1. Home
  2. risk assessment

risk assessment

Screening for Breast Cancer

Author/s: 
US Preventive Services Task Force

We all want better ways to find breast cancer early and save lives from this disease. Breast cancer screening can detect cancer early, when it’s most treatable. This guide is meant to help you and your health care professional understand the benefits and risks of breast cancer screening, including what age to start screening and how often people should be screened. This guide is not for women who have a BRCA gene variant, a history of chest radiation, or a personal history of breast cancer. These women should talk to their health care professional about how best to stay healthy.

Keywords 
breast cancer cancer screening mammography breast neoplasms Early Detection of Cancer

Suicide Prevention in Primary Care: A Toolkit for Primary Care Clinicians and Leaders

Author/s: 
Institute of Family Health, Little, V.

Suicide prevention has been named a national priority and much work has been done to review existing evidence and identify gaps in how our nation’s mental health and health care systems address this public health challenge. A national task force that was part of the effort to update the national suicide prevention strategy reviewed research and best practices from the field and
concluded that suicide prevention could be improved in health care. The task force found three common characteristics among successful suicide prevention programs in health care settings. Health care staff in these organizations:
Believed that suicide can be prevented in the population they serve through improvements in service access and quality, and through systems of continuous improvement;
Created a culture that finds suicide unacceptable and sets and monitors ambitious goals to prevent suicide; and
Employed evidence-based clinical care practice, including standardized risk stratification, evidence-based interventions, and patient engagement approaches1.

The task force’s recommendations formed the foundation of the Zero Suicide Approach for health care organizations. The recommendations contained in this guide are based on those offered in the comprehensive Zero Suicide in Health and Behavioral Health Care Toolkit [http://zerosuicide.sprc.org/toolkit]. Here they have been adapted specifically for primary care organizations and clinicians who care for underserved populations.
The guide focuses on two core components:
1. Screening and assessment
2. Care management and referral processes
The final section contains some additional information on administrative and legal issues providers and leaders may find helpful to support integration of safer suicide care in practice. Many providers and clinical leaders erroneously assume if they discuss suicide with a patient they open up themselves to liability. Utilizing a patient safety approach, primary care organizations can
establish safer suicide care practices that deliver high quality care to patients and reduce risk to the organization.
In each section of this guide you will find:
Information summarized for providers, including some helpful provider communication tips.
A list of recommended trainings and resources to learn more.
Leadership actions organizations may wish to undertake to help providers reduce suicide in their organization’s
patient population, and
Relevant tools, templates and case studies.
This toolkit begins with a brief background on the impact of suicide and offers a case study illustrating how one federally qualified health center adopted a safer suicide care model.

Keywords 
public health Patient safety mental health Suicide Prevention evidence-based medicine

Infectious Diseases Society of America Guidelines on Infection Prevention for Healthcare Personnel Caring for Patients with Suspected or Known COVID-19

Author/s: 
Lynch, J. B., Davitkov, P., Anderson, D. J., Bhimraj, A., Cheng, V. C. C., Guzman-Cottrill, J., Dhindsa, J., Duggal, A., Jain, M. K., Lee, G. M., Liang, S. Y., McGeer, A., Varghese, J., Lavergne, V., Murad, M. H., Mustafa, R. A., Sultan, S., Falck-Ytter, Y., Morgan, R. L.

Background: Since its emergence in late 2019, SARS-CoV-2 continues to pose a risk to healthcare personnel (HCP) and patients in healthcare settings. Although all clinical interactions likely carry some risk of transmission, human actions like coughing and care activities like aerosol-generating procedures likely have a higher risk of transmission. The rapid emergence and global spread of SARS-CoV-2 continues to create significant challenges in healthcare facilities, particularly with shortages of personal protective equipment (PPE) used by HCP. Evidence-based recommendations for what PPE to use in conventional, contingency, and crisis standards of care continue to be needed. Where evidence is lacking, the development of specific research questions can help direct funders and investigators.

Objective: Develop evidence-based rapid guidelines intended to support HCP in their decisions about infection prevention when caring for patients with suspected or known COVID-19.

Methods: IDSA formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel including frontline clinicians, infectious disease specialists, experts in infection control, and guideline methodologists with representation from the disciplines of public health, medical microbiology, pediatrics, critical care medicine and gastroenterology. The process followed a rapid recommendation checklist. The panel prioritized questions and outcomes. Then a systematic review of the peer-reviewed and grey literature was conducted. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess the certainty of evidence and make recommendations.

Results: The IDSA guideline panel agreed on eight recommendations, including two updated recommendations and one new recommendation added since the first version of the guideline. Narrative summaries of other interventions undergoing evaluations are also included.

Conclusions: Using a combination of direct and indirect evidence, the panel was able to provide recommendations for eight specific questions on the use of PPE for HCP providing care for patients with suspected or known COVID-19. Where evidence was lacking, attempts were made to provide potential avenues for investigation. There remain significant gaps in the understanding of the transmission dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 and PPE recommendations may need to be modified in response to new evidence. These recommendations should serve as a minimum for PPE use in healthcare facilities and do not preclude decisions based on local risk assessments or requirements of local health jurisdictions or other regulatory bodies.

Prevalence of Allergic Reactions After Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccination Among Adults With High Allergy Risk

Author/s: 
Shavit, R., Maoz-Segal, R., Iancovici-Kidon, M.

Importance
Allergic reactions among some individuals who received the Pfizer-BioNTech (BNT162b2) COVID-19 vaccine discourage patients with allergic conditions from receiving this vaccine and physicians from recommending the vaccine.

Objective
To describe the assessment and immunization of highly allergic individuals with the BNT162b2 vaccine.

Design, Setting, and Participants
In a prospective cohort study from December 27, 2020, to February 22, 2021, 8102 patients with allergies who applied to the COVID 19 vaccine referral center at the Sheba Medical Center underwent risk assessment using an algorithm that included a detailed questionnaire. High-risk patients (n = 429) were considered “highly allergic” and were immunized under medical supervision.

Exposures
Pfizer-BioNTech (BNT162b2) COVID-19 vaccine.

Main Outcomes and Measures
Allergic and anaphylactic reactions after the first and second doses of BNT162b2 vaccine among highly allergic patients.

Results
Of the 429 individuals who applied to the COVID-19 referral center and were defined as highly allergic, 304 (70.9%) were women and the mean (SD) age was 52 (16) years. This highly allergic group was referred to receive immunization under medical supervision. After the first dose of the BNT162b2 vaccine, 420 patients (97.9%) had no immediate allergic event, 6 (1.4%) developed minor allergic responses, and 3 (0.7%) had anaphylactic reactions. During the study period, 218 highly allergic patients (50.8%) received the second BNT162b2 vaccine dose, of which 214 (98.2%) had no allergic reactions and 4 patients (1.8%) had minor allergic reactions. Other immediate and late reactions were comparable with those seen in the general population, except for delayed itch and skin eruption, which were more common among allergic patients.

Conclusions and Relevance
The rate of allergic reactions to BNT162b2 vaccine, is higher among patients with allergies, particularly among a subgroup with a history of high-risk allergies. This study suggests that most patients with a history of allergic diseases and, particularly, highly allergic patients can be safely immunized by using an algorithm that can be implemented in different medical facilities and includes a referral center, a risk assessment questionnaire, and a setting for immunization under medical supervision of highly allergic patients. Further studies are required to define more specific risk factors for allergic reactions to the BNT162b2 vaccine.

Management of Blood Pressure in Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease Not Receiving Dialysis: Synopsis of the 2021 KDIGO Clinical Practice Guideline

Author/s: 
Tomson, C. R. V., Cheung, A. K., Mann, J. F. E., Chang, T. I., Cushman, W. C., Furth, S. L., Hou, F. F., Knoll, G. A., Muntner, P., Pecoits-Filho, R., Tobe, S. W., Lytvyn, L, Craig, J. C., Tunnicliffe, D. J., Howell, M., Tonelli, M., Cheung, M., Earley, A., Ix, J. H., Sarnak, M. J.

Description: The Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) 2021 clinical practice guideline for the management of blood pressure (BP) in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) not receiving dialysis is an update of the KDIGO 2012 guideline on the same topic and reflects new evidence on the risks and benefits of BP-lowering therapy among patients with CKD. It is intended to support shared decision making by health care professionals working with patients with CKD worldwide. This article is a synopsis of the full guideline.

Methods: The KDIGO leadership commissioned 2 co-chairs to convene an international Work Group of researchers and clinicians. After a Controversies Conference in September 2017, the Work Group defined the scope of the evidence review, which was undertaken by an evidence review team between October 2017 and April 2020. Evidence reviews were done according to the Cochrane Handbook. The GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach was used to guide the development of the recommendations and rate the strength and quality of the evidence. Practice points were included to provide guidance when evidence was insufficient to make a graded recommendation. The guideline was revised after public consultation between January and March 2020.

Recommendations: The updated guideline comprises 11 recommendations and 20 practice points. This synopsis summarizes key recommendations pertinent to the diagnosis and management of high BP in adults with CKD, excluding those receiving kidney replacement therapy. In particular, the synopsis focuses on recommendations for standardized BP measurement and a target systolic BP of less than 120 mm Hg, because these recommendations differ from some other guidelines.

Keywords 
blood pressure kidney disease dialysis clinical practice guideline

Preoperative Cardiac Risk Assessment

Author/s: 
Raslau, D, Bierle, DM, Stephenson, CR, Mikhail, MA, Kebede, EB, Mauck, KF

Major adverse cardiac events are common causes of perioperative mortality and major morbidity. Preventing these complications requires thorough preoperative risk assessment and postoperative monitoring of at-risk patients. Major guidelines recommend assessment based on a validated risk calculator that incorporates patient- and procedure-specific factors. American and European guidelines define when stress testing is needed on the basis of functional capacity assessment. Favoring cost-effectiveness, Canadian guidelines instead recommend obtaining brain natriuretic peptide or N-terminal prohormone of brain natriuretic peptide levels to guide postoperative screening for myocardial injury or infarction. When conditions such as acute coronary syndrome, severe pulmonary hypertension, and decompensated heart failure are identified, nonemergent surgery should be postponed until the condition is appropriately managed. There is an evolving role of biomarkers and myocardial injury after noncardiac surgery to enhance risk stratification, but the effect of interventions guided by these strategies is unclear.

Keywords 
cardiac preoperative assessment risk factors heart failure

Immunization Strategies to Span the Spectrum of Immunocompromised Adults

Author/s: 
Whitaker, JA

The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention provides annual recommendations for routine adult immunizations. Many recommendations consider patient factors such as age, medical conditions, and medications that increase an individual’s risk for infection with a vaccine-preventable disease. These factors, particularly those that lead to immunocompromise, may also alter the risk-benefit ratio for live vaccines, and/or lead to decreased vaccine immunogenicity and effectiveness. The provider may need to consider alternative vaccination strategies, including higher antigen dose vaccines, adjuvanted vaccines, avoidance of live vaccines, and careful timing of vaccination to optimize safety and effectiveness in immunocompromised populations. This thematic review discusses general principles regarding immunization of adults across the spectrum of immunocompromise, examines current guidelines and studies that support them, and outlines future research needs.

Keywords 
vaccination vaccines immunocompromised

Safety and efficacy of testosterone for women: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trial data

Author/s: 
Islam, R.M., Bell, R.J., Page, M.J., Davis, S.R., Green, S.

BACKGROUND:

The benefits and risks of testosterone treatment for women with diminished sexual wellbeing remain controversial. We did a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess potential benefits and risks of testosterone for women.

METHODS:

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science for blinded, randomised controlled trials of testosterone treatment of at least 12 weeks' duration completed between Jan 1, 1990, and Dec 10, 2018. We also searched drug registration applications to the European Medicine Agency and the US Food and Drug Administration to identify any unpublished data. Primary outcomes were the effects of testosterone on sexual function, cardiometabolic variables, cognitive measures, and musculoskeletal health. This study is registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO), number CRD42018104073.

FINDINGS:

Our search strategy retrieved 46 reports of 36 randomised controlled trials comprising 8480 participants. Our meta-analysis showed that, compared with placebo or a comparator (eg, oestrogen, with or without progestogen), testosterone significantly increased sexual function, including satisfactory sexual event frequency (mean difference 0·85, 95% CI 0·52 to 1·18), sexual desire (standardised mean difference 0·36, 95% CI 0·22 to 0·50), pleasure (mean difference 6·86, 95% CI 5·19 to 8·52), arousal (standardised mean difference 0·28, 95% CI 0·21 to 0·35), orgasm (standardised mean difference 0·25, 95% CI 0·18 to 0·32), responsiveness (standardised mean difference 0·28, 95% CI 0·21 to 0·35), and self-image (mean difference 5·64, 95% CI 4·03 to 7·26), and reduced sexual concerns (mean difference 8·99, 95% CI 6·90 to 11·08) and distress (standardised mean difference -0·27, 95% CI -0·36 to -0·17) in postmenopausal women. A significant rise in the amount of LDL-cholesterol, and reductions in the amounts of total cholesterol, HDL-cholesterol, and triglycerides, were seen with testosterone administered orally, but not when administered non-orally (eg, by transdermal patch or cream). An overall increase in weight was recorded with testosterone treatment. No effects of testosterone were reported for body composition, musculoskeletal variables, or cognitive measures, although the number of women who contributed data for these outcomes was small. Testosterone was associated with a significantly greater likelihood of reporting acne and hair growth, but no serious adverse events were recorded.

INTERPRETATION:

Testosterone is effective for postmenopausal women with low sexual desire causing distress, with administration via non-oral routes (eg, transdermal application) preferred because of a neutral lipid profile. The effects of testosterone on individual wellbeing and musculoskeletal and cognitive health, as well as long-term safety, warrant further investigation.

FUNDING:

Australian National Health and Medical Research Council.

Preoperative Evaluation Before Noncardiac Surgery

Author/s: 
Bierle, DM, Raslau, D, Regan, DW, Sundsted, KK, Mauck, K.F.

The medical complexity of surgical patients is increasing and medical specialties are frequently asked to assist with perioperative management surgical patients. Effective pre-anesthetic medical evaluations are a valuable tool in providing high-value, patient-centered surgical care and should systematically address risk assessment and identify areas for risk modification. This review outlines a structured approach to the pre-anesthetic medical evaluation, focusing on the asymptomatic patient. It discusses the evidence supporting the use of perioperative risk calculation tools and focused preoperative testing. We also introduce important key topics that will be explored in greater detail in upcoming reviews in this series.

Keywords 
surgery preoperative evaluation risk assessment

Final Update Summary: Breast Cancer: Medication Use to Reduce Risk

Author/s: 
US Preventive Services Task Force, Owens, Douglas K., Davidson, Karina W., Krist, Alex H., Barry, Michael J., Cabana, M, Caughey, AB, Doubeni, Chyke A., Epling, John W. Jr., Kubik, M, Landefeld, CS, Mangione, Carol M., Pbert, L, Silverstein, Michael, Tseng, Chien-Wen, Wong, JB

IMPORTANCE:

Breast cancer is the most common nonskin cancer among women in the United States and the second leading cause of cancer death. The median age at diagnosis is 62 years, and an estimated 1 in 8 women will develop breast cancer at some point in their lifetime. African American women are more likely to die of breast cancer compared with women of other races.

OBJECTIVE:

To update the 2013 US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation on medications for risk reduction of primary breast cancer.

EVIDENCE REVIEW:

The USPSTF reviewed evidence on the accuracy of risk assessment methods to identify women who could benefit from risk-reducing medications for breast cancer, as well as evidence on the effectiveness, adverse effects, and subgroup variations of these medications. The USPSTF reviewed evidence from randomized trials, observational studies, and diagnostic accuracy studies of risk stratification models in women without preexisting breast cancer or ductal carcinoma in situ.

FINDINGS:

The USPSTF found convincing evidence that risk assessment tools can predict the number of cases of breast cancer expected to develop in a population. However, these risk assessment tools perform modestly at best in discriminating between individual women who will or will not develop breast cancer. The USPSTF found convincing evidence that risk-reducing medications (tamoxifen, raloxifene, or aromatase inhibitors) provide at least a moderate benefit in reducing risk for invasive estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer in postmenopausal women at increased risk for breast cancer. The USPSTF found that the benefits of taking tamoxifen, raloxifene, and aromatase inhibitors to reduce risk for breast cancer are no greater than small in women not at increased risk for the disease. The USPSTF found convincing evidence that tamoxifen and raloxifene and adequate evidence that aromatase inhibitors are associated with small to moderate harms. Overall, the USPSTF determined that the net benefit of taking medications to reduce risk of breast cancer is larger in women who have a greater risk for developing breast cancer.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION:

The USPSTF recommends that clinicians offer to prescribe risk-reducing medications, such as tamoxifen, raloxifene, or aromatase inhibitors, to women who are at increased risk for breast cancer and at low risk for adverse medication effects. (B recommendation) The USPSTF recommends against the routine use of risk-reducing medications, such as tamoxifen, raloxifene, or aromatase inhibitors, in women who are not at increased risk for breast cancer. (D recommendation) This recommendation applies to asymptomatic women 35 years and older, including women with previous benign breast lesions on biopsy (such as atypical ductal or lobular hyperplasia and lobular carcinoma in situ). This recommendation does not apply to women who have a current or previous diagnosis of breast cancer or ductal carcinoma in situ.

Keywords 
breast cancer risk assessment risk reduction medication
Subscribe to risk assessment