Risultati per: Le campagne di screening come strumento di prevenzione oncologica tra dubbi e certezze

This systematic review and meta-analysis used databases, such as PubMed, ProQuest, and Scopus, to investigate the association between the COVID-19 pandemic and decreased rates of breast, colorectal, and cervical cancer screening globally.

To the Editor In a recent research letter, Dr Koh and colleagues recently reported on prostate-specific antigen (PSA) recommendations on the public websites of 607 US cancer centers. The authors reported that there were differences in screening recommendations based on age, and that discussion of shared decision-making and the potential harms of screening were not acknowledged by many centers on their websites. We have several critiques of their methods and results.

Less is More

Men ages 65 to 74 offered comprehensive screening with intensive follow-up had similar mortality as controls.

Introduction
With the exponential progress of patients with COVID-19, unexpected restrictions were directed to limit SARS-CoV-2 dissemination and imposed health-system an entire reformation to diminish transmission risk. These changes likely have caused the full range of cancer screenings and diagnosis gaps. Regardless of the recommendations, prostate cancer (PCa) screening/diagnosis programmes were momentarily postponed. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing has been an inexpensive, low-invasive and relatively precise means of detection for PCa screening that would improve the uncovering of any type of PCa. Unfortunately, a decrease in PSA screening would significantly decrease PCa detection, with non-negligible growth in PCa-specific death. This review is designed to improve our understanding of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the screening and diagnosis of patients with PCa.

Methods and analysis
This systematic review will be reported in accordant with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidance. A comprehensive search has been executed through five main electronic databases: PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, Scopus, Embase and ProQuest until 1 March 2022. Besides, grey literature, preprint studies and references of included studies will be searched. The main keywords have been used to perform the search strategy: COVID-19, prostatic neoplasms. All the relevant studies that met the inclusion criteria will be screened, selected and then extracted data by two independent authors. The quality assessment of the included studies will be performed by the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. In case of any disagreement between the two authors in selecting, extracting data and assessing the quality of included studies, it will be resolved via consensus and checked by the third author.

Ethics and dissemination
As this study will be a systematic review without human participants’ involvement, there will be no requirement for ethics approval. Findings will be presented at conferences and in a peer-reviewed journal.

PROSPERO registration number
CRD42021291656.

Objective
To examine and synthesise the literature on adverse childhood experience (ACE) screening in clinical and healthcare settings servicing children (0–11) and young people (12–25).

Design
A systematic review of literature was undertaken.

Data source
PsycInfo, Web of Science, Embase, PubMed and CINAHL were searched through June 2021. Additional searches were also undertaken.

Eligibility criteria
English language studies were included if they reported results of an ACE tool being used in a clinical or healthcare setting, participants were aged between 0 and 25 years and the ACE tool was completed by children/young people or by parents/caregivers/clinicians on behalf of the child/young person. Studies assessing clinicians’ views on ACE screening in children/young people attending health settings were also included.

Data extraction and synthesis
Two independent reviewers extracted data and assessed for risk of bias using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Results were synthesised qualitatively.

Results
Initial searches identified 5231 articles, of which 36 were included in the final review. Findings showed that the most commonly used tool for assessing ACE was the ACE questionnaire; administering ACE tools was found to be feasible and acceptable; there were limited studies looking at the utility, feasibility and acceptability of assessing for ACE in First Nations people; and while four studies provided information on actions taken following ACE screening, no follow-up data were collected to determine whether participants accessed services and/or the impact of accessing services.

Conclusion
As the evidence stands, widespread ACE screening is not recommended for routine clinical use. More research is needed on how and what specific ACE to screen for and the impact of screening on well-being.

PROSPERO registration number
University of York Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD42021260420).

Stroke, Volume 53, Issue 9, Page e424-e425, September 1, 2022.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening between ages 50 and 75 years is a US Preventive Services Task Force Grade A recommendation.1 The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic initially decreased CRC screening participation by as much as 82%,2 and new variants continue to disrupt preventive care. Screening colonoscopy is more vulnerable to pandemic-related delays than the fecal immunochemical test (FIT).2 We estimated the potential clinical impact of pandemic-related interruptions in CRC screening on the US population.

Introduction
The increasing prevalence of developmental disorders in early childhood poses a significant global health burden. Early detection of developmental problems is vital to ensure timely access to early intervention, and universal developmental surveillance is recommended best practice for identifying issues. Despite this, there is currently considerable variation in developmental surveillance and screening between Australian states and territories and low rates of developmental screening uptake by parents. This study aims to evaluate an innovative web-based developmental surveillance programme and a sustainable approach to referral and care pathways, linking primary care general practice (GP) services that fall under federal policy responsibility and state government-funded child health services.

Methods and analysis
The proposed study describes a longitudinal cluster randomised controlled trial (c-RCT) comparing a ‘Watch Me Grow Integrated’ (WMG-I) approach for developmental screening, to Surveillance as Usual (SaU) in GPs. Forty practices will be recruited across New South Wales and Queensland, and randomly allocated into either the (1) WMG-I or (2) SaU group. A cohort of 2000 children will be recruited during their 18-month vaccination visit or opportunistic visit to GP. At the end of the c-RCT, a qualitative study using focus groups/interviews will evaluate parent and practitioner views of the WMG-I programme and inform national and state policy recommendations.

Ethics and dissemination
The South Western Sydney Local Health District (2020/ETH01625), UNSW Sydney (2020/ETH01625) and University of Queensland (2021/HE000667) Human Research Ethics Committees independently reviewed and approved this study. Findings will be reported to the funding bodies, study institutes and partners; families and peer-reviewed conferences/publications.

Trial registration number
ANZCTR12621000680864.

Introduction
Indigenous peoples’ world views are intricately interrelated and interconnected with those of their communities and the environments where they live. Consequently, Indigenous peoples have a holistic view of their health, which contrasts with the dominant Western biomedical paradigm. However, the mental well-being of Indigenous peoples is predominately screened using tools developed using the Western paradigm that may not be culturally appropriate. The objective of this systematic mixed studies review (SMSR) is to assess the extent of the literature related to approaches used to develop new tools to screen the mental well-being of Indigenous adults.

Methods and analysis
This SMSR will be conducted in accordance with the method proposed by Pluye et al. It will include studies that describe the development of any type of tool or approach to screen for mental well-being in Indigenous adults, globally. Searches will be limited to the English language and literature published since January 2000. Databases to be searched include: CINAHL, Medline, PsycINFO, PubMed and Scopus. Only published studies will be included in the SMSR. Data that answers the research questions will be extracted from the literature and recorded on the associated data charting form. A sequential synthesis method will be used to analyse data from qualitative, quantitative and mixed-method studies. Data will be presented graphically, diagrammatically or in tabular form depending on what approach best conveys its meaning.

Ethics and dissemination
The SMSR will describe the approach to developing new tools for screening the mental well-being of Indigenous peoples across the globe. It will support researchers, clinicians and practitioners to consider both their approach to new tool development or, if they are using a previously developed tool, how reliable and valid it is for the population that they intend to use it with. Peer-reviewed publications will be used to disseminate SMSR findings.

Annals of Internal Medicine, Volume 175, Issue 10, Page 1491-1492, October 2022.

Objectives
To determine the diagnostic yield of screening patients for SARS-CoV-2 who were admitted with a diagnosis unrelated to COVID-19 and to identify risk factors for positive tests.

Design
Cohort from the Canadian COVID-19 Emergency Department Rapid Response Network registry.

Setting
30 acute care hospitals across Canada.

Participants
Patients hospitalised for non-COVID-19-related diagnoses who were tested for SARS-CoV-2 between 1 March and 29 December 2020.

Main outcome
Positive nucleic acid amplification test for SARS-CoV-2.

Outcome measure
Diagnostic yield.

Results
We enrolled 15 690 consecutive eligible adults who were admitted to hospital without clinically suspected COVID-19. Among these patients, 122 tested positive for COVID-19, resulting in a diagnostic yield of 0.8% (95% CI 0.64% to 0.92%). Factors associated with a positive test included presence of fever, being a healthcare worker, having a positive household contact or institutional exposure, and living in an area with higher 7-day average incident COVID-19 cases.

Conclusions
Universal screening of hospitalised patients for COVID-19 across two pandemic waves had a low diagnostic yield and should be informed by individual-level risk assessment in addition to regional COVID-19 prevalence.

Trial registration number
NCT04702945.

Introduction
Cryptococcal meningitis is a common fungal opportunistic infection and a leading cause of death among people with advanced HIV disease in sub-Saharan Africa. The WHO recommends cryptococcal antigen (CrAg) screening followed by pre-emptive therapy to prevent cryptococcal meningitis and death in this population. In 2016, South Africa was the first country to implement reflexive laboratory CrAg screening nationally. The Cryptococcal Antigen Screen-and-Treat National Evaluation Team (CAST-NET) aims to evaluate the effectiveness of this national screening programme to optimise health outcomes.

Methods and analysis
The CAST-NET study consists of two integrated parts: a retrospective cohort study and a cluster-randomised trial (CRT). The retrospective cohort study will determine 6-month cryptococcal meningitis-free survival among CrAg-positive patients. Secondary outcomes include the proportion of CrAg-positive results noted for action in the CrAg-positive patient chart, the proportion of CrAg-positive patients offered and accept/decline a lumbar puncture, the proportion of CrAg-positive patients prescribed antifungal therapy and the proportion of CrAg-positive patients who have antiretroviral therapy initiated or reinitiated at an appropriate time according to South African national guidelines. Cohort data will be analysed by the type of facility (ie, hospital vs primary health clinic) at which the patient was diagnosed with antigenaemia. The CRT will determine if the appointment and mentoring of a healthcare worker, or ‘crypto champion’, at intervention facilities is associated with a higher proportion of CrAg-positive persons initiating pre-emptive fluconazole therapy. Secondary outcomes will include 6-month cryptococcal meningitis-free survival and the proportion prescribed fluconazole maintenance treatment.

Ethics and dissemination
Ethics approvals were received from the University of the Witwatersrand Human Research Ethics Committee (Medical), the University of KwaZulu-Natal Biomedical Research Ethics Committee and the University of Pretoria Faculty of Health Sciences Research Ethics Committee. Study results will be disseminated to the South African Department of Health and participating facilities through peer-reviewed publications and reports.