Recent research has identified genetic traits that can be used in a laboratory setting to distinguish among global population groups. In some genetic analyses, the population groups identified resemble groups that are historically categorized as "races." On the basis of these associations, some researchers have argued that a patient's race can be used to predict underlying genetic traits and from these traits, the expected outcomes of treatment. Others have questioned the use of race in this way, arguing that racially defined groups are so heterogeneous that predictions of individual characteristics derived from group averages are bound to be problematic. Practitioners today face the dilemma of translating this scientific debate into clinical decisions made 1 patient at a time. Is it or is it not appropriate to use a patient's self-identified "race" to help decide treatment? In contrast to the global population groups identified by genetic studies, the U.S. population has experienced substantial genetic admixture over time, weakening our ability to distinguish groups on the basis of meaningful genetic differences. Nonetheless, many researchers have suggested that these differences are still sufficient to identify racially specific uses for pharmaceutical and other treatments. A review of recent research on the treatment of hypertension and congestive heart failure finds that race-specific treatments of this type carry a substantial risk for treating patients--black or white--inappropriately, either by withholding a treatment that may be effective or by using a treatment that may be ineffective. Only by moving beyond historical concepts of "race" to examining a patient's individual socioeconomic, cultural, behavioral, and ancestral circumstances can a practitioner select the treatment that is most likely to be effective and in doing so, can best serve that patient's needs.

OBJECTIVE: Late-night salivary cortisol (LNSC) is reportedly highly accurate for the diagnosis of Cushing's syndrome (CS). However, diagnostic thresholds for abnormal results are based on healthy, young populations and limited data are available on its use in elderly populations with chronic medical conditions. The purpose of this study was to evaluate LNSC levels in elderly male veterans with and without diabetes.

DESIGN: Prospective evaluation of LNSC levels in male veterans.

PATIENTS: One hundred and fifty-four participants with type 2 diabetes and 52 participants without diabetes. MEASUREMENTS: Participants underwent outpatient LNSC (2300 h) testing. Participants with elevated LNSC (> or = 4.3 nmol/l) underwent secondary testing, including 24-h urine free cortisol (24UFC, > 60 microg/day) and dexamethasone suppression testing (DST, serum cortisol > 50 nmol/l). Participants with positive secondary testing had a morning ACTH level analysed and either pituitary or adrenal imaging performed.

RESULTS: One hundred and forty-one diabetics and 46 controls (mean age 61 years) returned samples (91% overall). Average LNSC levels (nmol/l) in diabetics were significantly higher than in nondiabetics [median (interquartile range): 2.6 (1.8-4.1) vs. 1.6 (1.0-2.0)] and in those aged > or = 60 compared to 60 [2.7 (2.0-4.3) vs. 1.9 (1.4-2.9)] (P 0.001 for both). Thirty-one participants required secondary testing. Seventy-nine per cent of participants who underwent secondary testing had normal 24UFC and DST. No cases of CS have been diagnosed to date. Increasing age [odds ratio (OR) 2.0 per decade], current diabetes mellitus (OR 4.4), and elevated blood pressure (OR 1.3 per 10 mmHg increase in systolic blood pressure) were associated with abnormal LNSC results (P 0.05 for each).

CONCLUSIONS: LNSC has been shown to be sensitive and specific in diagnosing CS in certain high-risk populations, primarily the young and middle-aged. The development of age- and comorbidity-adjusted thresholds may be warranted for LNSC testing in elderly subjects and in those with significant comorbidity.

Background: Diagnostic sensitivity is calculated as the number of correct diagnoses divided by the sum of correct diagnoses plus the number of missed or false negative diagnoses. Because missed diagnoses are generally detected during clinical follow up or at necropsy, the low necropsy rates seen in current practice may result in overestimates of diagnostic performance. Using three target conditions (aortic dissection, pulmonary embolism, and active tuberculosis), the prevalence of clinically missed cases among necropsied and non-necropsied deaths was estimated and the impact of low necropsy rates on the apparent sensitivity of antemortem diagnosis determined.

Methods: After reviewing case series for each target condition, the most recent study that included cases first detected at necropsy was selected and the reported sensitivity of clinical diagnosis adjusted by estimating the total number of cases that would have been detected had all decedents undergone necropsy. These estimates were based on available data for necropsy rates, time period, country (US v non-US), and case mix.

Results: For all three target diagnoses, adjusting for the estimated prevalence of clinically missed cases among non-necropsied deaths produced sensitivity values outside the 95% confidence interval for the originally reported values, and well below sensitivities reported for the diagnostic tests that are usually used to detect these conditions. For active tuberculosis the sensitivity of antemortem diagnosis decreased from an apparent value of 96% to a corrected value of 83%, with a plausible range of 42-91%; for aortic dissection the sensitivity decreased from 86% to 74%; and for pulmonary embolism the reduction fell only modestly from 97% to 91% but was still lower than generally reported values of 98% or more.

Conclusions: Failure to adjust for the prevalence of missed cases among non-necropsied deaths may substantially overstate the performance of diagnostic tests and antemortem diagnosis in general, especially for conditions with high early case fatality.

BACKGROUND: Cervical-cancer screening strategies that involve the use of conventional cytology and require multiple visits have been impractical in developing countries. METHODS: We used computer-based models to assess the cost-effectiveness of a variety of cervical-cancer screening strategies in India, Kenya, Peru, South Africa, and Thailand. Primary data were combined with data from the literature to estimate age-specific incidence and mortality rates for cancer and the effectiveness of screening for and treatment of precancerous lesions. We assessed the direct medical, time, and program-related costs of strategies that differed according to screening test, targeted age and frequency, and number of clinic visits required. Single-visit strategies involved the assumption that screening and treatment could be provided in the same day. Outcomes included the lifetime risk of cancer, years of life saved, lifetime costs, and cost-effectiveness ratios (cost per year of life saved). RESULTS: The most cost-effective strategies were those that required the fewest visits, resulting in improved follow-up testing and treatment. Screening women once in their lifetime, at the age of 35 years, with a one-visit or two-visit screening strategy involving visual inspection of the cervix with acetic acid or DNA testing for human papillomavirus (HPV) in cervical cell samples, reduced the lifetime risk of cancer by approximately 25 to 36 percent, and cost less than 500 dollars per year of life saved. Relative cancer risk declined by an additional 40 percent with two screenings (at 35 and 40 years of age), resulting in a cost per year of life saved that was less than each country's per capita gross domestic product--a very cost-effective result, according to the Commission on Macroeconomics and Health. CONCLUSIONS: Cervical-cancer screening strategies incorporating visual inspection of the cervix with acetic acid or DNA testing for HPV in one or two clinical visits are cost-effective alternatives to conventional three-visit cytology-based screening programs in resource-poor settings.

BACKGROUND: This study was designed to quantify the resources used in reestablishing contact with women who missed their scheduled cervical cancer screening visits and to assess the success of this effort in reducing loss to follow-up in a developing country setting. METHODS: Women were enrolled in this Cape Town, South Africa-based screening study between 2000 and 2003, and all had scheduled follow-up visits in 2003. Community health worker (CHW) time, vehicle use, maintenance, and depreciation were estimated from weekly logs and cost accounting systems. The percentage of women who attended their scheduled visit, those who attended after CHW contact(s), and those who never returned despite attempted contact(s) were determined. The number of CHW visits per woman was also estimated. RESULTS: 3,711 visits were scheduled in 2003. Of these, 2,321 (62.5%) occurred without CHW contact, 918 (24.8%) occurred after contact(s), and 472 (12.7%) did not occur despite contact(s). Loss to follow-up was reduced from 21% to 6%, 39% to 10%, and 50% to 24% for 6, 12, and 24-month visits. CHWs attempted 3,200 contacts in 530 trips. On average, 3 CHWs attempted to contact 6 participants over each 111 minute trip. The per-person cost (2003 Rand) for these activities was 12.75, 24.92, and 40.50 for 6, 12, and 24-month visits. CONCLUSION: CHW contact with women who missed scheduled visits increased their return rate. Cost-effectiveness analyses aimed at policy decisions about cervical cancer screening in developing countries should incorporate these findings.

This paper compares the relative efficiency of health care providers in managing patients with severe chronic illnesses over fixed periods of time. To minimize the contribution of differences in severity of illness to differences in care management, we evaluate performance over fixed intervals prior to death for patients who died during a five-year period, 1999-2003. Medicare spending, hospital bed and full-time equivalent (FTE) physician inputs, and utilization varied extensively between regions, among hospitals located within a given region, and among hospitals belonging to a given hospital system. The data point to important opportunities to improve efficiency.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether an intervention focusing clinician attention on drug choice for hypertension treatment improves concordance between drug regimens and guidelines.

STUDY DESIGN: Cluster-randomized controlled trial comparing an individualized intervention with a general guideline implementation in geographically diverse primary care clinics of a university-affiliated Department of Veterans Affairs healthcare system.

METHODS: Participants were 36 attending physicians and nurse practitioners (16 in the general group and 20 in the individualized group), with findings based on 4500 hypertensive patients. A general guideline implementation for all clinicians, including education about guideline-based drug recommendations and goals for adequacy of blood pressure control, was compared with addition of a printed individualized advisory sent to clinicians at each patient visit, indicating whether or not the patient's antihypertensive drug regimen was guideline concordant. We measured change from baseline to end point in the proportion of clinicians' patients whose drug therapy was guideline concordant.

RESULTS: The individualized intervention resulted in an improvement in guideline concordance more than twice that observed for the general intervention (10.9% vs 3.8%, t = 2.796, P = .008). Bootstrap analysis showed that being in the individualized group increased the odds of concordance 1.5-fold (P = .025). The proportion of patients with adequate blood pressure control increased within each study group; however, the difference between groups was not significant.

CONCLUSION: An individualized advisory regarding drug therapy for hypertension given to the clinician at each patient visit was more effective in changing clinician prescribing behavior than implementation of a general guideline.