ACP Response to the RFI for the Pay PCPs Act, S. 4338

ACP Comments on CMS" Proposed Changes to Medicare Advantage and Part D

ACP Comment Letter to Senate Leadership and Committees in Support of Key Provisions in the House-Passed Build Back Better Act

ACP Comment Letter to Congressional Leadership and Committees in Support of Key Provisions in the Build Back Better Act

ACP Response to the U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions White Paper “Preparing for the Next Pandemic”

ACP Comment Letter to CMS Regarding MACRA/Quality Payment Program (QPP) Final Rule for CY 2018

Joint Comment Letter to FDA regarding Tobacco Product Standard for Nicotine Yield of Cigarettes and Certain Other Combusted Tobacco Products Proposed Rule

Joint Principles on Section 1115 Demonstration Waivers and Other Proposals to Change Medicaid

The Urban Poor and Health Care Reform: American College of Physicians Statement of Principles

Statement to the House Ways & Means Subcommittee on Health at the Hearing on the Uninsured

Development and Evaluation of a Framework for Identifying and Addressing Spin for Harms in Systematic Reviews of Interventions

“Spin” refers to misleading reporting, interpretation, and extrapolation of findings in primary and secondary research (such as in systematic reviews). The study of spin primarily focuses on beneficial outcomes. The objectives of this research were threefold: first, to develop a framework for identifying spin associated with harms in systematic reviews of interventions; second, to apply the framework to a set of reviews, thereby pinpointing instances where spin may be present; and finally, to revise the spin examples, offering guidance on how spin can be rectified. The authors developed their framework through an iterative process that engaged an international group of researchers specializing in spin and reporting bias. The framework comprises 12 specific types of spin for harms, grouped by 7 categories across the 3 domains (reporting, interpretation, and extrapolation). The authors subsequently gathered instances of spin from a random sample of 100 systematic reviews of interventions. Of the 58 reviews that assessed harm and the 42 that did not, they found that 28 (48%) and 6 (14%), respectively, had at least 1 of the 12 types of spin for harms. Inappropriate extrapolation of the results and conclusions for harms to populations, interventions, outcomes, or settings not assessed in a review was the most common category of spin in 17 of 100 reviews. The authors revised the examples to remove spin, taking into consideration the context (for example, medical discipline, source population), findings for harms, and methodological limitations of the original reviews. They provide guidance for authors, peer reviewers, and editors in recognizing and rectifying or (preferably) avoiding spin, ultimately enhancing the clarity and accuracy of harms reporting in systematic review publications.

How Would You Manage This Patient With Type 2 Diabetes and Chronic Kidney Disease? Grand Rounds Discussion From Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center

Nearly 15% of U.S. adults have diabetes; type 2 diabetes (T2D) accounts for more than 90% of cases. Approximately one third of all patients with diabetes will develop chronic kidney disease (CKD). All patients with T2D should be screened annually for CKD with both a urine albumin–creatinine ratio and an estimated glomerular filtration rate. Research into strategies to slow the worsening of CKD and reduce renal and cardiovascular morbidity in patients with T2D and CKD has evolved substantially. In 2022, a consensus statement from the American Diabetes Association and the Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes recommended prioritizing the use of sodium–glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors and metformin and included guidance for add-on therapy with glucagon-like peptide 1 receptors agonists for most patients whose first-line therapy failed. It also recommended nonsteroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists for patients with hypertension that is not adequately controlled with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin-receptor blockers. Here, an endocrinologist and a nephrologist discuss the care of patients with T2D and CKD and how they would apply the consensus statement to the care of an individual patient with T2D who is unaware that he has CKD.

Regulatory Framework for Cannabis: A Position Paper From the American College of Physicians

Cannabis, also known as marijuana, is the dried flowers, stems, seeds, and leaves of the Cannabis sativa plant. It contains more than 100 compounds, including tetrahydrocannabinol, which has psychoactive effects. Federal law prohibits the possession, distribution, and use of cannabis outside limited research activities, but most states have legalized cannabis for medical or recreational use. However, research into the potential therapeutic and adverse health effects of cannabis has been limited, in part because of the drug’s federal legal status. In this position paper, the American College of Physicians (ACP) calls for the decriminalization of possession of small amounts of cannabis for personal use and outlines a public health approach to controlling cannabis in jurisdictions where it is legal. ACP recommends the rigorous evaluation of the health effects and potential therapeutic uses of cannabis and cannabinoids as well as research into the effects of legalization on cannabis use. It also calls for evidence-based medical education related to cannabis and increased resources for treatment of cannabis use disorder.

Critical Care: What You May Have Missed in 2023

Critical care medicine is a specialty that brings together a truly wide spectrum of patient populations, disease states, and treatment methods. This article highlights 10 important pieces of research from 2023 (and 1 from 2022) in critical care. The literature was screened for new evidence relevant to internal medicine physicians and hospitalists whose focus of practice is not critical care but who may be taking care of seriously ill patients. The articles highlight the diverse spectrum of pathology and interplay of various specialties that go into critical care. Topics include transfusion medicine, fluid resuscitation, safe intubation practices and respiratory failure, and the management of acute ischemic stroke. Several trials are groundbreaking, forcing clinicians to reconsider preexisting dogma and likely adopt new treatment strategies.

How Would You Manage HIV Pre-exposure Prophylaxis in This Patient With Medical Comorbidities?: Grand Rounds Discussion From Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center: Annals of Internal Medicine: Vol 177, No 4

Despite advances in treatment, HIV infection remains an important cause of morbidity and mortality, with more than 30 000 new cases diagnosed in the United States each year. There are several interventions traditionally used to prevent HIV transmission, but these vary in effectiveness and there are challenges to their implementation. In 2014, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention published initial guidance on the use of antiretroviral pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) to prevent transmission of HIV infection in persons at risk based on multiple studies that showed it to be highly efficacious in various populations. It was updated in 2021 to reflect new drug options. The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force also recently updated its recommendations for PrEP, which strongly support its use in persons at risk. Despite its well-established effectiveness, the implementation of PrEP in clinical practice has been variable, especially among populations underserved by the medical system and marginalized by society. Fewer than one third of persons in the United States who are eligible for PrEP currently receive it. Here, 2 physicians experienced in HIV PrEP debate how best to identify patients who might benefit from PrEP, how to decide what regimen to use, and how to monitor therapy.

Benefits and Risks Associated With Statin Therapy for Primary Prevention in Old and Very Old Adults: Real-World Evidence From a Target Trial Emulation Study: Annals of Internal Medicine: Vol 177, No 6

Background: There is little consensus on using statins for primary prevention of cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) and all-cause mortality in adults aged 75 years or older due to the underrepresentation of this population in randomized controlled trials. Objective: To investigate the benefits and risks of using statins for primary prevention in old (aged 75 to 84 years) and very old (aged ≥85 years) adults. Design: Sequential target trial emulation comparing matched cohorts initiating versus not initiating statin therapy. Setting: Territory-wide public electronic medical records in Hong Kong. Participants: Persons aged 75 years or older who met indications for statin initiation from January 2008 to December 2015 were included. Participants with preexisting diagnosed CVDs at baseline, such as coronary heart disease (CHD), were excluded from the analysis. Among 69 981 eligible persons aged 75 to 84 years and 14 555 persons aged 85 years or older, 41 884 and 9457 had history of CHD equivalents (for example, diabetes) in the respective age groups. Intervention: Initiation of statin therapy. Measurements: Incidence of major CVDs (stroke, myocardial infarction, or heart failure), all-cause mortality, and major adverse events (myopathies and liver dysfunction). Results: Of 42 680 matched person-trials aged 75 to 84 years and 5390 matched person-trials aged 85 years or older (average follow-up, 5.3 years), 9676 and 1600 of them developed CVDs in each age group, respectively. Risk reduction for overall CVD incidence was found for initiating statin therapy in adults aged 75 to 84 years (5-year standardized risk reduction, 1.20% [95% CI, 0.57% to 1.82%] in the intention-to-treat [ITT] analysis; 5.00% [CI, 1.11% to 8.89%] in the per protocol [PP] analysis) and in those aged 85 years or older (ITT: 4.44% [CI, 1.40% to 7.48%]; PP: 12.50% [CI, 4.33% to 20.66%]). No significantly increased risks for myopathies and liver dysfunction were found in both age groups. Limitation: Unmeasured confounders, such as lifestyle factors of diet and physical activity, may exist. Conclusion: Reduction for CVDs after statin therapy were seen in patients aged 75 years or older without increasing risks for severe adverse effects. Of note, the benefits and safety of statin therapy were consistently found in adults aged 85 years or older. Primary Funding Source: Health Bureau, the Government of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China, and National Natural Science Foundation of China.

Excessive Alcohol Use and Alcohol Use Disorders: A Policy Brief of the American College of Physicians

Alcohol is used by more people in the United States than tobacco, electronic nicotine delivery systems, or illicit drugs. Several health conditions, including cancer, cardiovascular disease, and liver disease, are associated with excessive alcohol use and alcohol use disorder. Nearly 30 million people aged 12 years or older in the United States reported past-year alcohol use disorder in 2022, but—despite its prevalence—alcohol use disorder is undertreated. In this policy brief, the American College of Physicians outlines the health effects of excessive alcohol use and alcohol use disorder, calls for policy changes to increase the availability of treatment of alcohol use disorder and excessive alcohol use, and recommends alcohol-related public health interventions.

The Effect of Open-Label Semaglutide on Metabolic Dysfunction–Associated Steatotic Liver Disease in People With HIV

Little Miracles

Progressive Resistance Training or Neuromuscular Exercise for Hip Osteoarthritis: A Multicenter Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial: Annals of Internal Medicine: Vol 177, No 5

Background: Exercise is recommended as first-line treatment for patients with hip osteoarthritis (OA). However, randomized controlled trials providing evidence for the optimal exercise type are lacking. Objective: To investigate whether progressive resistance training (PRT) is superior to neuromuscular exercise (NEMEX) for improving functional performance in patients with hip OA. Design: Multicenter, cluster-randomized, controlled, parallel-group, assessor-blinded, superiority trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04714047) Setting: Hospitals and physiotherapy clinics. Participants: 160 participants with clinically diagnosed hip OA were enrolled from 18 January 2021 to 28 April 2023 and randomly assigned to PRT (n = 82) or NEMEX (n = 78). Intervention: Twelve weeks of PRT or NEMEX with 2 supervised 60-minute group sessions each week. The PRT intervention consisted of 5 high-intensity resistance training exercises targeting muscles at the hip and knee joints. The NEMEX intervention included 10 exercises and emphasized sensorimotor control and functional stability. Measurements: The primary outcome was change in the 30-second chair stand test (30s-CST). Key secondary outcomes were changes in scores on the pain and hip-related quality of life (QoL) subscales of the Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS). Results: The mean changes from baseline to 12-week follow-up in the 30s-CST were 1.5 (95% CI, 0.9 to 2.1) chair stands with PRT and 1.5 (CI, 0.9 to 2.1) chair stands with NEMEX (difference, 0.0 [CI, −0.8 to 0.8] chair stands). For the HOOS pain subscale, mean changes were 8.6 (CI, 5.3 to 11.8) points with PRT and 9.3 (CI, 5.9 to 12.6) points with NEMEX (difference, −0.7 [CI, −5.3 to 4.0] points). For the HOOS QoL subscale, mean changes were 8.0 (CI, 4.3 to 11.7) points with PRT and 5.7 (CI, 1.9 to 9.5) points with NEMEX (difference, 2.3 [CI, −3.0 to 7.6] points). Limitation: Participants and physiotherapists were not blinded. Conclusion: In patients with hip OA, PRT is not superior to NEMEX for improving functional performance, hip pain, or hip-related QoL. Primary Funding Source: Independent Research Fund Denmark.

Digital tools help patients find their way | ACP Hospitalist

Lost | ACP Hospitalist

Sepsis still infected with uncertainty | ACP Hospitalist

Recent Research | ACP Hospitalist

In the News | ACP Hospitalist

In the News | ACP Hospitalist

Explaining Sepsis-3 | ACP Hospitalist

An ear-ly intervention to reduce delirium | ACP Hospitalist

Medicare reports on the 2016 Physician Fee Schedule Value Modifier | ACP Hospitalist

Cases from the University of Texas at Austin | ACP Hospitalist