aged

Background: This cross-sectional study aimed to describe proportions of patients with indications of alcohol consumption using phosphatidylethanol (PEth), the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT), and its consumption-focused version (AUDIT-C), in relation to blood pressure (BP) control, overall and by sex.

Methods: A total of 270 hypertensive primary care patients (ICD-10: I10.9) were stratified into BP control groups: controlled (<140/90 mmHg), uncontrolled (≥140/90 mmHg), and apparent treatment-resistant hypertension (aTRH; ≥140/90 mmHg with ≥3 antihypertensive drugs). A randomized sample from each stratum was invited, baseline data were collected. Alcohol consumption using predefined categories for PEth and AUDIT, and hazardous use (PEth ≥ 0.122 µmol/L; AUDIT ≥ 8; AUDIT-C ≥ 5 for men, ≥4 for women), were analyzed in relation to BP control groups.

Results: Mean age was 67 ± 11 years; 42% were women. PEth indicated high and regular alcohol consumption in 6.4% of controlled, 5.3% of uncontrolled, and 19.2% of aTRH patients (controlled vs. aTRH, P = .027; uncontrolled vs. aTRH, P = .013). AUDIT showed no significant differences in hazardous use between BP groups (P = .865). AUDIT-C identified slightly higher proportions of hazardous use than PEth, across BP groups and sexes. No significant differences were found between BP groups for hazardous use by PEth (P = .339) or AUDIT-C (P = .150).

Conclusions: PEth revealed significantly higher alcohol use in the aTRH group, undetected by AUDIT. AUDIT-C and PEth identified more hazardous use than AUDIT, suggesting their potential to prompt alcohol-related discussions and support evidence-based hypertension care. PEth correlated more strongly with AUDIT-C than with AUDIT.

Clinical trial registration: Retrospectively registered in Clinical Trials, SLSO2022-0143, 2022-12-10.

Keywords: alcohol use disorder; cardiovascular disorders (hypertension/DVT/atherosclerosis); hypertension (high blood pressure); prevention; primary care; screening.

Importance Tai chi is a type of exercise recommended for knee osteoarthritis, but access to in-person tai chi can be limited.

Objective To evaluate the effects of an unsupervised multimodal online tai chi intervention on knee pain and function for people with knee osteoarthritis.

Design, Setting, and Participants The RETREAT study was a 2-group superiority randomized clinical trial enrolling participants who met clinical criteria for knee osteoarthritis in Australian communities from August 2023 and November 2024.

Interventions Participants in the control group received access to a purpose-built website containing information about osteoarthritis and exercise benefits. Participants in the intervention group received the My Joint Tai Chi intervention comprising access to the same website plus tai chi information, a 12-week unsupervised video-based Yang-style tai chi program, and encouragement to use an app to facilitate program adherence.

Main Outcomes and Measures Changes in knee pain during walking (Numeric Rating Scale; range 0-10 with higher scores indicating greater pain) and difficulty with physical function (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index; range 0-68 with higher scores indicating greater dysfunction) during 12 weeks. Secondary outcomes included another knee pain measure, sport and recreation function, quality of life, physical and mental well-being, fear of movement, self-efficacy, balance confidence, positive activated affect, sleep quality, global improvement, and oral medication use.

Results Of 2106 patients screened, 178 met inclusion criteria and were randomized, 89 (mean [SD] age, 61.0 [8.7] years; 66 female [74%] and 23 [26%] male participants) to the control group and 89 (mean [SD] age, 62.1 [7.3] years; 59 [66%] female and 30 male [34%] participants) to the tai chi intervention. Of the total, 170 (96%) completed both of the primary outcomes at 12 weeks. The tai chi group reported greater improvements in knee pain (control, −1.3; tai chi, −2.7; mean difference, −1.4 [95% CI, −2.1 to −0.7] units; P < .001) and function (control, −6.9; tai chi, −12.0; mean difference, −5.6 [95% CI, −9.0 to −2.3] units; P < .001) compared to the control group. More participants in the tai chi than in the control group achieved a minimal clinically important difference in pain (73% vs 47%; risk difference, 0.3; 95% CI, 0.1 to 0.4; P < .001) and function (72% vs 52%; risk difference, 0.2; 95% CI, 0.1 to 0.3; P = .007). Between-group differences for most secondary outcomes favored tai chi, including another knee pain measure, sport and recreation function, quality of life, physical and mental well-being, global improvement, pain self-efficacy, and balance confidence. No associated serious adverse events were reported.

Conclusions and Relevance This randomized clinical trial found that this unsupervised multimodal online tai chi intervention improved knee pain and function compared with the control at 12 weeks. This free-to-access web-based intervention offers an effective, safe, accessible, and scalable option for guideline-recommended osteoarthritis exercise.

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

Background: Carotid revascularisation, comprising either carotid endarterectomy or stenting, is offered to patients with carotid stenosis to prevent stroke based on the results of randomised trials conducted more than 30 years ago. Since then, medical therapy for stroke prevention has improved. We aimed to assess whether patients with asymptomatic and symptomatic carotid stenosis with a low or intermediate predicted risk of stroke, who received optimised medical therapy (OMT), would benefit from additional revascularisation.

Methods: The Second European Carotid Surgery Trial (ECST-2) is a multicentre randomised trial with blinded outcome adjudication, which was conducted at 30 centres with stroke and carotid revascularisation expertise in Europe and Canada. Patients aged 18 years or older with asymptomatic or symptomatic carotid stenosis of 50% or greater, and a 5-year predicted risk of ipsilateral stroke of less than 20% (estimated using the Carotid Artery Risk [CAR] score), were recruited. Patients were randomly assigned to either OMT alone or OMT plus revascularisation (1:1) using a web-based system. The primary outcome for this 2-year, interim analysis was a hierarchical outcome composite of: (1) periprocedural death, fatal stroke, or fatal myocardial infarction; (2) non-fatal stroke; (3) non-fatal myocardial infarction; or (4) new silent cerebral infarction on imaging. Analysis was by intention-to-treat using the win ratio-ie, each patient in the OMT alone group was compared as a pair with each patient in the OMT plus revascularisation group, with a win declared for the patient with a better outcome within the pair (a tie was declared if neither patient in the pair had a better outcome). The win ratio was calculated as the number of wins in the OMT alone group divided by the number of wins in the OMT plus revascularisation group. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN Registry (ISRCTN97744893) and is ongoing.

Findings: Between March 1, 2012, and Oct 31, 2019, 429 patients were randomly assigned to OMT alone (n=215) or OMT plus revascularisation (n=214). One patient allocated to OMT alone withdrew consent within 48 h and was not considered further. The median age of patients was 72 years (IQR 65-78); 296 (69%) were male and 133 (31%) female. No benefit was recorded in favour of either treatment group with respect to the primary hierarchical outcome assessed 2 years after randomisation, with 5228 (11·4%) wins for the OMT alone group, 5173 (11·3%) wins for the OMT plus revascularisation group, and 35 395 (77·3%) ties between groups (win ratio 1·01 [95% CI 0·60-1·70]; p=0·97). For OMT alone versus OMT plus revascularisation, four versus three patients had periprocedural death, fatal stroke, or fatal myocardial infarction; 11 versus 16 had non-fatal stroke; seven versus five had non-fatal myocardial infarction; and 12 versus seven had new silent cerebral infarction on imaging. One periprocedural death occurred in the OMT plus revascularisation group, which was attributed to decompensated aortic stenosis 1 week after carotid endarterectomy.

Interpretation: No evidence for a benefit of revascularisation in addition to OMT was found in the first 2 years following treatment for patients with asymptomatic or symptomatic carotid stenosis of 50% or greater with a low or intermediate predicted stroke risk (assessed by the CAR score). The results support treating patients with asymptomatic and low or intermediate risk symptomatic carotid stenosis with OMT alone until further data from the 5-year analysis of ECST-2 and other trials become available.

Funding: National Institute for Health and Care Research; Stroke Association; Swiss National Science Foundation; Dutch Organisation for Knowledge and Innovation in Health, Healthcare and Well-Being; Leeds Neurology Foundation.