VA Portland Health Care System

The Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Checklist (PCL) is a widely used DSM-correspondent self-report measure of PTSD symptoms. The PCL was recently revised to reflect DSM-5 changes to the PTSD criteria. In this article, the authors describe the development and initial psychometric evaluation of the PCL for DSM-5 (PCL-5). Psychometric properties of the PCL-5 were examined in 2 studies involving trauma-exposed college students. In Study 1 (N = 278), PCL-5 scores exhibited strong internal consistency (α = .94), test-retest reliability (r = .82), and convergent (rs = .74 to .85) and discriminant (rs = .31 to .60) validity. In addition, confirmatory factor analyses indicated adequate fit with the DSM-5 4-factor model, χ2 (164) = 455.83, p < .001, standardized root mean square residual (SRMR) = .07, root mean squared error of approximation (RMSEA) = .08, comparative fit index (CFI) = .86, and Tucker-Lewis index (TLI) = .84, and superior fit with recently proposed 6-factor, χ2 (164) = 318.37, p < .001, SRMR = .05, RMSEA = .06, CFI = .92, and TLI = .90, and 7-factor, χ2 (164) = 291.32, p < .001, SRMR = .05, RMSEA = .06, CFI = .93, and TLI = .91, models. In Study 2 (N = 558), PCL-5 scores demonstrated similarly strong reliability and validity. Overall, results indicate that the PCL-5 is a psychometrically sound measure of PTSD symptoms. Implications for use of the PCL-5 in a variety of assessment contexts are discussed.

BACKGROUND: Major depressive disorder is one of the most common, burdensome, and costly psychiatric disorders worldwide in adults. Pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments are available; however, because of inadequate resources, antidepressants are used more frequently than psychological interventions. Prescription of these agents should be informed by the best available evidence. Therefore, we aimed to update and expand our previous work to compare and rank antidepressants for the acute treatment of adults with unipolar major depressive disorder. METHODS: We did a systematic review and network meta-analysis. We searched Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL, Embase, LILACS database, MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process, PsycINFO, the websites of regulatory agencies, and international registers for published and unpublished, double-blind, randomised controlled trials from their inception to Jan 8, 2016. We included placebo-controlled and head-to-head trials of 21 antidepressants used for the acute treatment of adults (≥18 years old and of both sexes) with major depressive disorder diagnosed according to standard operationalised criteria. We excluded quasi-randomised trials and trials that were incomplete or included 20% or more of participants with bipolar disorder, psychotic depression, or treatment-resistant depression; or patients with a serious concomitant medical illness. We extracted data following a predefined hierarchy. In network meta-analysis, we used group-level data. We assessed the studies' risk of bias in accordance to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, and certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework. Primary outcomes were efficacy (response rate) and acceptability (treatment discontinuations due to any cause). We estimated summary odds ratios (ORs) using pairwise and network meta-analysis with random effects. This study is registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42012002291. FINDINGS: We identified 28 552 citations and of these included 522 trials comprising 116 477 participants. In terms of efficacy, all antidepressants were more effective than placebo, with ORs ranging between 2·13 (95% credible interval [CrI] 1·89-2·41) for amitriptyline and 1·37 (1·16-1·63) for reboxetine. For acceptability, only agomelatine (OR 0·84, 95% CrI 0·72-0·97) and fluoxetine (0·88, 0·80-0·96) were associated with fewer dropouts than placebo, whereas clomipramine was worse than placebo (1·30, 1·01-1·68). When all trials were considered, differences in ORs between antidepressants ranged from 1·15 to 1·55 for efficacy and from 0·64 to 0·83 for acceptability, with wide CrIs on most of the comparative analyses. In head-to-head studies, agomelatine, amitriptyline, escitalopram, mirtazapine, paroxetine, venlafaxine, and vortioxetine were more effective than other antidepressants (range of ORs 1·19-1·96), whereas fluoxetine, fluvoxamine, reboxetine, and trazodone were the least efficacious drugs (0·51-0·84). For acceptability, agomelatine, citalopram, escitalopram, fluoxetine, sertraline, and vortioxetine were more tolerable than other antidepressants (range of ORs 0·43-0·77), whereas amitriptyline, clomipramine, duloxetine, fluvoxamine, reboxetine, trazodone, and venlafaxine had the highest dropout rates (1·30-2·32). 46 (9%) of 522 trials were rated as high risk of bias, 380 (73%) trials as moderate, and 96 (18%) as low; and the certainty of evidence was moderate to very low. INTERPRETATION: All antidepressants were more efficacious than placebo in adults with major depressive disorder. Smaller differences between active drugs were found when placebo-controlled trials were included in the analysis, whereas there was more variability in efficacy and acceptability in head-to-head trials. These results should serve evidence-based practice and inform patients, physicians, guideline developers, and policy makers on the relative merits of the different antidepressants. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research Oxford Health Biomedical Research Centre and the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science.

BACKGROUND: Apalutamide, a competitive inhibitor of the androgen receptor, is under development for the treatment of prostate cancer. We evaluated the efficacy of apalutamide in men with nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer who were at high risk for the development of metastasis. METHODS: We conducted a double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial involving men with nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer and a prostate-specific antigen doubling time of 10 months or less. Patients were randomly assigned, in a 2:1 ratio, to receive apalutamide (240 mg per day) or placebo. All the patients continued to receive androgen-deprivation therapy. The primary end point was metastasis-free survival, which was defined as the time from randomization to the first detection of distant metastasis on imaging or death. RESULTS: A total of 1207 men underwent randomization (806 to the apalutamide group and 401 to the placebo group). In the planned primary analysis, which was performed after 378 events had occurred, median metastasis-free survival was 40.5 months in the apalutamide group as compared with 16.2 months in the placebo group (hazard ratio for metastasis or death, 0.28; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.23 to 0.35; P<0.001). Time to symptomatic progression was significantly longer with apalutamide than with placebo (hazard ratio, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.32 to 0.63; P<0.001). The rate of adverse events leading to discontinuation of the trial regimen was 10.6% in the apalutamide group and 7.0% in the placebo group. The following adverse events occurred at a higher rate with apalutamide than with placebo: rash (23.8% vs. 5.5%), hypothyroidism (8.1% vs. 2.0%), and fracture (11.7% vs. 6.5%). CONCLUSIONS: Among men with nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, metastasis-free survival and time to symptomatic progression were significantly longer with apalutamide than with placebo. (Funded by Janssen Research and Development; SPARTAN ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01946204 .).

OBJECTIVE: To develop updated guidelines for the pharmacologic management of rheumatoid arthritis. METHODS: We developed clinically relevant population, intervention, comparator, and outcomes (PICO) questions. After conducting a systematic literature review, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to rate the certainty of evidence. A voting panel comprising clinicians and patients achieved consensus on the direction (for or against) and strength (strong or conditional) of recommendations. RESULTS: The guideline addresses treatment with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), including conventional synthetic DMARDs, biologic DMARDs, and targeted synthetic DMARDs, use of glucocorticoids, and use of DMARDs in certain high-risk populations (i.e., those with liver disease, heart failure, lymphoproliferative disorders, previous serious infections, and nontuberculous mycobacterial lung disease). The guideline includes 44 recommendations (7 strong and 37 conditional). CONCLUSION: This clinical practice guideline is intended to serve as a tool to support clinician and patient decision-making. Recommendations are not prescriptive, and individual treatment decisions should be made through a shared decision-making process based on patients' values, goals, preferences, and comorbidities.

BACKGROUND: Data suggest that the effects of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) differ among U.S. racial/ethnic groups. PURPOSE: To evaluate racial/ethnic disparities in severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection rates and COVID-19 outcomes, factors contributing to disparities, and interventions to reduce them. DATA SOURCES: English-language articles in MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Scopus, searched from inception through 31 August 2020. Gray literature sources were searched through 2 November 2020. STUDY SELECTION: Observational studies examining SARS-CoV-2 infections, hospitalizations, or deaths by race/ethnicity in U.S. settings. DATA EXTRACTION: Single-reviewer abstraction confirmed by a second reviewer; independent dual-reviewer assessment of quality and strength of evidence. DATA SYNTHESIS: 37 mostly fair-quality cohort and cross-sectional studies, 15 mostly good-quality ecological studies, and data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and APM Research Lab were included. African American/Black and Hispanic populations experience disproportionately higher rates of SARS-CoV-2 infection, hospitalization, and COVID-19-related mortality compared with non-Hispanic White populations, but not higher case-fatality rates (mostly reported as in-hospital mortality) (moderate- to high-strength evidence). Asian populations experience similar outcomes to non-Hispanic White populations (low-strength evidence). Outcomes for other racial/ethnic groups have been insufficiently studied. Health care access and exposure factors may underlie the observed disparities more than susceptibility due to comorbid conditions (low-strength evidence). LIMITATIONS: Selection bias, missing race/ethnicity data, and incomplete outcome assessments in cohort and cross-sectional studies must be considered. In addition, adjustment for key demographic covariates was lacking in ecological studies. CONCLUSION: African American/Black and Hispanic populations experience disproportionately higher rates of SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19-related mortality but similar rates of case fatality. Differences in health care access and exposure risk may be driving higher infection and mortality rates. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Health Administration, Health Services Research & Development. (PROSPERO: CRD42020187078).

OBJECTIVE: To develop updated guidelines for the pharmacologic management of rheumatoid arthritis. METHODS: We developed clinically relevant population, intervention, comparator, and outcomes (PICO) questions. After conducting a systematic literature review, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to rate the certainty of evidence. A voting panel comprising clinicians and patients achieved consensus on the direction (for or against) and strength (strong or conditional) of recommendations. RESULTS: The guideline addresses treatment with disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), including conventional synthetic DMARDs, biologic DMARDs, and targeted synthetic DMARDs, use of glucocorticoids, and use of DMARDs in certain high-risk populations (i.e., those with liver disease, heart failure, lymphoproliferative disorders, previous serious infections, and nontuberculous mycobacterial lung disease). The guideline includes 44 recommendations (7 strong and 37 conditional). CONCLUSION: This clinical practice guideline is intended to serve as a tool to support clinician and patient decision-making. Recommendations are not prescriptive, and individual treatment decisions should be made through a shared decision-making process based on patients' values, goals, preferences, and comorbidities.

The miniaturization, sophistication, proliferation, and accessibility of technologies are enabling the capture of more and previously inaccessible phenomena in Parkinson's disease (PD). However, more information has not translated into a greater understanding of disease complexity to satisfy diagnostic and therapeutic needs. Challenges include noncompatible technology platforms, the need for wide-scale and long-term deployment of sensor technology (among vulnerable elderly patients in particular), and the gap between the "big data" acquired with sensitive measurement technologies and their limited clinical application. Major opportunities could be realized if new technologies are developed as part of open-source and/or open-hardware platforms that enable multichannel data capture sensitive to the broad range of motor and nonmotor problems that characterize PD and are adaptable into self-adjusting, individualized treatment delivery systems. The International Parkinson and Movement Disorders Society Task Force on Technology is entrusted to convene engineers, clinicians, researchers, and patients to promote the development of integrated measurement and closed-loop therapeutic systems with high patient adherence that also serve to (1) encourage the adoption of clinico-pathophysiologic phenotyping and early detection of critical disease milestones, (2) enhance the tailoring of symptomatic therapy, (3) improve subgroup targeting of patients for future testing of disease-modifying treatments, and (4) identify objective biomarkers to improve the longitudinal tracking of impairments in clinical care and research. This article summarizes the work carried out by the task force toward identifying challenges and opportunities in the development of technologies with potential for improving the clinical management and the quality of life of individuals with PD. © 2016 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.

BACKGROUND: Patients with noninfectious uveitis are at risk for long-term complications of uncontrolled inflammation, as well as for the adverse effects of long-term glucocorticoid therapy. We conducted a trial to assess the efficacy and safety of adalimumab as a glucocorticoid-sparing agent for the treatment of noninfectious uveitis. METHODS: This multinational phase 3 trial involved adults who had active noninfectious intermediate uveitis, posterior uveitis, or panuveitis despite having received prednisone treatment for 2 or more weeks. Investigators and patients were unaware of the study-group assignments. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive adalimumab (a loading dose of 80 mg followed by a dose of 40 mg every 2 weeks) or matched placebo. All patients received a mandatory prednisone burst followed by tapering of prednisone over the course of 15 weeks. The primary efficacy end point was the time to treatment failure occurring at or after week 6. Treatment failure was a multicomponent outcome that was based on assessment of new inflammatory lesions, best corrected visual acuity, anterior chamber cell grade, and vitreous haze grade. Nine ranked secondary efficacy end points were assessed, and adverse events were reported. RESULTS: The median time to treatment failure was 24 weeks in the adalimumab group and 13 weeks in the placebo group. Among the 217 patients in the intention-to-treat population, those receiving adalimumab were less likely than those in the placebo group to have treatment failure (hazard ratio, 0.50; 95% confidence interval, 0.36 to 0.70; P<0.001). Outcomes with regard to three secondary end points (change in anterior chamber cell grade, change in vitreous haze grade, and change in best corrected visual acuity) were significantly better in the adalimumab group than in the placebo group. Adverse events and serious adverse events were reported more frequently among patients who received adalimumab (1052.4 vs. 971.7 adverse events and 28.8 vs. 13.6 serious adverse events per 100 person-years). CONCLUSIONS: In our trial, adalimumab was found to be associated with a lower risk of uveitic flare or visual impairment and with more adverse events and serious adverse events than was placebo. (Funded by AbbVie; VISUAL I ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01138657 .).

BACKGROUND: In 2009, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommended biennial mammography screening for women aged 50 to 74 years and selective screening for those aged 40 to 49 years. PURPOSE: To review studies of the effectiveness of breast cancer screening in average-risk women. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE and Cochrane databases to 4 June 2015. STUDY SELECTION: English-language randomized, controlled trials and observational studies of screening with mammography, magnetic resonance imaging, and ultrasonography that reported breast cancer mortality, all-cause mortality, or advanced breast cancer outcomes. DATA EXTRACTION: Investigators extracted and confirmed data and dual rated study quality; discrepancies were resolved through consensus. DATA SYNTHESIS: Fair-quality evidence from a meta-analysis of mammography trials indicated relative risks (RRs) for breast cancer mortality of 0.92 for women aged 39 to 49 years (95% CI, 0.75 to 1.02) (9 trials; 3 deaths prevented per 10,000 women over 10 years); 0.86 for those aged 50 to 59 years (CI, 0.68 to 0.97) (7 trials; 8 deaths prevented per 10,000 women over 10 years); 0.67 for those aged 60 to 69 years (CI, 0.54 to 0.83) (5 trials; 21 deaths prevented per 10,000 women over 10 years); and 0.80 for those aged 70 to 74 years (CI, 0.51 to 1.28) (3 trials; 13 deaths prevented per 10,000 women over 10 years). Risk reduction was 25% to 31% for women aged 50 to 69 years in observational studies of mammography screening. All-cause mortality was not reduced with screening. Advanced breast cancer was reduced for women aged 50 years or older (RR, 0.62 [CI, 0.46 to 0.83]) (3 trials) but not those aged 39 to 49 years (RR, 0.98 [CI, 0.74 to 1.37]) (4 trials); less evidence supported this outcome. LIMITATIONS: Most trials used imaging technologies and treatments that are now outdated, and definitions of advanced breast cancer were heterogeneous. Studies of effectiveness based on risk factors, intervals, or other modalities were unavailable or methodologically limited. CONCLUSION: Breast cancer mortality is generally reduced with mammography screening, although estimates are not statistically significant at all ages and the magnitudes of effect are small. Advanced cancer is reduced with screening for women aged 50 years or older. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.

Individual genetic variation may help to explain different immune responses to a virus across a population. In particular, understanding how variation in HLA may affect the course of COVID-19 could help identify individuals at higher risk from the disease. HLA typing can be fast and inexpensive. Pairing HLA typing with COVID-19 testing where feasible could improve assessment of severity of viral disease in the population. Following the development of a vaccine against SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, individuals with high-risk HLA types could be prioritized for vaccination.

DESCRIPTION: Hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia (HHT) is an autosomal dominant disease with an estimated prevalence of 1 in 5000 that is characterized by the presence of vascular malformations (VMs). These result in chronic bleeding, acute hemorrhage, and complications from shunting through VMs. The goal of the Second International HHT Guidelines process was to develop evidence-based consensus guidelines for the management and prevention of HHT-related symptoms and complications. METHODS: The guidelines were developed using the AGREE II (Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II) framework and GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) methodology. The guidelines expert panel included expert physicians (clinical and genetic) in HHT from 15 countries, guidelines methodologists, health care workers, health care administrators, patient advocacy representatives, and persons with HHT. During the preconference process, the expert panel generated clinically relevant questions in 6 priority topic areas. A systematic literature search was done in June 2019, and articles meeting a priori criteria were included to generate evidence tables, which were used as the basis for recommendation development. The expert panel subsequently convened during a guidelines conference to conduct a structured consensus process, during which recommendations reaching at least 80% consensus were discussed and approved. RECOMMENDATIONS: The expert panel generated and approved 6 new recommendations for each of the following 6 priority topic areas: epistaxis, gastrointestinal bleeding, anemia and iron deficiency, liver VMs, pediatric care, and pregnancy and delivery (36 total). The recommendations highlight new evidence in existing topics from the first International HHT Guidelines and provide guidance in 3 new areas: anemia, pediatrics, and pregnancy and delivery. These recommendations should facilitate implementation of key components of HHT care into clinical practice.

BACKGROUND: Asciminib is an allosteric inhibitor that binds a myristoyl site of the BCR-ABL1 protein, locking BCR-ABL1 into an inactive conformation through a mechanism distinct from those for all other ABL kinase inhibitors. Asciminib targets both native and mutated BCR-ABL1, including the gatekeeper T315I mutant. The safety and antileukemic activity of asciminib in patients with Philadelphia chromosome-positive leukemia are unknown. METHODS: In this phase 1, dose-escalation study, we enrolled 141 patients with chronic-phase and 9 with accelerated-phase chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) who had resistance to or unacceptable side effects from at least two previous ATP-competitive tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). The primary objective was to determine the maximum tolerated dose or the recommended dose (or both) of asciminib. Asciminib was administered once or twice daily (at doses of 10 to 200 mg). The median follow-up was 14 months. RESULTS: Patients were heavily pretreated; 70% (105 of 150 patients) had received at least three TKIs. The maximum tolerated dose of asciminib was not reached. Among patients with chronic-phase CML, 34 (92%) with a hematologic relapse had a complete hematologic response; 31 (54%) without a complete cytogenetic response at baseline had a complete cytogenetic response. A major molecular response was achieved or maintained by 12 months in 48% of patients who could be evaluated, including 8 of 14 (57%) deemed to have resistance to or unacceptable side effects from ponatinib. A major molecular response was achieved or maintained by 12 months in 5 patients (28%) with a T315I mutation at baseline. Clinical responses were durable; a major molecular response was maintained in 40 of 44 patients. Dose-limiting toxic effects included asymptomatic elevations in the lipase level and clinical pancreatitis. Common adverse events included fatigue, headache, arthralgia, hypertension, and thrombocytopenia. CONCLUSIONS: Asciminib was active in heavily pretreated patients with CML who had resistance to or unacceptable side effects from TKIs, including patients in whom ponatinib had failed and those with a T315I mutation. (Funded by Novartis Pharmaceuticals; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02081378.).

BACKGROUND: Functional independence with aging is an important goal for individuals and society. Simple prognostic indicators can inform health promotion and care planning, but evidence is limited by heterogeneity in measures of function. METHODS: We performed a pooled analysis of data from seven studies of 27,220 community-dwelling older adults aged 65 or older with baseline gait speed, followed for disability and mortality. Outcomes were incident inability or dependence on another person in bathing or dressing; and difficulty walking ¼ - ½ mile or climbing 10 steps within 3 years. RESULTS: Participants with faster baseline gait had lower rates of incident disability. In subgroups (defined by 0.2 m/s-wide intervals from <0.4 to ≥ 1.4 m/s) with increasingly greater gait speed, 3-year rates of bathing or dressing dependence trended from 10% to 1% in men, and from 15% to 1% in women, while mobility difficulty trended from 47% to 4% in men and 40% to 6% in women. The age-adjusted relative risk ratio per 0.1 m/s greater speed for bathing or dressing dependence in men was 0.68 (0.57-0.81) and in women: 0.74 (0.66-0.82); for mobility difficulty, men: 0.75 (0.68-0.82), women: 0.73 (0.67-0.80). Results were similar for combined disability and mortality. Effects were largely consistent across subgroups based on age, gender, race, body mass index, prior hospitalization, and selected chronic conditions. In the presence of multiple other risk factors for disability, gait speed significantly increased the area under the receiver operator characteristic curve. CONCLUSION: In older adults, gait speed predicts 3 year incidence of bathing or dressing dependence, mobility difficulty, and a composite outcome of disability and mortality.

BACKGROUND: In 2009, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommended biennial mammography screening for women aged 50 to 74 years and selective screening for those aged 40 to 49 years. PURPOSE: To review studies of screening in average-risk women with mammography, magnetic resonance imaging, or ultrasonography that reported on false-positive results, overdiagnosis, anxiety, pain, and radiation exposure. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE and Cochrane databases through December 2014. STUDY SELECTION: English-language systematic reviews, randomized trials, and observational studies of screening. DATA EXTRACTION: Investigators extracted and confirmed data from studies and dual-rated study quality. Discrepancies were resolved through consensus. DATA SYNTHESIS: Based on 2 studies of U.S. data, 10-year cumulative rates of false-positive mammography results and biopsies were higher with annual than biennial screening (61% vs. 42% and 7% vs. 5%, respectively) and for women aged 40 to 49 years, those with dense breasts, and those using combination hormone therapy. Twenty-nine studies using different methods reported overdiagnosis rates of 0% to 54%; rates from randomized trials were 11% to 22%. Women with false-positive results reported more anxiety, distress, and breast cancer-specific worry, although results varied across 80 observational studies. Thirty-nine observational studies indicated that some women reported pain during mammography (1% to 77%); of these, 11% to 46% declined future screening. Models estimated 2 to 11 screening-related deaths from radiation-induced cancer per 100,000 women using digital mammography, depending on age and screening interval. Five observational studies of tomosynthesis and mammography indicated increased biopsies but reduced recalls compared with mammography alone. LIMITATIONS: Studies of overdiagnosis were highly heterogeneous, and estimates varied depending on the analytic approach. Studies of anxiety and pain used different outcome measures. Radiation exposure was based on models. CONCLUSION: False-positive results are common and are higher for annual screening, younger women, and women with dense breasts. Although overdiagnosis, anxiety, pain, and radiation exposure may cause harm, their effects on individual women are difficult to estimate and vary widely. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.

BACKGROUND: The effects of levodopa on balance and gait function in people with Parkinson's disease (PD) is controversial. This study compared the relative responsiveness to l-dopa on six domains of balance and gait: postural sway in stance; gait pace; dynamic stability; gait initiation; arm swing; and turning in people with mild and severe PD, with and without dyskinesia. METHODS: We studied 104 subjects with idiopathic PD (H & Y II [n = 52] and III-IV [n = 52]) and 64 age-matched controls. Subjects performed a mobility task in the practical off state and on l-dopa: standing quietly for 30 seconds, initiating gait, walking 7 meters, and turning 180 degrees. Thirty-four measures of mobility were computed from inertial sensors. Standardized response means were used to determine relative responsiveness to l-dopa. RESULTS: The largest improvements with l-dopa were found for arm swing and pace-related gait measures. Gait dynamic stability was unaffected by PD and not responsive to l-dopa. l-dopa reduced turning duration, but only in subjects with severe PD. In contrast to gait, postural sway in quiet standing increased with l-dopa, especially in the more severely affected subjects. The increase in postural sway, as well as decrease in turning duration and exaggerated arm swing with l-dopa was observed only for subjects with dyskinesia at the time of testing. CONCLUSIONS: The observed spectrum of l-dopa responsiveness in balance and gait measures suggests that multiple neural circuits control balance and gait. Many of the negative effects of l-dopa may be directly or indirectly caused by dyskinesia.

BACKGROUND: Subclinical atrial fibrillation is short-lasting and asymptomatic and can usually be detected only by long-term continuous monitoring with pacemakers or defibrillators. Subclinical atrial fibrillation is associated with an increased risk of stroke by a factor of 2.5; however, treatment with oral anticoagulation is of uncertain benefit. METHODS: We conducted a trial involving patients with subclinical atrial fibrillation lasting 6 minutes to 24 hours. Patients were randomly assigned in a double-blind, double-dummy design to receive apixaban at a dose of 5 mg twice daily (2.5 mg twice daily when indicated) or aspirin at a dose of 81 mg daily. The trial medication was discontinued and anticoagulation started if subclinical atrial fibrillation lasting more than 24 hours or clinical atrial fibrillation developed. The primary efficacy outcome, stroke or systemic embolism, was assessed in the intention-to-treat population (all the patients who had undergone randomization); the primary safety outcome, major bleeding, was assessed in the on-treatment population (all the patients who had undergone randomization and received at least one dose of the assigned trial drug, with follow-up censored 5 days after permanent discontinuation of trial medication for any reason). RESULTS: -VASc score of 3.9±1.1 (scores range from 0 to 9, with higher scores indicating a higher risk of stroke); 36.1% of the patients were women. After a mean follow-up of 3.5±1.8 years, stroke or systemic embolism occurred in 55 patients in the apixaban group (0.78% per patient-year) and in 86 patients in the aspirin group (1.24% per patient-year) (hazard ratio, 0.63; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.45 to 0.88; P = 0.007). In the on-treatment population, the rate of major bleeding was 1.71% per patient-year in the apixaban group and 0.94% per patient-year in the aspirin group (hazard ratio, 1.80; 95% CI, 1.26 to 2.57; P = 0.001). Fatal bleeding occurred in 5 patients in the apixaban group and 8 patients in the aspirin group. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with subclinical atrial fibrillation, apixaban resulted in a lower risk of stroke or systemic embolism than aspirin but a higher risk of major bleeding. (Funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and others; ARTESIA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01938248.).

Background: Although autistic adults often discuss experiencing “autistic burnout” and attribute serious negative outcomes to it, the concept is almost completely absent from the academic and clinical literature. Methods: We used a community-based participatory research approach to conduct a thematic analysis of 19 interviews and 19 public Internet sources to understand and characterize autistic burnout. Interview participants were autistic adults who identified as having been professionally diagnosed with an autism spectrum condition. We conducted a thematic analysis, using a hybrid inductive–deductive approach, at semantic and latent levels, through a critical paradigm. We addressed trustworthiness through multiple coders, peer debriefing, and examination of contradictions. Results: Autistic adults described the primary characteristics of autistic burnout as chronic exhaustion, loss of skills, and reduced tolerance to stimulus. They described burnout as happening because of life stressors that added to the cumulative load they experienced, and barriers to support that created an inability to obtain relief from the load. These pressures caused expectations to outweigh abilities resulting in autistic burnout. Autistic adults described negative impacts on their health, capacity for independent living, and quality of life, including suicidal behavior. They also discussed a lack of empathy from neurotypical people and described acceptance and social support, time off/reduced expectations, and doing things in an autistic way/unmasking as associated in their experiences with recovery from autistic burnout. Conclusions: Autistic burnout appears to be a phenomenon distinct from occupational burnout or clinical depression. Better understanding autistic burnout could lead to ways to recognize, relieve, or prevent it, including highlighting the potential dangers of teaching autistic people to mask or camouflage their autistic traits, and including burnout education in suicide prevention programs. These findings highlight the need to reduce discrimination and stigma related to autism and disability. Lay summary Why was this study done? Autistic burnout is talked about a lot by autistic people but has not been formally addressed by researchers. It is an important issue for the autistic community because it is described as leading to distress; loss of work, school, health, and quality of life; and even suicidal behavior. What was the purpose of this study? This study aimed to characterize autistic burnout, understand what it is like, what people think causes it, and what helps people recover from or prevent it. It is a first step in starting to understand autistic burnout well enough to address it. What did the researchers do? Our research group—the Academic Autism Spectrum Partnership in Research and Education—used a community-based participatory research approach with the autistic community in all stages of the study. We analyzed 9 interviews from our study on employment, 10 interviews about autistic burnout, and 19 public Internet sources (five in-depth). We recruited in the United States by publicizing on social media, by word of mouth, and through community connections. When analyzing interviews, we took what people said at face value and in deeper social context, and looked for strong themes across data. What were the results of the study? The primary characteristics of autistic burnout were chronic exhaustion , loss of skills , and reduced tolerance to stimulus . Participants described burnout as happening because of life stressors that added to the cumulative load they experienced, and barriers to support that created an inability to obtain relief from the load. These pressures caused expectations to outweigh abilities resulting in autistic burnout . From this we created a definition: Autistic burnout is a syndrome conceptualized as resulting from chronic life stress and a mismatch of expectations and abilities without adequate supports. It is characterized by pervasive, long-term (typically 3+ months) exhaustion, loss of function, and reduced tolerance to stimulus. Participants described negative impacts on their lives, including health , capacity for independent living , and quality of life , including suicidal behavior. They also discussed a lack of empathy from neurotypical people. People had ideas for recovering from autistic burnout including acceptance and social support , time off/reduced expectations , and doing things in an autistic way/unmasking . How do these findings add to what was already known? We now have data that autistic burnout refers to a clear set of characteristics, and is different from workplace burnout and clinical depression. We have the start of a model for why autistic burnout might happen. We know that people have been able to recover from autistic burnout and have some insights into how. What are the potential weaknesses in the study? This was a small exploratory study with a convenience sample. Although we were able to bring in some diversity by using three data sources, future work would benefit from interviewing a wider range of participants, especially those who are not white, have higher support needs, and have either very high or very low educational attainment. More research is needed to understand how to measure, prevent, and treat autistic burnout. How will these findings help autistic adults now or in the future? These findings validate the experience of autistic adults. Understanding autistic burnout could lead to ways to help relieve it or prevent it. The findings may help therapists and other practitioners recognize autistic burnout, and the potential dangers of teaching autistic people to mask autistic traits. Suicide prevention programs should consider the potential role of burnout. These findings highlight the need to reduce discrimination and stigma around autism and disability.

BACKGROUND: The benefits of pay-for-performance (P4P) programs are uncertain. PURPOSE: To update and expand a prior review examining the effects of P4P programs targeted at the physician, group, managerial, or institutional level on process-of-care and patient outcomes in ambulatory and inpatient settings. DATA SOURCES: PubMed from June 2007 to October 2016; MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Business Economics and Theory, Business Source Elite, Scopus, Faculty of 1000, and Gartner Research from June 2007 to February 2016. STUDY SELECTION: Trials and observational studies in ambulatory and inpatient settings reporting process-of-care, health, or utilization outcomes. DATA EXTRACTION: Two investigators extracted data, assessed study quality, and graded the strength of the evidence. DATA SYNTHESIS: Among 69 studies, 58 were in ambulatory settings, 52 reported process-of-care outcomes, and 38 reported patient outcomes. Low-strength evidence suggested that P4P programs in ambulatory settings may improve process-of-care outcomes over the short term (2 to 3 years), whereas data on longer-term effects were limited. Many of the positive studies were conducted in the United Kingdom, where incentives were larger than in the United States. The largest improvements were seen in areas where baseline performance was poor. There was no consistent effect of P4P on intermediate health outcomes (low-strength evidence) and insufficient evidence to characterize any effect on patient health outcomes. In the hospital setting, there was low-strength evidence that P4P had little or no effect on patient health outcomes and a positive effect on reducing hospital readmissions. LIMITATION: Few methodologically rigorous studies; heterogeneous population and program characteristics and incentive targets. CONCLUSION: Pay-for-performance programs may be associated with improved processes of care in ambulatory settings, but consistently positive associations with improved health outcomes have not been demonstrated in any setting. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs.

Importance: The US Preventive Services Task Force recommends annual lung cancer screening (LCS) with low-dose computed tomography for current and former heavy smokers aged 55 to 80 years. There is little published experience regarding implementing this recommendation in clinical practice. Objectives: To describe organizational- and patient-level experiences with implementing an LCS program in selected Veterans Health Administration (VHA) hospitals and to estimate the number of VHA patients who may be candidates for LCS. Design, Setting, and Participants: This clinical demonstration project was conducted at 8 academic VHA hospitals among 93 033 primary care patients who were assessed on screening criteria; 2106 patients underwent LCS between July 1, 2013, and June 30, 2015. Interventions: Implementation Guide and support, full-time LCS coordinators, electronic tools, tracking database, patient education materials, and radiologic and nodule follow-up guidelines. Main Outcomes and Measures: Description of implementation processes; percentages of patients who agreed to undergo LCS, had positive findings on results of low-dose computed tomographic scans (nodules to be tracked or suspicious findings), were found to have lung cancer, or had incidental findings; and estimated number of VHA patients who met the criteria for LCS. Results: Of the 4246 patients who met the criteria for LCS, 2452 (57.7%) agreed to undergo screening and 2106 (2028 men and 78 women; mean [SD] age, 64.9 [5.1] years) underwent LCS. Wide variation in processes and patient experiences occurred among the 8 sites. Of the 2106 patients screened, 1257 (59.7%) had nodules; 1184 of these patients (56.2%) required tracking, 42 (2.0%) required further evaluation but the findings were not cancer, and 31 (1.5%) had lung cancer. A variety of incidental findings, such as emphysema, other pulmonary abnormalities, and coronary artery calcification, were noted on the scans of 857 patients (40.7%). Conclusions and Relevance: It is estimated that nearly 900 000 of a population of 6.7 million VHA patients met the criteria for LCS. Implementation of LCS in the VHA will likely lead to large numbers of patients eligible for LCS and will require substantial clinical effort for both patients and staff.

This review discusses current pharmacologic principles of diuretic therapy, integrates data from recent research, and suggests evidence-based approaches to diuretic treatment in patients with heart failure.