slide1 n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Evelyn P. Whitlock, MD, MPH Al L. Siu, MD, MSPH PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Evelyn P. Whitlock, MD, MPH Al L. Siu, MD, MSPH

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 24

Evelyn P. Whitlock, MD, MPH Al L. Siu, MD, MSPH - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 101 Views
  • Uploaded on

Making Recommendations for Special Populations: Older Adults, Children, and Racial/Ethnic Minorities September 19, 2011. Evelyn P. Whitlock, MD, MPH Al L. Siu, MD, MSPH Associate Director, Oregon Evidence-based Practice Center The Brookdale Department of Geriatrics & Palliative Care

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Evelyn P. Whitlock, MD, MPH Al L. Siu, MD, MSPH' - gaerwn


Download Now An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
slide1

Making Recommendations for Special Populations: Older Adults, Children, and Racial/Ethnic MinoritiesSeptember 19, 2011

Evelyn P. Whitlock, MD, MPH Al L. Siu, MD, MSPH

Associate Director, Oregon Evidence-based Practice Center The Brookdale Department of Geriatrics & Palliative Care

Kaiser Permanente, Center for Health Research The Mount Sinai Medical Center

Michael L. LeFevre, MD, MSPH Kirsten Bibbins-Domingo, PhD, MD

Department of Family & Community MedicineDivision of General Internal Medicine

University of Missouri School of Medicine University of California, San Francisco

history of uspstf primary care prevention
History of USPSTF: Primary Care & Prevention
  • First convened by the USPHS in 1984
  • Sponsored by AHRQ since 1998
  • Commissions EPCs to perform systematic reviews of clinical preventive services
  • Bases clinical recommendations for primary care providers on evidence reviews
  • Guide to Clinical Preventive Services (online)
    • Over 100 screening, behavioral counseling, and chemoprevention recommendations

3

selection of recent and upcoming topics
Selection of Recent and Upcoming Topics
  • Recent Screening Recommendations
    • Screening for Depression in Adults (2009)
    • Screening for Obesity in Adults (in press)
    • Screening for Cervical Cancer (in press)
  • Special Population Recommendations
    • Screening for Child and Adolescent Depression (2009)
    • Screening for Obesity in Children and Adolescents (2010)
    • Interventions to Prevent Falls (upcoming)
    • Screening for Dementia (upcoming)
    • Screening for Hypertension in Children and Adolescents (upcoming)

4

incidence of cervical cancer by age and race ethnicity
Incidence of Cervical Cancer by Age and Race/Ethnicity

Source: US Crude Cervical Cancer Incidence Rates by Age and Race/Ethnicity (SEER 2000-2007)

Rates are expressed as cases per 100,000 women. ICC only unless otherwise specified

*American Indian/Alaska Native statistics only include cases from the Contract Health Service Delivery Area (CHSDA) counties.

†Hispanic and NonHispanic are not mutually exclusive from White, Black, American Indian/Alaska Native, and Asian or Pacific Islander.

5

uspstf s steps to an evidence based recommendation
USPSTF’s Steps to an Evidence-based Recommendation
  • Select highest priority topics
  • Set scope of topic/workplan: what questions are important to answer; what evidence to search for
  • Consult during protocol-based systematic review
  • Consider evidence synthesis results: overall benefits & harms, subgroups/effect modifiers, key contextual findings
  • Apply USPSTF rules of evidence and make related judgments to make a recommendation

6

overview of uspstf process for an evidence based recommendation rules of evidence
Overview of USPSTF Process for an Evidence-based Recommendation—rules of evidence

What evidence does the USPSTF consider?

Key questions on both benefits and harms of all aspects of a preventive service are answered through a systematic review and sometimes a companion modeling exercise

Rules of evidence provide framework for determining net benefit—way beyond “hierarchy of evidence” approach

Reference: Sawaya G et al. Ann Intern Med. 2007;147:871-875.

uspstf evaluation of evidence for each key question convincing adequate or inadequate
USPSTF Evaluation of Evidence for Each Key Question —Convincing, Adequate, or Inadequate?
  • Appropriate study design(s)?
  • High quality studies?
  • Applicable studies to US?
  • Precision of results (number and size of studies)
  • Consistency of results
  • Additional factors (biological plausibility, dose/response…)

Reference: Sawaya G et al. Ann Intern Med. 2007;147:871-875.

8

uspstf evaluation of net benefit
USPSTF Evaluation of Net Benefit
  • How does the USPSTF estimate certainty & magnitude of net benefit for the whole preventive service?
  • Certainty and magnitude of net benefit together determine the recommendation letter grade (A, B, C, D, I)

9

uspstf evaluation of body of evidence high moderate or low certainty in findings overall
USPSTF Evaluation of Body of Evidence: High, Moderate, or Low Certainty in Findings Overall
  • Appropriate study design(s) for all KQ
  • High quality studies for all KQ
  • Applicable body of studies to US
  • Precision of results (number and size of studies)
  • Consistency of results across key questions
  • Additional factors

Reference: Sawaya G et al. Ann Intern Med. 2007;147:871-875.

10

magnitude of net benefit substantial moderate small zero negative
Magnitude of net benefit —Substantial, Moderate, Small, Zero-Negative
  • “Quantitative” subtraction of average harms (immediate and downstream) from average benefits
  • Substantial: benefits substantially outweigh harms (large benefit in rare group or smaller benefit across prevalent condition)
  • Zero-negative: harms equal or out-weigh benefits
  • Small: benefits slightly outweigh harms and may vary individually (preference, other factors)
  • Judgment necessarily involved

11

uspstf recommendation grid grading
USPSTF Recommendation Grid—Grading

*A, B, C, D, and Insufficient represent the letter grades of recommendation or statement of insufficient evidence assigned by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force after assessing certainty and magnitude of net benefit of the service.

12

general versus population specific recommendations
General Versus Population-specific Recommendations
  • General recommendations are not always appropriate for certain groups
  • Different natural history of disease and different health states can affect net benefits of preventive services
  • The average effect may be misleading
    • One group may benefit, another may be harmed, and one may have no benefit or harms
  • Either approach (general or population-specific) has trade-offs

13

some challenges in making recommendations in special populations
Some Challenges in Making Recommendations in Special Populations
  • Often under-represented in clinical trials
  • Important population-specific characteristics that differ from the general population affect prevention (e.g., limited life expectancy in older adults, cultural differences, proxy or caregiver involvement, tracking of risk factors into adulthood) are hard to factor in
  • Important outcomes also vary across population
  • Methodology
    • No rules for extrapolation from other populations
    • Incomplete approaches to deal with heterogeneity of treatment effects
    • No clear guidance on when a population-specific approach is preferable

14

special populations of particular interest to the uspstf
Special Populations of Particular Interest to the USPSTF
  • Racial and Ethnic Minorities (growing emphasis)
    • Blacks
    • Asians / Pacific Islanders
    • Hispanics
    • Native Americans / Alaskan Natives
  • Children – Methods workgroup since 2002
    • Children under 18 years of age
  • Older Adults – Methods workgroup since 2005 (recently published)
    • Adults over 65 years of age

Reference: Leipzig R et al. Ann Intern Med. 2010;153:809-814.

15

purpose of today s session
Purpose of Today’s Session

To discuss important barriers and potential solutions for using evidence and making recommendations for these special populations

To generate important areas for future work by USPSTF methods working groups focused on these special populations

To identify other important subpopulations for USPSTF consideration

racial ethnic minorities kirsten bibbins domingo phd md uspstf member
Racial/Ethnic Minorities –Kirsten Bibbins-Domingo, PhD, MD, USPSTF Member

Understudied

Even if study participants are enrolled proportional to US population, low power for group-specific results

Non-standard definitions for racial/ethnic groups and heterogeneity within defined groups (e.g., Asians)

Health disparities may or may not represent the need for population-specific recommendations

Possible differential factors: baseline risk, biology of disease, differential access to screening or treatment, differential response to treatment, cultural/acculturation issues

Different spectrum of disease (e.g., stroke vs MI in CVD) in R/E minorities may drive health outcome differences

starting questions
Starting Questions
  • What is your impression of how well the USPSTF recommendations meet the needs of racial-ethnic minorities?
  • What are the important methodological advances that need to occur in order to improve the development and implementation of recommendations for minorities?
  • How can the USPSTF do a more apt job communicating how they review the evidence (or lack thereof) for racial-ethnic minorities?

18

children michael l lefevre md msph uspstf co chair
Children – Michael L. LeFevre, MD, MSPH, USPSTF Co-Chair
  • Many insufficient evidence (“I” statements) for children’s preventive services—some already well-accepted parts of pediatric practice
    • Children are relatively understudied
    • Service impact (e.g. anticipatory guidance) hard to measure
  • Relatively healthy populations
    • Developmental issues more common than disease issues
  • Health outcomes may differ from adults
    • Broader concerns (sensory function, school readiness, behavior)
    • Longer time frame to achieve health impact (adult disease)

19

starting questions1
Starting Questions
  • What is your impression of how well the USPSTF recommendations meet the needs of children and adolescents?
  • What are the important methodological advances that need to occur in order to improve the development and implementation of recommendations for kids?
  • How can the USPSTF do a more apt job communicating how they review the evidence (or lack thereof) for children and adolescents?

20

older adults al l siu md msph uspstf co chair
Older Adults – Al L. Siu, MD, MSPH, USPSTF Co-Chair
  • Understudied, particularly older (75+) and oldest old (85+)
  • Age captures only part of variation in health
    • Unhealthy 65 year old may be more like a healthy 85 year old
  • Life expectancy is very important in determining net benefits, but hard to determine
  • Comorbidities are common, understudied, and modify prevention considerations
    • Single focus prevention recommendations less relevant
  • Patient-important outcomes predominate (function, independence, quality of life more than mortality)

21

starting questions2
Starting Questions
  • What is your impression of how well the USPSTF recommendations meet the needs of older adults?
  • What are the important methodological advances that need to occur in order to improve the development and implementation of recommendations for older adults?
  • How can the USPSTF do a more apt job communicating how they review the evidence (or lack thereof) for older adults?

22

contact information
Contact Information
  • Tracy Wolff, MD, MPH

Medical Officer, USPSTF Program

Tracy.wolff@ahrq.gov.hhs

  • www.preventiveservices.ahrq.gov
  • www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org
  • www.epss.ahrq.gov

For more information stop by the Prevention and Chronic Care Program booth in the mAHRQet Place Café and join us tomorrow in Salon E at 330 for a Guided Tour of How a USPSTF Topic Becomes a Recommendation!