasing burden of CRC in younger individuals, microsimulation modeling results, and a “reasonable expectation” that screening tests will perform as well in adults aged 45-49 years as they do in older adults, members of the ACS Guideline Development Group said in the guideline, which was published in CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians.

Starting screening at age 45 contrasts with recommendations from the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF), which in 2016 gave an “A” recommendation for CRC screening from 50 to 75 years of age. At the time, the USPSTF noted a modest increase in life-years gained by starting earlier, based on microsimulation modeling. But it concluded that available evidence best supported starting at age 50.

The updated ACS guidelines are based in part on a modeling study that the authors say extends the previous analysis conducted for the USPSTF.

“The recommendation places a high value on the potential years of life saved, addresses anticipated rising incidence going forward, and is expected to contribute to the reduction in disparities in incidence before age 50 years in some racial groups,” the ACS guideline authors added.

The recommendation to start screening at age 45 is a “qualified” recommendation, the authors said, given the limitations of the current evidence base. Most studies to date have been focused on older individuals, in keeping with long-standing recommendations to start screening at age 50.

The move downward in screening age recommendation acknowledges one of the most “significant and disturbing” developments in CRC, the guideline’s authors said: the marked increase in incidence among younger individuals.

While CRC incidence and mortality have been declining in adults aged 55 years and older, recent studies cited in the ACS guideline document show a 51% increase in incidence from 1994 to 2014 – and an 11% increase in mortality from 2005 to 2015 – for adults younger than 55 years.

The current age-specific incidence rate for adults 45-49 years is 31.4 per 100,000, compared with 58.4 per 100,000 in adults 50-54 years. However, the ACS guideline authors said the higher rate in the older cohort is partly influenced by more frequent screening. “The true underlying risk in adults aged 45-49 years is likely closer to the risk in adults aged 50-54 years than the most recent age-specific rates would suggest,” they wrote.

Since patients in this age range have not been routinely screened before, the ACS recommendation is based on modeling. Now we need to analyze the outcomes of early screening to identify which patients will benefit most. Choices for screening include either a structural examination or a high-sensitivity stool-based test, according to the guideline, which doesn’t state a preference for any particular test.

The AGA, in their statement in response, noted that with CRC rates rising in people younger than age 50, it is appropriate to consider beginning routine screening at age 45. The statement continues “Since patients in this age range have not been previously routinely screened, the ACS recommendation is based on modeling. Now we need to analyze the outcomes of early screening to identify which patients will benefit most.”

In addition to Dr. Wolf, members of the ACS Guideline Development Group received no compensation.

SOURCE: Wolf AMD et al. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018 May 30. doi: 10.3322/caac.21457.

The American Cancer Society recommends all U.S. adults at average risk of colorectal cancer (CRC) undergo screening starting at age 45 years.

That update to ACS recommendations is based on an increasing burden of CRC in younger individuals, microsimulation modeling results, and a “reasonable expectation” that screening tests will perform as well in adults aged 45-49 years as they do in older adults, members of the ACS Guideline Development Group said in the guideline, which was published in CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians.

Starting screening at age 45 contrasts with recommendations from the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF), which in 2016 gave an “A” recommendation for CRC screening from 50 to 75 years of age. At the time, the USPSTF noted a modest increase in life-years gained by starting earlier, based on microsimulation modeling. But it concluded that available evidence best supported starting at age 50.

The updated ACS guidelines are based in part on a modeling study that the authors say extends the previous analysis conducted for the USPSTF.

“The recommendation places a high value on the potential years of life saved, addresses anticipated rising incidence going forward, and is expected to contribute to the reduction in disparities in incidence before age 50 years in some racial groups,” the ACS guideline authors added.

The recommendation to start screening at age 45 is a “qualified” recommendation, the authors said, given the limitations of the current evidence base. Most studies to date have been focused on older individuals, in keeping with long-standing recommendations to start screening at age 50.

The move downward in screening age recommendation acknowledges one of the most “significant and disturbing” developments in CRC, the guideline’s authors said: the marked increase in incidence among younger individuals.

While CRC incidence and mortality have been declining in adults aged 55 years and older, recent studies cited in the ACS guideline document show a 51% increase in incidence from 1994 to 2014 – and an 11% increase in mortality from 2005 to 2015 – for adults younger than 55 years.

The current age-specific incidence rate for adults 45-49 years is 31.4 per 100,000, compared with 58.4 per 100,000 in adults 50-54 years. However, the ACS guideline authors said the higher rate in the older cohort is partly influenced by more frequent screening. “The true underlying risk in adults aged 45-49 years is likely closer to the risk in adults aged 50-54 years than the most recent age-specific rates would suggest,” they wrote.

Since patients in this age range have not been routinely screened before, the ACS recommendation is based on modeling. Now we need to analyze the outcomes of early screening to identify which patients will benefit most. Choices for screening include either a structural examination or a high-sensitivity stool-based test, according to the guideline, which doesn’t state a preference for any particular test.

The AGA, in their statement in response, noted that with CRC rates rising in people younger than age 50, it is appropriate to consider beginning routine screening at age 45. The statement continues “Since patients in this age range have not been previously routinely screened, the ACS recommendation is based on modeling. Now we need to analyze the outcomes of early screening to identify which patients will benefit most.”

In addition to Dr. Wolf, members of the ACS Guideline Development Group received no compensation.

SOURCE: Wolf AMD et al. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018 May 30. doi: 10.3322/caac.21457.

The United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic evidence review of 62 randomized clinical trials with a total of 35,058 patients to gather evidence on the effectiveness and harms of primary care–relevant interventions to prevent falls in community-dwelling adults 65 years or older.¹This 2018 statement recommends exercise interventions (B recommendation), advises selective offering of multifactorial interventions based on individual circumstances (C recommendation), and discourages the use of vitamin D supplementation (D recommendation).² It thereby has updated its 2012 statement, in which exercise or physical therapy and vitamin D supplementation were recommended to prevent falls.

Importance

Scope of review

Out of the 62 randomized clinical trials, 65% of intervention studies targeted patients at high risk of falls; they were most commonly identified by history of prior falls, but mobility, gait, and balance impairment were often also considered. Specific medical diagnoses that could affect fall-related outcomes (osteoporosis, visual impairment, neurocognitive disorders) were excluded. This review did not look at the outcome of studies in populations who were vitamin D deficient because, in this population, vitamin D supplementation would be considered treatment rather than prevention. Of note, women constituted the majority in most studies.

Exercise interventions

USPSTF found five good-quality and 16 fair-quality studies, which altogether included a total of 7,297 patients, that reported on various exercise interventions to prevent falls; altogether, these studies included a total of 7,297 patients. Of the studies, 57% recruited populations at high risk for falls with a mean age ranging from 68 to 88 years. Exercise interventions included supervised individual classes, group classes, and physical therapy. The most common exercise component was gait, balance, and functional training; other common components included, in order of frequency, were resistance training, flexibility training, and endurance training. Most common frequency and duration were three sessions per week for 12 months. Exercise interventions reduced the number of persons experiencing a fall (relative risk 0.89; 95% confidence interval, 0.81-0.97), reduced the number of injurious falls (incidence rate ratio, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.73-0.90), and revealed a statistically insignificant reduction in the number of falls. Reported adverse events were minor and most commonly included pain or bruising related to exercise.

Multifactorial interventions

USPSTF found seven good-quality and 19 fair-quality studies that reported on multifactorial interventions; altogether, these studies included a total of 15,506 patients. Of the studies, 73% recruited populations at high risk for falls, and the mean age ranged from 71.9 to 85 years. Multifactorial interventions had two components:

• Initial assessment to screen for modifiable risk factors for falls (multidisciplinary comprehensive geriatric assessment or specific assessment that evaluated various factors, such as balance, gait, vision, cardiovascular health, medication, environment, cognition, and psychological health).
• Subsequent customized interventions (group or individual exercise, cognitive-behavioral therapy, nutrition, environmental modification, physical or occupational therapy, social or community services, and referral to specialists).

While studies found that multifactorial interventions reduced the number of falls (IRR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.68-0.91), they did not reduce the number of people who experienced a fall (RR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.89-1.01) or an injurious fall (RR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.85-1.03). Four studies reported minor harm, mostly bruising, from exercise. Therefore, USPSTF has recommended that clinicians take into consideration patient’s medical history (including prior falls and comorbidities) to selectively offer multifactorial interventions.

Vitamin D supplementation

USPSTF found four good-quality and three fair-quality studies that reported on the effect of vitamin D supplementation on the prevention of falls; altogether, these studies included a total of 7,531 patients. Of the studies, 43% recruited populations at high risk for falls. The mean age ranged from 71 to 76.8 years, and mean serum 25-OH vitamin D levels ranged from 26.4 to 31.8 ng/mL. Vitamin D formulations and dosages varied among trials from 700 IU/day to 150,000 IU/3 months to 500,000 IU/year. Pooled analyses did not show a significant reduction in falls (IRR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.79-1.20) or the number of persons experiencing a fall (RR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.88-1.08). Only two trials reported on injurious falls; one reported an increase and the other reported no statistically significant difference. One study using high doses of Vitamin D supplementation (500,000 IU per year) showed statistically significant increase in all three endpoints.

Recommendation of others for fall prevention

The National Institution of Aging has emphasized exercise for strength and balance, monitoring for environmental hazards, and hearing and vision care, as well as medication management. The American Geriatric Society (AGS) has recommended asking about prior falls annually and assessing gait and balance on those who have experienced a fall. The AGS also has recommended strength and gait training, environmental modification, medication management, and vitamin D supplementation of at least 800 IU/day for those vitamin D deficient or at increased risk of falls. The Center for Disease Control and Prevention recommends STEADI (Stopping Elderly Accidents, Deaths & Injuries), a coordinated approach to implement the AGS’s clinical practice guidelines. The American Academy of Family Physicians recommends exercise or physical therapy and vitamin D supplementation.

The bottom line

Regarding reduction of falls, the USPSTF found adequate evidence that exercise interventions confer a moderate net benefit, multifactorial interventions have a small net benefit, and vitamin D supplementation offers no net benefit in preventing falls.

References

1. Guirquis-Blake JM et al. JAMA. 2018 Apr 24;319(16):1705-16.

2. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force et al. JAMA. 2018 Apr 24;319(16):1696-1704.
 

Dr. Shrestha is a first-year resident in the family medicine residency program at Abington (Pa.) Jefferson Health. Dr. Skolnik is a professor of family and community medicine at Jefferson Medical College, Philadelphia, and an associate director of the family medicine residency program at Abington Jefferson Health.

.

The United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic evidence review of 62 randomized clinical trials with a total of 35,058 patients to gather evidence on the effectiveness and harms of primary care–relevant interventions to prevent falls in community-dwelling adults 65 years or older.¹This 2018 statement recommends exercise interventions (B recommendation), advises selective offering of multifactorial interventions based on individual circumstances (C recommendation), and discourages the use of vitamin D supplementation (D recommendation).² It thereby has updated its 2012 statement, in which exercise or physical therapy and vitamin D supplementation were recommended to prevent falls.

Importance

Scope of review

Out of the 62 randomized clinical trials, 65% of intervention studies targeted patients at high risk of falls; they were most commonly identified by history of prior falls, but mobility, gait, and balance impairment were often also considered. Specific medical diagnoses that could affect fall-related outcomes (osteoporosis, visual impairment, neurocognitive disorders) were excluded. This review did not look at the outcome of studies in populations who were vitamin D deficient because, in this population, vitamin D supplementation would be considered treatment rather than prevention. Of note, women constituted the majority in most studies.

Exercise interventions

USPSTF found five good-quality and 16 fair-quality studies, which altogether included a total of 7,297 patients, that reported on various exercise interventions to prevent falls; altogether, these studies included a total of 7,297 patients. Of the studies, 57% recruited populations at high risk for falls with a mean age ranging from 68 to 88 years. Exercise interventions included supervised individual classes, group classes, and physical therapy. The most common exercise component was gait, balance, and functional training; other common components included, in order of frequency, were resistance training, flexibility training, and endurance training. Most common frequency and duration were three sessions per week for 12 months. Exercise interventions reduced the number of persons experiencing a fall (relative risk 0.89; 95% confidence interval, 0.81-0.97), reduced the number of injurious falls (incidence rate ratio, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.73-0.90), and revealed a statistically insignificant reduction in the number of falls. Reported adverse events were minor and most commonly included pain or bruising related to exercise.

Multifactorial interventions

USPSTF found seven good-quality and 19 fair-quality studies that reported on multifactorial interventions; altogether, these studies included a total of 15,506 patients. Of the studies, 73% recruited populations at high risk for falls, and the mean age ranged from 71.9 to 85 years. Multifactorial interventions had two components:

• Initial assessment to screen for modifiable risk factors for falls (multidisciplinary comprehensive geriatric assessment or specific assessment that evaluated various factors, such as balance, gait, vision, cardiovascular health, medication, environment, cognition, and psychological health).
• Subsequent customized interventions (group or individual exercise, cognitive-behavioral therapy, nutrition, environmental modification, physical or occupational therapy, social or community services, and referral to specialists).

While studies found that multifactorial interventions reduced the number of falls (IRR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.68-0.91), they did not reduce the number of people who experienced a fall (RR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.89-1.01) or an injurious fall (RR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.85-1.03). Four studies reported minor harm, mostly bruising, from exercise. Therefore, USPSTF has recommended that clinicians take into consideration patient’s medical history (including prior falls and comorbidities) to selectively offer multifactorial interventions.

Vitamin D supplementation

USPSTF found four good-quality and three fair-quality studies that reported on the effect of vitamin D supplementation on the prevention of falls; altogether, these studies included a total of 7,531 patients. Of the studies, 43% recruited populations at high risk for falls. The mean age ranged from 71 to 76.8 years, and mean serum 25-OH vitamin D levels ranged from 26.4 to 31.8 ng/mL. Vitamin D formulations and dosages varied among trials from 700 IU/day to 150,000 IU/3 months to 500,000 IU/year. Pooled analyses did not show a significant reduction in falls (IRR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.79-1.20) or the number of persons experiencing a fall (RR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.88-1.08). Only two trials reported on injurious falls; one reported an increase and the other reported no statistically significant difference. One study using high doses of Vitamin D supplementation (500,000 IU per year) showed statistically significant increase in all three endpoints.

Recommendation of others for fall prevention

The National Institution of Aging has emphasized exercise for strength and balance, monitoring for environmental hazards, and hearing and vision care, as well as medication management. The American Geriatric Society (AGS) has recommended asking about prior falls annually and assessing gait and balance on those who have experienced a fall. The AGS also has recommended strength and gait training, environmental modification, medication management, and vitamin D supplementation of at least 800 IU/day for those vitamin D deficient or at increased risk of falls. The Center for Disease Control and Prevention recommends STEADI (Stopping Elderly Accidents, Deaths & Injuries), a coordinated approach to implement the AGS’s clinical practice guidelines. The American Academy of Family Physicians recommends exercise or physical therapy and vitamin D supplementation.

The bottom line

Regarding reduction of falls, the USPSTF found adequate evidence that exercise interventions confer a moderate net benefit, multifactorial interventions have a small net benefit, and vitamin D supplementation offers no net benefit in preventing falls.

References

1. Guirquis-Blake JM et al. JAMA. 2018 Apr 24;319(16):1705-16.

2. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force et al. JAMA. 2018 Apr 24;319(16):1696-1704.
 

Dr. Shrestha is a first-year resident in the family medicine residency program at Abington (Pa.) Jefferson Health. Dr. Skolnik is a professor of family and community medicine at Jefferson Medical College, Philadelphia, and an associate director of the family medicine residency program at Abington Jefferson Health.

.

The United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic evidence review of 62 randomized clinical trials with a total of 35,058 patients to gather evidence on the effectiveness and harms of primary care–relevant interventions to prevent falls in community-dwelling adults 65 years or older.¹This 2018 statement recommends exercise interventions (B recommendation), advises selective offering of multifactorial interventions based on individual circumstances (C recommendation), and discourages the use of vitamin D supplementation (D recommendation).² It thereby has updated its 2012 statement, in which exercise or physical therapy and vitamin D supplementation were recommended to prevent falls.

Importance

Scope of review

Out of the 62 randomized clinical trials, 65% of intervention studies targeted patients at high risk of falls; they were most commonly identified by history of prior falls, but mobility, gait, and balance impairment were often also considered. Specific medical diagnoses that could affect fall-related outcomes (osteoporosis, visual impairment, neurocognitive disorders) were excluded. This review did not look at the outcome of studies in populations who were vitamin D deficient because, in this population, vitamin D supplementation would be considered treatment rather than prevention. Of note, women constituted the majority in most studies.

Exercise interventions

USPSTF found five good-quality and 16 fair-quality studies, which altogether included a total of 7,297 patients, that reported on various exercise interventions to prevent falls; altogether, these studies included a total of 7,297 patients. Of the studies, 57% recruited populations at high risk for falls with a mean age ranging from 68 to 88 years. Exercise interventions included supervised individual classes, group classes, and physical therapy. The most common exercise component was gait, balance, and functional training; other common components included, in order of frequency, were resistance training, flexibility training, and endurance training. Most common frequency and duration were three sessions per week for 12 months. Exercise interventions reduced the number of persons experiencing a fall (relative risk 0.89; 95% confidence interval, 0.81-0.97), reduced the number of injurious falls (incidence rate ratio, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.73-0.90), and revealed a statistically insignificant reduction in the number of falls. Reported adverse events were minor and most commonly included pain or bruising related to exercise.

Multifactorial interventions

USPSTF found seven good-quality and 19 fair-quality studies that reported on multifactorial interventions; altogether, these studies included a total of 15,506 patients. Of the studies, 73% recruited populations at high risk for falls, and the mean age ranged from 71.9 to 85 years. Multifactorial interventions had two components:

• Initial assessment to screen for modifiable risk factors for falls (multidisciplinary comprehensive geriatric assessment or specific assessment that evaluated various factors, such as balance, gait, vision, cardiovascular health, medication, environment, cognition, and psychological health).
• Subsequent customized interventions (group or individual exercise, cognitive-behavioral therapy, nutrition, environmental modification, physical or occupational therapy, social or community services, and referral to specialists).

While studies found that multifactorial interventions reduced the number of falls (IRR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.68-0.91), they did not reduce the number of people who experienced a fall (RR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.89-1.01) or an injurious fall (RR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.85-1.03). Four studies reported minor harm, mostly bruising, from exercise. Therefore, USPSTF has recommended that clinicians take into consideration patient’s medical history (including prior falls and comorbidities) to selectively offer multifactorial interventions.

Vitamin D supplementation

USPSTF found four good-quality and three fair-quality studies that reported on the effect of vitamin D supplementation on the prevention of falls; altogether, these studies included a total of 7,531 patients. Of the studies, 43% recruited populations at high risk for falls. The mean age ranged from 71 to 76.8 years, and mean serum 25-OH vitamin D levels ranged from 26.4 to 31.8 ng/mL. Vitamin D formulations and dosages varied among trials from 700 IU/day to 150,000 IU/3 months to 500,000 IU/year. Pooled analyses did not show a significant reduction in falls (IRR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.79-1.20) or the number of persons experiencing a fall (RR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.88-1.08). Only two trials reported on injurious falls; one reported an increase and the other reported no statistically significant difference. One study using high doses of Vitamin D supplementation (500,000 IU per year) showed statistically significant increase in all three endpoints.

Recommendation of others for fall prevention

The National Institution of Aging has emphasized exercise for strength and balance, monitoring for environmental hazards, and hearing and vision care, as well as medication management. The American Geriatric Society (AGS) has recommended asking about prior falls annually and assessing gait and balance on those who have experienced a fall. The AGS also has recommended strength and gait training, environmental modification, medication management, and vitamin D supplementation of at least 800 IU/day for those vitamin D deficient or at increased risk of falls. The Center for Disease Control and Prevention recommends STEADI (Stopping Elderly Accidents, Deaths & Injuries), a coordinated approach to implement the AGS’s clinical practice guidelines. The American Academy of Family Physicians recommends exercise or physical therapy and vitamin D supplementation.

The bottom line

Regarding reduction of falls, the USPSTF found adequate evidence that exercise interventions confer a moderate net benefit, multifactorial interventions have a small net benefit, and vitamin D supplementation offers no net benefit in preventing falls.

References

1. Guirquis-Blake JM et al. JAMA. 2018 Apr 24;319(16):1705-16.

2. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force et al. JAMA. 2018 Apr 24;319(16):1696-1704.
 

Dr. Shrestha is a first-year resident in the family medicine residency program at Abington (Pa.) Jefferson Health. Dr. Skolnik is a professor of family and community medicine at Jefferson Medical College, Philadelphia, and an associate director of the family medicine residency program at Abington Jefferson Health.

.

SAN DIEGO – National guidelines for the treatment of malignant pleural mesothelioma often are not followed, a new study showed, with fewer than one-third of patients receiving cancer-directed surgery.

Another 32% received no treatment, although that didn’t seem to have an impact on median months of survival.

Still, “there can be a wide variation in median survival time, depending on clinical factors and tumor characteristics,” said study coauthor Harmik Soukiasian, MD, of Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles. “Given the variation in prognosis, it is quite astonishing that over 30% of MPM patients are not receiving any form of treatment. As clinicians armed with these data, we need to investigate why that is.”

Dr. Soukiasian presented the study findings at the annual meeting of the American Association for Thoracic Surgery.

MPM, a rare cancer, is mainly linked to asbestos exposure. “MPM is almost always a fatal disease, and the prognosis can only be modestly influenced by oncological treatments,” according to the authors of guidelines released in 2013. “The diagnostic process can be complex, with highly specialized advice frequently required to arrive at a definite diagnosis. Treatment varies from therapeutic nihilism to radical combined-modality treatment approaches” (J Thorac Dis. 2013 Dec;5[6]:E254-E307).

Surgical resection is a controversial treatment for MPM, Dr. Soukiasian said. It is “based on the principle of macroscopic resection of solid tumor with adjuvant therapy to treat micrometastatic disease,” he explained. “Cancer-directed surgery for MPM is usually reserved for localized epithelial type histology and is associated with a 5-year survival rate of 15%.”

For the new study, the investigators tracked 3,834 patients in the National Cancer Database (2004-2014) diagnosed with MPM clinical stages I-III. Most had epithelioid MPM (69%), with sarcomatoid (17%) and mixed subtype (15%) making up the rest. They examined whether patient treatment complied with the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines, which recommend surgery in resectable epithelioid MPM.

SOURCE: Espinoza-Mercado F et al. General Thoracic Surgery Simultaneous Scientific Session. Abstract 18.

SAN DIEGO – National guidelines for the treatment of malignant pleural mesothelioma often are not followed, a new study showed, with fewer than one-third of patients receiving cancer-directed surgery.

Another 32% received no treatment, although that didn’t seem to have an impact on median months of survival.

Still, “there can be a wide variation in median survival time, depending on clinical factors and tumor characteristics,” said study coauthor Harmik Soukiasian, MD, of Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles. “Given the variation in prognosis, it is quite astonishing that over 30% of MPM patients are not receiving any form of treatment. As clinicians armed with these data, we need to investigate why that is.”

Dr. Soukiasian presented the study findings at the annual meeting of the American Association for Thoracic Surgery.

MPM, a rare cancer, is mainly linked to asbestos exposure. “MPM is almost always a fatal disease, and the prognosis can only be modestly influenced by oncological treatments,” according to the authors of guidelines released in 2013. “The diagnostic process can be complex, with highly specialized advice frequently required to arrive at a definite diagnosis. Treatment varies from therapeutic nihilism to radical combined-modality treatment approaches” (J Thorac Dis. 2013 Dec;5[6]:E254-E307).

Surgical resection is a controversial treatment for MPM, Dr. Soukiasian said. It is “based on the principle of macroscopic resection of solid tumor with adjuvant therapy to treat micrometastatic disease,” he explained. “Cancer-directed surgery for MPM is usually reserved for localized epithelial type histology and is associated with a 5-year survival rate of 15%.”

For the new study, the investigators tracked 3,834 patients in the National Cancer Database (2004-2014) diagnosed with MPM clinical stages I-III. Most had epithelioid MPM (69%), with sarcomatoid (17%) and mixed subtype (15%) making up the rest. They examined whether patient treatment complied with the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines, which recommend surgery in resectable epithelioid MPM.

SOURCE: Espinoza-Mercado F et al. General Thoracic Surgery Simultaneous Scientific Session. Abstract 18.

SAN DIEGO – National guidelines for the treatment of malignant pleural mesothelioma often are not followed, a new study showed, with fewer than one-third of patients receiving cancer-directed surgery.

Another 32% received no treatment, although that didn’t seem to have an impact on median months of survival.

Still, “there can be a wide variation in median survival time, depending on clinical factors and tumor characteristics,” said study coauthor Harmik Soukiasian, MD, of Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles. “Given the variation in prognosis, it is quite astonishing that over 30% of MPM patients are not receiving any form of treatment. As clinicians armed with these data, we need to investigate why that is.”

Dr. Soukiasian presented the study findings at the annual meeting of the American Association for Thoracic Surgery.

MPM, a rare cancer, is mainly linked to asbestos exposure. “MPM is almost always a fatal disease, and the prognosis can only be modestly influenced by oncological treatments,” according to the authors of guidelines released in 2013. “The diagnostic process can be complex, with highly specialized advice frequently required to arrive at a definite diagnosis. Treatment varies from therapeutic nihilism to radical combined-modality treatment approaches” (J Thorac Dis. 2013 Dec;5[6]:E254-E307).

Surgical resection is a controversial treatment for MPM, Dr. Soukiasian said. It is “based on the principle of macroscopic resection of solid tumor with adjuvant therapy to treat micrometastatic disease,” he explained. “Cancer-directed surgery for MPM is usually reserved for localized epithelial type histology and is associated with a 5-year survival rate of 15%.”

For the new study, the investigators tracked 3,834 patients in the National Cancer Database (2004-2014) diagnosed with MPM clinical stages I-III. Most had epithelioid MPM (69%), with sarcomatoid (17%) and mixed subtype (15%) making up the rest. They examined whether patient treatment complied with the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines, which recommend surgery in resectable epithelioid MPM.

SOURCE: Espinoza-Mercado F et al. General Thoracic Surgery Simultaneous Scientific Session. Abstract 18.

WASHINGTON – The National Action Alliance for Suicide Prevention released in April 2018 what the organization said was the first set of “standard care” recommendations for suicide prevention in people with suicide risk.

Care for people with a suicide risk in the United States “is not working very well. Evidence-based tools exist to detect and manage suicidality, but they are new and infrequently used” by many clinicians, including those seeing suicidal patients in primary care, emergency, or hospital settings, said Michael F. Hogan, PhD, during a session on the new standard-care recommendations at the annual conference of the American Association of Suicidology.

Mitchel L. Zoler/MDedge News

Mitchel L. Zoler/MDedge News

[email protected]

WASHINGTON – The National Action Alliance for Suicide Prevention released in April 2018 what the organization said was the first set of “standard care” recommendations for suicide prevention in people with suicide risk.

Care for people with a suicide risk in the United States “is not working very well. Evidence-based tools exist to detect and manage suicidality, but they are new and infrequently used” by many clinicians, including those seeing suicidal patients in primary care, emergency, or hospital settings, said Michael F. Hogan, PhD, during a session on the new standard-care recommendations at the annual conference of the American Association of Suicidology.

Mitchel L. Zoler/MDedge News

Mitchel L. Zoler/MDedge News

[email protected]

WASHINGTON – The National Action Alliance for Suicide Prevention released in April 2018 what the organization said was the first set of “standard care” recommendations for suicide prevention in people with suicide risk.

Care for people with a suicide risk in the United States “is not working very well. Evidence-based tools exist to detect and manage suicidality, but they are new and infrequently used” by many clinicians, including those seeing suicidal patients in primary care, emergency, or hospital settings, said Michael F. Hogan, PhD, during a session on the new standard-care recommendations at the annual conference of the American Association of Suicidology.

Mitchel L. Zoler/MDedge News

Mitchel L. Zoler/MDedge News

[email protected]

The USPSTF recommends that, to reduce the risk of false positives and unnecessary complications from prostate cancer screening and treatment, physicians and their male patients aged 55-69 years should review together the pros and cons.

Clinicians should not conduct prostate cancer screening in men aged 55-69 years who do not ask for it (level C recommendation), according to the USPSTF recommendations, published in JAMA, which also recommend against any prostate cancer screening for men aged 70 years and older (level D recommendation). The recommendations replace those from 2012, and upgrade the statement against routine screening from a D to a C.

“The change in recommendation grade further reflects new evidence about and increased use of active surveillance of low-risk prostate cancer, which may reduce the risk of subsequent harms from screening,” according to the USPSTF.

The recommendations apply to asymptomatic adult men in the general United States population with no previous diagnosis of prostate cancer, as well as those whose ethnicity or family history put them at increased risk of death from prostate cancer.

In the evidence report published in JAMA, Joshua J. Fenton, MD, professor in the department of family and community medicine of the University of California, Davis, Sacramento, and his colleagues reviewed 63 studies comprising 1,904,950 individuals. The researchers examined the findings for information including the effectiveness of PSA screening and the potential harms associated with both screening and cancer treatment if disease was identified.

Overdiagnosis of prostate cancer ranged from 21% to 50% for cancers detected by screening, and one randomized trial of more than 1,000 men found no significant reduction in mortality for prostatectomy or radiation therapy compared with active monitoring.

Overall, men randomized to PSA screening had no significant reduction in risk of prostate cancer mortality in trials from the United States or the United Kingdom, although data from a European trial showed a significant reduction. Complications requiring hospitalization occurred in 0.5%-1.6% of men who had biopsies after screening showed abnormal results.

The evidence review was limited by several factors including a lack of data on newer treatments such as cryotherapy and high-intensity focused ultrasound, the researchers noted.

However, the data support an individualized approach to PSA screening for prostate cancer, in which each man can weigh the potential risks and benefits of screening, according to the USPSTF.

The research was funded by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. The researchers had no financial conflicts to disclose.

SOURCE: Fenton J et al. JAMA. 2018;319(18):1914-31. and JAMA. 2018;319(18):1901-13.

The USPSTF recommends that, to reduce the risk of false positives and unnecessary complications from prostate cancer screening and treatment, physicians and their male patients aged 55-69 years should review together the pros and cons.

Clinicians should not conduct prostate cancer screening in men aged 55-69 years who do not ask for it (level C recommendation), according to the USPSTF recommendations, published in JAMA, which also recommend against any prostate cancer screening for men aged 70 years and older (level D recommendation). The recommendations replace those from 2012, and upgrade the statement against routine screening from a D to a C.

“The change in recommendation grade further reflects new evidence about and increased use of active surveillance of low-risk prostate cancer, which may reduce the risk of subsequent harms from screening,” according to the USPSTF.

The recommendations apply to asymptomatic adult men in the general United States population with no previous diagnosis of prostate cancer, as well as those whose ethnicity or family history put them at increased risk of death from prostate cancer.

In the evidence report published in JAMA, Joshua J. Fenton, MD, professor in the department of family and community medicine of the University of California, Davis, Sacramento, and his colleagues reviewed 63 studies comprising 1,904,950 individuals. The researchers examined the findings for information including the effectiveness of PSA screening and the potential harms associated with both screening and cancer treatment if disease was identified.

Overdiagnosis of prostate cancer ranged from 21% to 50% for cancers detected by screening, and one randomized trial of more than 1,000 men found no significant reduction in mortality for prostatectomy or radiation therapy compared with active monitoring.

Overall, men randomized to PSA screening had no significant reduction in risk of prostate cancer mortality in trials from the United States or the United Kingdom, although data from a European trial showed a significant reduction. Complications requiring hospitalization occurred in 0.5%-1.6% of men who had biopsies after screening showed abnormal results.

The evidence review was limited by several factors including a lack of data on newer treatments such as cryotherapy and high-intensity focused ultrasound, the researchers noted.

However, the data support an individualized approach to PSA screening for prostate cancer, in which each man can weigh the potential risks and benefits of screening, according to the USPSTF.

The research was funded by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. The researchers had no financial conflicts to disclose.

SOURCE: Fenton J et al. JAMA. 2018;319(18):1914-31. and JAMA. 2018;319(18):1901-13.

The USPSTF recommends that, to reduce the risk of false positives and unnecessary complications from prostate cancer screening and treatment, physicians and their male patients aged 55-69 years should review together the pros and cons.

Clinicians should not conduct prostate cancer screening in men aged 55-69 years who do not ask for it (level C recommendation), according to the USPSTF recommendations, published in JAMA, which also recommend against any prostate cancer screening for men aged 70 years and older (level D recommendation). The recommendations replace those from 2012, and upgrade the statement against routine screening from a D to a C.

“The change in recommendation grade further reflects new evidence about and increased use of active surveillance of low-risk prostate cancer, which may reduce the risk of subsequent harms from screening,” according to the USPSTF.

The recommendations apply to asymptomatic adult men in the general United States population with no previous diagnosis of prostate cancer, as well as those whose ethnicity or family history put them at increased risk of death from prostate cancer.

In the evidence report published in JAMA, Joshua J. Fenton, MD, professor in the department of family and community medicine of the University of California, Davis, Sacramento, and his colleagues reviewed 63 studies comprising 1,904,950 individuals. The researchers examined the findings for information including the effectiveness of PSA screening and the potential harms associated with both screening and cancer treatment if disease was identified.

Overdiagnosis of prostate cancer ranged from 21% to 50% for cancers detected by screening, and one randomized trial of more than 1,000 men found no significant reduction in mortality for prostatectomy or radiation therapy compared with active monitoring.

Overall, men randomized to PSA screening had no significant reduction in risk of prostate cancer mortality in trials from the United States or the United Kingdom, although data from a European trial showed a significant reduction. Complications requiring hospitalization occurred in 0.5%-1.6% of men who had biopsies after screening showed abnormal results.

The evidence review was limited by several factors including a lack of data on newer treatments such as cryotherapy and high-intensity focused ultrasound, the researchers noted.

However, the data support an individualized approach to PSA screening for prostate cancer, in which each man can weigh the potential risks and benefits of screening, according to the USPSTF.

The research was funded by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. The researchers had no financial conflicts to disclose.

SOURCE: Fenton J et al. JAMA. 2018;319(18):1914-31. and JAMA. 2018;319(18):1901-13.

LAS VEGAS – It may be only a matter of time before the “gold standard” small biopsy is no longer considered mandatory to make a diagnosis of celiac disease in adults, according to Joseph A. Murray, MD, consultant in the division of gastroenterology and hepatology and department of immunology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn.

“Right now, none of the adult societies support biopsy avoidance, but I predict that it will come to be,” Dr. Murray said at the inaugural Perspectives in Digestive Diseases meeting held by Global Academy for Medical Education.

Andrew D. Bowser/MDedge News

The first society to endorse skipping the biopsy was the European Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition.

In guidelines for the diagnosis of celiac disease, that group said a celiac diagnosis could be made based on symptoms, antibodies, and HLA in children with symptoms suggestive of the disease and high antibody levels (IgA anti-tissue transglutaminase type 2 antibody titers greater than 10 times the upper limit of normal).

“The data [are] now pretty good to support that approach in symptomatic children,” Dr. Murray said. “If we apply these to adult patients, it’s not bad, actually, partly because our biopsies aren’t perfect.”

However, not all adult gastroenterology specialists agreed with the recommendations of the pediatric society. Guidelines from the British Society of Gastroenterology have stated that serology cannot replace biopsy, which “remains essential” for celiac disease diagnosis.

Global Academy and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.

Dr. Murray reported disclosures related to Ardent Mills, DBV Technologies, Evelo, GlaxoSmithKline, Johnson & Johnson, Immunogenix, Innovate, National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health, Takeda, Torax Medical, and UCB.

LAS VEGAS – It may be only a matter of time before the “gold standard” small biopsy is no longer considered mandatory to make a diagnosis of celiac disease in adults, according to Joseph A. Murray, MD, consultant in the division of gastroenterology and hepatology and department of immunology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn.

“Right now, none of the adult societies support biopsy avoidance, but I predict that it will come to be,” Dr. Murray said at the inaugural Perspectives in Digestive Diseases meeting held by Global Academy for Medical Education.

Andrew D. Bowser/MDedge News

The first society to endorse skipping the biopsy was the European Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition.

In guidelines for the diagnosis of celiac disease, that group said a celiac diagnosis could be made based on symptoms, antibodies, and HLA in children with symptoms suggestive of the disease and high antibody levels (IgA anti-tissue transglutaminase type 2 antibody titers greater than 10 times the upper limit of normal).

“The data [are] now pretty good to support that approach in symptomatic children,” Dr. Murray said. “If we apply these to adult patients, it’s not bad, actually, partly because our biopsies aren’t perfect.”

However, not all adult gastroenterology specialists agreed with the recommendations of the pediatric society. Guidelines from the British Society of Gastroenterology have stated that serology cannot replace biopsy, which “remains essential” for celiac disease diagnosis.

Global Academy and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.

Dr. Murray reported disclosures related to Ardent Mills, DBV Technologies, Evelo, GlaxoSmithKline, Johnson & Johnson, Immunogenix, Innovate, National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health, Takeda, Torax Medical, and UCB.

LAS VEGAS – It may be only a matter of time before the “gold standard” small biopsy is no longer considered mandatory to make a diagnosis of celiac disease in adults, according to Joseph A. Murray, MD, consultant in the division of gastroenterology and hepatology and department of immunology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn.

“Right now, none of the adult societies support biopsy avoidance, but I predict that it will come to be,” Dr. Murray said at the inaugural Perspectives in Digestive Diseases meeting held by Global Academy for Medical Education.

Andrew D. Bowser/MDedge News

The first society to endorse skipping the biopsy was the European Society for Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and Nutrition.

In guidelines for the diagnosis of celiac disease, that group said a celiac diagnosis could be made based on symptoms, antibodies, and HLA in children with symptoms suggestive of the disease and high antibody levels (IgA anti-tissue transglutaminase type 2 antibody titers greater than 10 times the upper limit of normal).

“The data [are] now pretty good to support that approach in symptomatic children,” Dr. Murray said. “If we apply these to adult patients, it’s not bad, actually, partly because our biopsies aren’t perfect.”

However, not all adult gastroenterology specialists agreed with the recommendations of the pediatric society. Guidelines from the British Society of Gastroenterology have stated that serology cannot replace biopsy, which “remains essential” for celiac disease diagnosis.

Global Academy and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.

Dr. Murray reported disclosures related to Ardent Mills, DBV Technologies, Evelo, GlaxoSmithKline, Johnson & Johnson, Immunogenix, Innovate, National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health, Takeda, Torax Medical, and UCB.

AUSTIN, TEX. – While women may have a plethora of options for care during pregnancy, attention given to women after birth is seriously lacking, with detrimental effect.

Currently, postpartum care is limited to a follow-up appointment 6 weeks after pregnancy, but according to Alison Stuebe, MD, medical director of lactation services at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, there is too much going on in those 6 weeks to continue this model.

To address preferred changes to this system of care, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists recently released a revised committee opinion, which Dr. Stuebe helped create, to provide better care for mothers right after giving birth..

“What we’d like to do with the new committee opinion is move from this one-off visit at 6 weeks where we tell people ‘you’re good to go, you can have sex, get out of my office,’ to a much more comprehensive approach that reaches out to moms in the first couple of weeks,” explained Dr. Stuebe. “Whether that’s by phone, by asynchronous communication, by in-person visit, [the physician] finds out what’s going on, and then makes appropriate recommendations to help her rather than waiting to see what’s left after 6 weeks,” she said at ACOG’s annual clinical and scientific meeting.

Paying for these services is a big barrier right now, said Dr. Stuebe, but some solutions have already shown signs of being cost effective.

One example, in Dr. Stuebe’s hometown of Durham County, N.C., is a program called Durham Connect, which puts nurses in contact with women at 3 weeks postpartum to make assessments of what care the mother needs, and then offers service referrals to help with those needs.

According to Dr. Stuebe, studies have found every dollar invested in the program would save $3 in emergency department visits for children.

As postpartum care evolves, the most important thing is to remember that when it comes to pregnancy and birth, just because the baby is out doesn’t mean the mother can be ignored, she said.

The revised committee opinion states: “The comprehensive postpartum visit should include a full assessment of physical, social, and psychological well-being, including the following domains: mood and emotional well-being; infant care and feeding; sexuality, contraception, and birth spacing; sleep and fatigue; physical recovery from birth; chronic disease management; and health maintenance.”

Dr. Stuebe receives support from Janssen.

[email protected]

AUSTIN, TEX. – While women may have a plethora of options for care during pregnancy, attention given to women after birth is seriously lacking, with detrimental effect.

Currently, postpartum care is limited to a follow-up appointment 6 weeks after pregnancy, but according to Alison Stuebe, MD, medical director of lactation services at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, there is too much going on in those 6 weeks to continue this model.

To address preferred changes to this system of care, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists recently released a revised committee opinion, which Dr. Stuebe helped create, to provide better care for mothers right after giving birth..

“What we’d like to do with the new committee opinion is move from this one-off visit at 6 weeks where we tell people ‘you’re good to go, you can have sex, get out of my office,’ to a much more comprehensive approach that reaches out to moms in the first couple of weeks,” explained Dr. Stuebe. “Whether that’s by phone, by asynchronous communication, by in-person visit, [the physician] finds out what’s going on, and then makes appropriate recommendations to help her rather than waiting to see what’s left after 6 weeks,” she said at ACOG’s annual clinical and scientific meeting.

Paying for these services is a big barrier right now, said Dr. Stuebe, but some solutions have already shown signs of being cost effective.

One example, in Dr. Stuebe’s hometown of Durham County, N.C., is a program called Durham Connect, which puts nurses in contact with women at 3 weeks postpartum to make assessments of what care the mother needs, and then offers service referrals to help with those needs.

According to Dr. Stuebe, studies have found every dollar invested in the program would save $3 in emergency department visits for children.

As postpartum care evolves, the most important thing is to remember that when it comes to pregnancy and birth, just because the baby is out doesn’t mean the mother can be ignored, she said.

The revised committee opinion states: “The comprehensive postpartum visit should include a full assessment of physical, social, and psychological well-being, including the following domains: mood and emotional well-being; infant care and feeding; sexuality, contraception, and birth spacing; sleep and fatigue; physical recovery from birth; chronic disease management; and health maintenance.”

Dr. Stuebe receives support from Janssen.

[email protected]

AUSTIN, TEX. – While women may have a plethora of options for care during pregnancy, attention given to women after birth is seriously lacking, with detrimental effect.

Currently, postpartum care is limited to a follow-up appointment 6 weeks after pregnancy, but according to Alison Stuebe, MD, medical director of lactation services at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, there is too much going on in those 6 weeks to continue this model.

To address preferred changes to this system of care, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists recently released a revised committee opinion, which Dr. Stuebe helped create, to provide better care for mothers right after giving birth..

“What we’d like to do with the new committee opinion is move from this one-off visit at 6 weeks where we tell people ‘you’re good to go, you can have sex, get out of my office,’ to a much more comprehensive approach that reaches out to moms in the first couple of weeks,” explained Dr. Stuebe. “Whether that’s by phone, by asynchronous communication, by in-person visit, [the physician] finds out what’s going on, and then makes appropriate recommendations to help her rather than waiting to see what’s left after 6 weeks,” she said at ACOG’s annual clinical and scientific meeting.

Paying for these services is a big barrier right now, said Dr. Stuebe, but some solutions have already shown signs of being cost effective.

One example, in Dr. Stuebe’s hometown of Durham County, N.C., is a program called Durham Connect, which puts nurses in contact with women at 3 weeks postpartum to make assessments of what care the mother needs, and then offers service referrals to help with those needs.

According to Dr. Stuebe, studies have found every dollar invested in the program would save $3 in emergency department visits for children.

As postpartum care evolves, the most important thing is to remember that when it comes to pregnancy and birth, just because the baby is out doesn’t mean the mother can be ignored, she said.

The revised committee opinion states: “The comprehensive postpartum visit should include a full assessment of physical, social, and psychological well-being, including the following domains: mood and emotional well-being; infant care and feeding; sexuality, contraception, and birth spacing; sleep and fatigue; physical recovery from birth; chronic disease management; and health maintenance.”

Dr. Stuebe receives support from Janssen.

[email protected]

KAUAI, HAWAII – The recent report that the risk of a major adverse cardiovascular event increases by 1% more than in the general population for each additional year of psoriasis duration is sobering news for physicians who treat pediatric psoriasis.

“If I have a 16-year-old who has a 5-year history of psoriasis, what does that mean for when she’s 30 or 40? And should we be intervening more aggressively?” Lawrence F. Eichenfield, MD, asked at the Hawaii Dermatology Seminar provided by the Global Academy for Medical Education/Skin Disease Education Foundation.

Bruce Jancin/MDedge News

Psoriasis develops during childhood in almost one-third of patients.

The pediatric psoriasis screening guidelines describe a simple routine screening program and timeline for early identification of overweight or obesity, type 2 diabetes, hypertension, nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, anxiety, depression, substance abuse, inflammatory bowel disease, and quality of life issues, all of which are encountered with increased frequency in pediatric psoriasis patients. A fasting lipid panel is recommended in children aged 9-11 years with psoriasis and again at age 17-21 years.

“Don’t forget arthritis. For a kid with psoriasis, at every office visit, I ask about morning stiffness or limp. Those are probably the two most sensitive questions in screening for psoriatic arthritis,” according to Dr. Eichenfield.

It has been clear for some time that the skin is not the only organ affected by psoriatic inflammation. The study that quantified the relationship between psoriasis duration and cardiovascular risk – a 1% increase for each year of psoriasis – was a collaboration between investigators at the University of Copenhagen and the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.

The two-part project included aortal imaging of 190 psoriasis patients using fludeoxyglucose F 18 PET/CT scan, which showed a strong relationship between duration of psoriasis and the degree of vascular inflammation. This was bolstered by a population-based study using Danish national registry data on 87,161 psoriasis patients and 4.2 million controls from the general Danish population (J Am Acad Dermatol. 2017 Oct;77[4]:650-56.e3).

Dr. Eichenfield reported serving as a consultant to and/or recipient of research grants from more than a dozen pharmaceutical companies.

SDEF/Global Academy for Medical Education and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.

[email protected]
 

KAUAI, HAWAII – The recent report that the risk of a major adverse cardiovascular event increases by 1% more than in the general population for each additional year of psoriasis duration is sobering news for physicians who treat pediatric psoriasis.

“If I have a 16-year-old who has a 5-year history of psoriasis, what does that mean for when she’s 30 or 40? And should we be intervening more aggressively?” Lawrence F. Eichenfield, MD, asked at the Hawaii Dermatology Seminar provided by the Global Academy for Medical Education/Skin Disease Education Foundation.

Bruce Jancin/MDedge News

Psoriasis develops during childhood in almost one-third of patients.

The pediatric psoriasis screening guidelines describe a simple routine screening program and timeline for early identification of overweight or obesity, type 2 diabetes, hypertension, nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, anxiety, depression, substance abuse, inflammatory bowel disease, and quality of life issues, all of which are encountered with increased frequency in pediatric psoriasis patients. A fasting lipid panel is recommended in children aged 9-11 years with psoriasis and again at age 17-21 years.

“Don’t forget arthritis. For a kid with psoriasis, at every office visit, I ask about morning stiffness or limp. Those are probably the two most sensitive questions in screening for psoriatic arthritis,” according to Dr. Eichenfield.

It has been clear for some time that the skin is not the only organ affected by psoriatic inflammation. The study that quantified the relationship between psoriasis duration and cardiovascular risk – a 1% increase for each year of psoriasis – was a collaboration between investigators at the University of Copenhagen and the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.

The two-part project included aortal imaging of 190 psoriasis patients using fludeoxyglucose F 18 PET/CT scan, which showed a strong relationship between duration of psoriasis and the degree of vascular inflammation. This was bolstered by a population-based study using Danish national registry data on 87,161 psoriasis patients and 4.2 million controls from the general Danish population (J Am Acad Dermatol. 2017 Oct;77[4]:650-56.e3).

Dr. Eichenfield reported serving as a consultant to and/or recipient of research grants from more than a dozen pharmaceutical companies.

SDEF/Global Academy for Medical Education and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.

[email protected]
 

KAUAI, HAWAII – The recent report that the risk of a major adverse cardiovascular event increases by 1% more than in the general population for each additional year of psoriasis duration is sobering news for physicians who treat pediatric psoriasis.

“If I have a 16-year-old who has a 5-year history of psoriasis, what does that mean for when she’s 30 or 40? And should we be intervening more aggressively?” Lawrence F. Eichenfield, MD, asked at the Hawaii Dermatology Seminar provided by the Global Academy for Medical Education/Skin Disease Education Foundation.

Bruce Jancin/MDedge News

Psoriasis develops during childhood in almost one-third of patients.

The pediatric psoriasis screening guidelines describe a simple routine screening program and timeline for early identification of overweight or obesity, type 2 diabetes, hypertension, nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, anxiety, depression, substance abuse, inflammatory bowel disease, and quality of life issues, all of which are encountered with increased frequency in pediatric psoriasis patients. A fasting lipid panel is recommended in children aged 9-11 years with psoriasis and again at age 17-21 years.

“Don’t forget arthritis. For a kid with psoriasis, at every office visit, I ask about morning stiffness or limp. Those are probably the two most sensitive questions in screening for psoriatic arthritis,” according to Dr. Eichenfield.

It has been clear for some time that the skin is not the only organ affected by psoriatic inflammation. The study that quantified the relationship between psoriasis duration and cardiovascular risk – a 1% increase for each year of psoriasis – was a collaboration between investigators at the University of Copenhagen and the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.

The two-part project included aortal imaging of 190 psoriasis patients using fludeoxyglucose F 18 PET/CT scan, which showed a strong relationship between duration of psoriasis and the degree of vascular inflammation. This was bolstered by a population-based study using Danish national registry data on 87,161 psoriasis patients and 4.2 million controls from the general Danish population (J Am Acad Dermatol. 2017 Oct;77[4]:650-56.e3).

Dr. Eichenfield reported serving as a consultant to and/or recipient of research grants from more than a dozen pharmaceutical companies.

SDEF/Global Academy for Medical Education and this news organization are owned by the same parent company.

[email protected]
 

LOS ANGELES – A new clinical guideline for adults with multiple sclerosis is designed to help clinicians navigate an increasingly complex landscape of treatment options, its authors say.

The new American Academy of Neurology (AAN) guideline includes some 30 recommendations related to starting a disease-modifying therapy (DMT), switching therapies, or stopping treatment. The guideline, presented April 23 at the AAN annual meeting and published online simultaneously in Neurology, is the first full MS practice guideline issued by AAN since 2002, when only a handful of medications were licensed for use in MS.

The new guideline does not present a hierarchy of DMTs to start but instead weighs evidence for 21 medications or formulations, including 8 used off label, with the idea that clinicians will tailor their choices by considering patient needs, preferences, potential adverse affects, cost of medicines, comorbidities (including depression), and likelihood of adherence, among other factors addressed.

“It’s a dramatically different landscape of the choices clinicians have,” guideline lead author Alexander Rae-Grant, MD, of the Cleveland Clinic, said at a press conference announcing the guideline.

The guideline encourages clinicians and patients “to have a detailed discussion of the risks and benefits of different therapies,” guideline coauthor Ruth Ann Marrie, MD, PhD, of the University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, said at the press conference. “You need to have that informed ... discussion to share decision making – the guideline provides information for each provider-patient dyad to make decisions specific to that patient.”

The guideline incorporates findings from nearly 50 randomized trials, although few of these were head-to-head comparisons of therapies. The authors graded evidence for each DMT as compared with placebo or other DMTs in lowering relapse rate, taking into consideration study design and size. The guideline reflects changes to diagnostic criteria made in 2010, and a classification scheme issued in 2014 for MS subtypes, both of which have complicated the extension of clinical trial findings to some patient groups. It stresses early treatment, recommending that clinicians start DMTs in people with a single clinical demyelinating event and two or more brain lesions characteristic of MS.

Several drugs used off label in MS, including azathioprine and cladribine, were included in the evidence review, with cladribine described as a cost-effective option for patients without the resources to obtain approved agents.

SOURCE: Rae-Grant A et al. Neurology. 2018;90:777-88.

LOS ANGELES – A new clinical guideline for adults with multiple sclerosis is designed to help clinicians navigate an increasingly complex landscape of treatment options, its authors say.

The new American Academy of Neurology (AAN) guideline includes some 30 recommendations related to starting a disease-modifying therapy (DMT), switching therapies, or stopping treatment. The guideline, presented April 23 at the AAN annual meeting and published online simultaneously in Neurology, is the first full MS practice guideline issued by AAN since 2002, when only a handful of medications were licensed for use in MS.

The new guideline does not present a hierarchy of DMTs to start but instead weighs evidence for 21 medications or formulations, including 8 used off label, with the idea that clinicians will tailor their choices by considering patient needs, preferences, potential adverse affects, cost of medicines, comorbidities (including depression), and likelihood of adherence, among other factors addressed.

“It’s a dramatically different landscape of the choices clinicians have,” guideline lead author Alexander Rae-Grant, MD, of the Cleveland Clinic, said at a press conference announcing the guideline.

The guideline encourages clinicians and patients “to have a detailed discussion of the risks and benefits of different therapies,” guideline coauthor Ruth Ann Marrie, MD, PhD, of the University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, said at the press conference. “You need to have that informed ... discussion to share decision making – the guideline provides information for each provider-patient dyad to make decisions specific to that patient.”

The guideline incorporates findings from nearly 50 randomized trials, although few of these were head-to-head comparisons of therapies. The authors graded evidence for each DMT as compared with placebo or other DMTs in lowering relapse rate, taking into consideration study design and size. The guideline reflects changes to diagnostic criteria made in 2010, and a classification scheme issued in 2014 for MS subtypes, both of which have complicated the extension of clinical trial findings to some patient groups. It stresses early treatment, recommending that clinicians start DMTs in people with a single clinical demyelinating event and two or more brain lesions characteristic of MS.

Several drugs used off label in MS, including azathioprine and cladribine, were included in the evidence review, with cladribine described as a cost-effective option for patients without the resources to obtain approved agents.

SOURCE: Rae-Grant A et al. Neurology. 2018;90:777-88.

LOS ANGELES – A new clinical guideline for adults with multiple sclerosis is designed to help clinicians navigate an increasingly complex landscape of treatment options, its authors say.

The new American Academy of Neurology (AAN) guideline includes some 30 recommendations related to starting a disease-modifying therapy (DMT), switching therapies, or stopping treatment. The guideline, presented April 23 at the AAN annual meeting and published online simultaneously in Neurology, is the first full MS practice guideline issued by AAN since 2002, when only a handful of medications were licensed for use in MS.

The new guideline does not present a hierarchy of DMTs to start but instead weighs evidence for 21 medications or formulations, including 8 used off label, with the idea that clinicians will tailor their choices by considering patient needs, preferences, potential adverse affects, cost of medicines, comorbidities (including depression), and likelihood of adherence, among other factors addressed.

“It’s a dramatically different landscape of the choices clinicians have,” guideline lead author Alexander Rae-Grant, MD, of the Cleveland Clinic, said at a press conference announcing the guideline.

The guideline encourages clinicians and patients “to have a detailed discussion of the risks and benefits of different therapies,” guideline coauthor Ruth Ann Marrie, MD, PhD, of the University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, said at the press conference. “You need to have that informed ... discussion to share decision making – the guideline provides information for each provider-patient dyad to make decisions specific to that patient.”

The guideline incorporates findings from nearly 50 randomized trials, although few of these were head-to-head comparisons of therapies. The authors graded evidence for each DMT as compared with placebo or other DMTs in lowering relapse rate, taking into consideration study design and size. The guideline reflects changes to diagnostic criteria made in 2010, and a classification scheme issued in 2014 for MS subtypes, both of which have complicated the extension of clinical trial findings to some patient groups. It stresses early treatment, recommending that clinicians start DMTs in people with a single clinical demyelinating event and two or more brain lesions characteristic of MS.

Several drugs used off label in MS, including azathioprine and cladribine, were included in the evidence review, with cladribine described as a cost-effective option for patients without the resources to obtain approved agents.

SOURCE: Rae-Grant A et al. Neurology. 2018;90:777-88.

It’s time to introduce a new paradigm for comprehensive care of women’s physical and mental health in the 3 months after giving birth, according to the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.

In their newly revised committee opinion on postpartum care, ACOG encouraged doctors to think of a woman’s immediate postpartum period as a “fourth trimester” during which better care for women may help reduce maternal deaths and morbidity. That care includes a 3-week postpartum visit and a more comprehensive one within 3 months post partum.

Components of comprehensive postpartum care

ACOG recommends the prenatal preparation for the postpartum period include discussions about infant feeding, “baby blues,” postpartum emotional health, parenting challenges, postpartum recovery from birth, long-term management of chronic health conditions, choosing a primary care provider for the mother’s ongoing care, her reproductive desires and choices, and any concerns about interpersonal or partner violence.

Before giving birth, a woman should develop a postpartum care plan with her physician and assemble a care team that includes her primary care providers along with family and friends who can provide support. The plan should include contact information for questions and written instructions about postpartum visits and follow-up care.

Prenatal planning also provides an opportunity to discuss a woman’s breastfeeding plans, goals, and questions as well as common physical problems that women may experience in the weeks after giving birth, such as heavy bleeding, pain, physical exhaustion, and urinary incontinence.

Physicians should inform women of the risks and benefits of becoming pregnant within 18 months and advise them not to have pregnancy intervals of less than 6 months. They should also ensure women know all their contraceptive options and should provide any information necessary for women to determine which methods best meet her needs.

The committee recommended a postpartum visit within the first 3 weeks after birth, instead of the current “6-week check,” that is timed and tailored to each woman’s particular needs. This visit allows assessment of postpartum depression risk and/or treatment and discussion of breastfeeding goals and/or difficulties. Approximately one in five women who stopped breastfeeding earlier than they wanted to had ceased within first 6 weeks post partum.

Woman-centered follow-up should be tailored to women’s individual needs and include a comprehensive postpartum visit no later than 12 weeks after giving birth. The comprehensive visit should include a complete assessment of the woman’s physical, social, and psychological well-being, including discussion of “mood and emotional well-being, infant care and feeding, sexuality, contraception, birth spacing, sleep and fatigue, physical recovery from birth, chronic disease management, and health maintenance,” the committee wrote.

The comprehensive visit should include the following components:

• Postpartum depression and anxiety screening.
• Screening for tobacco use and substance use.
• Follow-up on preexisting mental and physical health conditions.
• Assessment of mother’s confidence and comfort with newborn care, including feeding method, childcare strategy, identification of the child’s medical home, and recommended immunizations for all caregivers.
• Comfort and confidence with breastfeeding and management of any challenges, such as breastfeeding-associated pain; logistics and legal rights after returning to work or school; and fertility and contraception with breastfeeding.
• Assessment of material needs, including housing, utilities, food, and diapers.
• Guidance on sexuality, dyspareunia, reproductive life plans, contraception, and management of recurrent pregnancy complications, such as daily low-dose aspirin to reduce preeclampsia risk and 17a-hydroxyprogesterone caproate to reduce recurrent preterm birth.
• Sleep, fatigue, and coping options.
• Physical recovery from birth, including assessment of urinary and fecal continence and guidance on physical activity and a healthy weight.
• Chronic disease management and long-term implications of those conditions.
• Health maintenance, including review of vaccination history, needed vaccinations, and well-woman screenings, including Pap test and pelvic examination as indicated.

“However timed, the comprehensive postpartum visit is a medical appointment; it is not an ‘all-clear’ signal,” the authors wrote. “Obstetrician-gynecologists and other obstetric care providers should ensure that women, their families, and their employers understand that completion of the comprehensive postpartum visit does not obviate the need for continued recovery and support through 6 weeks’ post partum and beyond.”

Women with comorbidities or adverse birth outcomes

Women who had gestational diabetes, gestational hypertension, preeclampsia, eclampsia, or a preterm birth should be informed of their increased lifetime risk of cardiovascular and metabolic disease, the committee recommended. Women who have experienced a miscarriage, stillbirth, or neonatal death should also follow up with their provider, who can offer resources for emotional support and bereavement counseling, referrals as needed, a review of any laboratory or pathology results related to the loss and counseling regarding future risks and pregnancies.

The committee recommended that women with chronic medical conditions follow up with their ob.gyn. or other primary care providers to ensure ongoing coordinated care for hypertension, obesity, diabetes, thyroid disorders, renal disease, mood disorders, substance use disorders, seizure disorders, and any other chronic issues. Care should include assessment of medications, including antiepileptics and psychotropic drugs, that may require adjustment for postpartum physiology and, if relevant, breastfeeding.

Since half of postpartum strokes occur within the first 10 days after discharge, ACOG recommends women with other hypertensive disorders of pregnancy have a postpartum visit within 7-10 days after birth to assess blood pressure. A follow-up visit should occur within 72 hours for those with severe hypertension.

ACOG also recommended early postpartum follow-up for women with increased risk of complications, including postpartum depression, cesarean or perennial wound infections, lactation difficulties, or chronic conditions.

SOURCE: Obstet Gynecol 2018;131:e140-50.

It’s time to introduce a new paradigm for comprehensive care of women’s physical and mental health in the 3 months after giving birth, according to the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.

In their newly revised committee opinion on postpartum care, ACOG encouraged doctors to think of a woman’s immediate postpartum period as a “fourth trimester” during which better care for women may help reduce maternal deaths and morbidity. That care includes a 3-week postpartum visit and a more comprehensive one within 3 months post partum.

Components of comprehensive postpartum care

ACOG recommends the prenatal preparation for the postpartum period include discussions about infant feeding, “baby blues,” postpartum emotional health, parenting challenges, postpartum recovery from birth, long-term management of chronic health conditions, choosing a primary care provider for the mother’s ongoing care, her reproductive desires and choices, and any concerns about interpersonal or partner violence.

Before giving birth, a woman should develop a postpartum care plan with her physician and assemble a care team that includes her primary care providers along with family and friends who can provide support. The plan should include contact information for questions and written instructions about postpartum visits and follow-up care.

Prenatal planning also provides an opportunity to discuss a woman’s breastfeeding plans, goals, and questions as well as common physical problems that women may experience in the weeks after giving birth, such as heavy bleeding, pain, physical exhaustion, and urinary incontinence.

Physicians should inform women of the risks and benefits of becoming pregnant within 18 months and advise them not to have pregnancy intervals of less than 6 months. They should also ensure women know all their contraceptive options and should provide any information necessary for women to determine which methods best meet her needs.

The committee recommended a postpartum visit within the first 3 weeks after birth, instead of the current “6-week check,” that is timed and tailored to each woman’s particular needs. This visit allows assessment of postpartum depression risk and/or treatment and discussion of breastfeeding goals and/or difficulties. Approximately one in five women who stopped breastfeeding earlier than they wanted to had ceased within first 6 weeks post partum.

Woman-centered follow-up should be tailored to women’s individual needs and include a comprehensive postpartum visit no later than 12 weeks after giving birth. The comprehensive visit should include a complete assessment of the woman’s physical, social, and psychological well-being, including discussion of “mood and emotional well-being, infant care and feeding, sexuality, contraception, birth spacing, sleep and fatigue, physical recovery from birth, chronic disease management, and health maintenance,” the committee wrote.

The comprehensive visit should include the following components:

• Postpartum depression and anxiety screening.
• Screening for tobacco use and substance use.
• Follow-up on preexisting mental and physical health conditions.
• Assessment of mother’s confidence and comfort with newborn care, including feeding method, childcare strategy, identification of the child’s medical home, and recommended immunizations for all caregivers.
• Comfort and confidence with breastfeeding and management of any challenges, such as breastfeeding-associated pain; logistics and legal rights after returning to work or school; and fertility and contraception with breastfeeding.
• Assessment of material needs, including housing, utilities, food, and diapers.
• Guidance on sexuality, dyspareunia, reproductive life plans, contraception, and management of recurrent pregnancy complications, such as daily low-dose aspirin to reduce preeclampsia risk and 17a-hydroxyprogesterone caproate to reduce recurrent preterm birth.
• Sleep, fatigue, and coping options.
• Physical recovery from birth, including assessment of urinary and fecal continence and guidance on physical activity and a healthy weight.
• Chronic disease management and long-term implications of those conditions.
• Health maintenance, including review of vaccination history, needed vaccinations, and well-woman screenings, including Pap test and pelvic examination as indicated.

“However timed, the comprehensive postpartum visit is a medical appointment; it is not an ‘all-clear’ signal,” the authors wrote. “Obstetrician-gynecologists and other obstetric care providers should ensure that women, their families, and their employers understand that completion of the comprehensive postpartum visit does not obviate the need for continued recovery and support through 6 weeks’ post partum and beyond.”

Women with comorbidities or adverse birth outcomes

Women who had gestational diabetes, gestational hypertension, preeclampsia, eclampsia, or a preterm birth should be informed of their increased lifetime risk of cardiovascular and metabolic disease, the committee recommended. Women who have experienced a miscarriage, stillbirth, or neonatal death should also follow up with their provider, who can offer resources for emotional support and bereavement counseling, referrals as needed, a review of any laboratory or pathology results related to the loss and counseling regarding future risks and pregnancies.

The committee recommended that women with chronic medical conditions follow up with their ob.gyn. or other primary care providers to ensure ongoing coordinated care for hypertension, obesity, diabetes, thyroid disorders, renal disease, mood disorders, substance use disorders, seizure disorders, and any other chronic issues. Care should include assessment of medications, including antiepileptics and psychotropic drugs, that may require adjustment for postpartum physiology and, if relevant, breastfeeding.

Since half of postpartum strokes occur within the first 10 days after discharge, ACOG recommends women with other hypertensive disorders of pregnancy have a postpartum visit within 7-10 days after birth to assess blood pressure. A follow-up visit should occur within 72 hours for those with severe hypertension.

ACOG also recommended early postpartum follow-up for women with increased risk of complications, including postpartum depression, cesarean or perennial wound infections, lactation difficulties, or chronic conditions.

SOURCE: Obstet Gynecol 2018;131:e140-50.

It’s time to introduce a new paradigm for comprehensive care of women’s physical and mental health in the 3 months after giving birth, according to the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.

In their newly revised committee opinion on postpartum care, ACOG encouraged doctors to think of a woman’s immediate postpartum period as a “fourth trimester” during which better care for women may help reduce maternal deaths and morbidity. That care includes a 3-week postpartum visit and a more comprehensive one within 3 months post partum.

Components of comprehensive postpartum care

ACOG recommends the prenatal preparation for the postpartum period include discussions about infant feeding, “baby blues,” postpartum emotional health, parenting challenges, postpartum recovery from birth, long-term management of chronic health conditions, choosing a primary care provider for the mother’s ongoing care, her reproductive desires and choices, and any concerns about interpersonal or partner violence.

Before giving birth, a woman should develop a postpartum care plan with her physician and assemble a care team that includes her primary care providers along with family and friends who can provide support. The plan should include contact information for questions and written instructions about postpartum visits and follow-up care.

Prenatal planning also provides an opportunity to discuss a woman’s breastfeeding plans, goals, and questions as well as common physical problems that women may experience in the weeks after giving birth, such as heavy bleeding, pain, physical exhaustion, and urinary incontinence.

Physicians should inform women of the risks and benefits of becoming pregnant within 18 months and advise them not to have pregnancy intervals of less than 6 months. They should also ensure women know all their contraceptive options and should provide any information necessary for women to determine which methods best meet her needs.

The committee recommended a postpartum visit within the first 3 weeks after birth, instead of the current “6-week check,” that is timed and tailored to each woman’s particular needs. This visit allows assessment of postpartum depression risk and/or treatment and discussion of breastfeeding goals and/or difficulties. Approximately one in five women who stopped breastfeeding earlier than they wanted to had ceased within first 6 weeks post partum.

Woman-centered follow-up should be tailored to women’s individual needs and include a comprehensive postpartum visit no later than 12 weeks after giving birth. The comprehensive visit should include a complete assessment of the woman’s physical, social, and psychological well-being, including discussion of “mood and emotional well-being, infant care and feeding, sexuality, contraception, birth spacing, sleep and fatigue, physical recovery from birth, chronic disease management, and health maintenance,” the committee wrote.

The comprehensive visit should include the following components:

• Postpartum depression and anxiety screening.
• Screening for tobacco use and substance use.
• Follow-up on preexisting mental and physical health conditions.
• Assessment of mother’s confidence and comfort with newborn care, including feeding method, childcare strategy, identification of the child’s medical home, and recommended immunizations for all caregivers.
• Comfort and confidence with breastfeeding and management of any challenges, such as breastfeeding-associated pain; logistics and legal rights after returning to work or school; and fertility and contraception with breastfeeding.
• Assessment of material needs, including housing, utilities, food, and diapers.
• Guidance on sexuality, dyspareunia, reproductive life plans, contraception, and management of recurrent pregnancy complications, such as daily low-dose aspirin to reduce preeclampsia risk and 17a-hydroxyprogesterone caproate to reduce recurrent preterm birth.
• Sleep, fatigue, and coping options.
• Physical recovery from birth, including assessment of urinary and fecal continence and guidance on physical activity and a healthy weight.
• Chronic disease management and long-term implications of those conditions.
• Health maintenance, including review of vaccination history, needed vaccinations, and well-woman screenings, including Pap test and pelvic examination as indicated.

“However timed, the comprehensive postpartum visit is a medical appointment; it is not an ‘all-clear’ signal,” the authors wrote. “Obstetrician-gynecologists and other obstetric care providers should ensure that women, their families, and their employers understand that completion of the comprehensive postpartum visit does not obviate the need for continued recovery and support through 6 weeks’ post partum and beyond.”

Women with comorbidities or adverse birth outcomes

Women who had gestational diabetes, gestational hypertension, preeclampsia, eclampsia, or a preterm birth should be informed of their increased lifetime risk of cardiovascular and metabolic disease, the committee recommended. Women who have experienced a miscarriage, stillbirth, or neonatal death should also follow up with their provider, who can offer resources for emotional support and bereavement counseling, referrals as needed, a review of any laboratory or pathology results related to the loss and counseling regarding future risks and pregnancies.

The committee recommended that women with chronic medical conditions follow up with their ob.gyn. or other primary care providers to ensure ongoing coordinated care for hypertension, obesity, diabetes, thyroid disorders, renal disease, mood disorders, substance use disorders, seizure disorders, and any other chronic issues. Care should include assessment of medications, including antiepileptics and psychotropic drugs, that may require adjustment for postpartum physiology and, if relevant, breastfeeding.

Since half of postpartum strokes occur within the first 10 days after discharge, ACOG recommends women with other hypertensive disorders of pregnancy have a postpartum visit within 7-10 days after birth to assess blood pressure. A follow-up visit should occur within 72 hours for those with severe hypertension.

ACOG also recommended early postpartum follow-up for women with increased risk of complications, including postpartum depression, cesarean or perennial wound infections, lactation difficulties, or chronic conditions.

SOURCE: Obstet Gynecol 2018;131:e140-50.