First, do no harm: Critically revisiting contemporary approaches to child sexual abuse prevention.

Crime prevention is typically presented in a tripartite model that includes primary, secondary, and tertiary domains. Almost every criminal justice intervention constitutes tertiary prevention and occurs reactively, in the aftermath of an offence. Child sexual abuse is no exception, and prevention science has long recommended we focus our intervention efforts further upstream. Such an approach would include earlier detection and disclosure (secondary prevention), or-even better-reducing the risks of early exposure to the environmental forces which facilitate sexual abuse in the first place (primary prevention). What is missing from the field, however, is a coherent framework through which to critique the unintended consequences of our well-intentioned responses to child sexual abuse. Such consequences include secondary trauma for victim survivors and vicarious trauma for families and practitioners. In this article, we reflect on prevention from a critical perspective that centres the principle of "first, do no harm." In doing so, we introduce the notion of 'quaternary prevention' for child sexual abuse. Public health has long recognised the risks of medicalisation, overdiagnosis, and unnecessary intervention. We encourage our field to engage within a framework of quaternary prevention to consider the iatrogenic effects of many contemporary practices and to take seriously the "do no harm" principle to improve practice across all levels of prevention.

Primary and secondary prevention of cervical cancer among Italian AFAB transgender people.

OBJECTIVE: Currently, available data on preventive measures for Human Papillomavirus (HPV) infection and cervical cancer in the transgender assigned female at birth (AFAB) community are extremely limited. Our aim was to analyze adherence to primary and secondary cervical cancer prevention screening programs among transgender AFAB people attending our gender clinic. METHODS: Transgender AFAB people attending our center were recruited. Anamnestic data were collected for each person through completion of a medical history form and medical records. Variables recorded included previous HPV vaccination, adherence to regional screening programs (Pap smear or HPV DNA test), subject age, duration of current or prior gender-affirming hormone therapy (GAHT) and whether gender affirmation surgery (GAS) with hysterectomy had been performed. Open questions regarding reasons for not undergoing screening tests were also included. RESULTS: In this cross-sectional study, 263 AFAB transgender people were included, with a mean age of 30.6 ± 10.5 years. GAS with hysterectomy had been performed on 37.6 % of these people. Of our participants, 71.7 % who were born after 1998 (the first cohort to receive HPV vaccination invitations in Italy) had been vaccinated for HPV. Seventy-four-point-nine percent of participants who were still eligible for cervical screening had never undergone Pap smear or HPV DNA testing, whereas those who had undergone at least one cervical screening had done so on average 4.2 ± 4.5 years ago. CONCLUSION: HPV vaccination prevalence in the AFAB transgender population born after 1998 is in line with the Italian AFAB general population. However, adherence to cervical cancer screening programs in the transgender AFAB population appears to be lower in comparison to the cisgender population. Further efforts are required from the medical community to enhance AFAB transgender people's adherence to HPV vaccination and to cervical screening.

Interactions between antiepileptic drugs and direct oral anticoagulants for primary and secondary stroke prevention.

INTRODUCTION: Direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) are the guideline-recommended therapy for prevention of stroke in atrial fibrillation (AF) and venous thromboembolism. Since approximately 10% of patients using antiepileptic drugs (AED) also receive DOAC, aim of this review is to summarize data about drug-drug interactions (DDI) of DOAC with AED by using data from PubMed until December 2023. AREAS COVERED: Of 49 AED, only 16 have been investigated regarding DDI with DOAC by case reports or observational studies. No increased risk for stroke was reported only for topiramate, zonisamide, pregabalin, and gabapentin, whereas for the remaining 12 AED conflicting results regarding the risk for stroke and bleeding were found. Further 16 AED have the potential for pharmacodynamic or pharmacokinetic DDI, but no data regarding DOAC are available. For the remaining 17 AED it is unknown if they have DDI with DOAC. EXPERT OPINION: Knowledge about pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic DDI of AED and DOAC is limited and frequently restricted to in vitro and in vivo findings. Since no data about DDI with DOAC are available for 67% of AED and an increasing number of patients have a combined medication of DOAC and AED, there is an urgent need for research on this topic.

Implementation of a Pharmacist-Driven Aspirin Deprescribing Protocol Among Older Veterans in a Primary Care Setting.

Background Recent cardiovascular guideline updates recommend against the use of aspirin for primary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) in older people. However, aspirin use remains common in this population. Objective To implement and evaluate the benefit of a pharmacist-driven aspirin deprescribing protocol compared with primary care provider (PCP) education-only in a primary care setting. Methods This prospective, cohort project targeted deprescribing for patients prescribed aspirin for primary prevention of ASCVD. Patients were included if they received primary care services at the Milwaukee Veterans Health Administration Medical Center (VHA) and were 70 years of age or older. Criteria for exclusion were aspirin obtained outside the VHA system, aspirin prescribed for a non-ASCVD-related condition, and/or a history of ASCVD. Active deprescribing by pharmacists and PCP education took place in the intervention group with PCP education only in the standard-of-care group. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who had aspirin deprescribed in each group. Secondary outcomes included patient acceptability of the intervention and barriers to implementation. Results A total of 520 patients were prescribed aspirin in the intervention group versus 417 in the education-only group. Sixty-five patients met intervention criteria and were contacted for aspirin deprescribing. The pharmacist-led active deprescribing group led to a higher rate of aspirin deprescriptions versus the education-only group (54% vs 18%; P = 0.0001) for patients who met criteria. Conclusion A pharmacist-led aspirin deprescribing protocol within a primary care setting significantly decreased the number of aspirin prescriptions compared with PCP education only.

Pharmacist-Led Deprescribing of Aspirin in Older People in an Outpatient Setting.

Background In 2019, the American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association updated their joint guidelines stating low-dose aspirin should not be used on a routine basis for primary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) among people older than 70 years of age because of increased bleeding risk.1 In addition to these updated guidelines, a statement released by the US Preventive Services Task Force in April 2022 recommends against the initiation of low-dose aspirin for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease in people 60 years of age or older.² Despite these updated recommendations, aspirin continues to be a common medication older patients take, providing an opportunity for a clinical pharmacist deprescribing intervention. Objective To identify the role of a pharmacist-led aspirin deprescribing intervention within a safety-net health system in the outpatient setting. Methods This project included patients 70 years of age and older who had aspirin listed as an active medication without documented ASCVD. This project assessed aspirin deprescribing rates, time spent on pharmacist outreach, and reasons for patient and/or provider refusal to discontinue aspirin. Results One hundred thirty-one eligible patients were contacted. Of those, 78 (60%) patients discontinued aspirin after speaking with the pharmacist, and 8 patients discontinued aspirin after a clinical pharmacist recommendation to the patient's primary care provider (PCP). The median time spent on outreach was approximately eight minutes. Of the 6 patients who consented to the project but declined to discontinue aspirin therapy based on pharmacist intervention, 5 preferred to discuss the issue with their PCP, while 1 patient was told by an outside provider to take aspirin. Conclusion Results indicate the successful impact a clinical pharmacist may have in deprescribing aspirin in a high-risk population. These data may also suggest that an active and intentional approach to deprescribing is likely to be more effective than a written recommendation to providers.

Effects of primary or secondary prevention with vitamin A supplementation on clinically important outcomes: a systematic review of randomised clinical trials with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis.

OBJECTIVES: This systematic review with meta-analyses of randomised trials evaluated the preventive effects of vitamin A supplements versus placebo or no intervention on clinically important outcomes, in people of any age. METHODS: We searched different electronic databases and other resources for randomised clinical trials that had compared vitamin A supplements versus placebo or no intervention (last search 16 April 2024). We used Cochrane methodology. We used the random-effects model to calculate risk ratios (RRs), with 95% CIs. We analysed individually and cluster randomised trials separately. Our primary outcomes were mortality, adverse events and quality of life. We assessed risks of bias in the trials and used Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) to assess the certainty of the evidence. RESULTS: We included 120 randomised trials (1 671 672 participants); 105 trials allocated individuals and 15 allocated clusters. 92 trials included children (78 individually; 14 cluster randomised) and 28 adults (27 individually; 1 cluster randomised). 14/105 individually randomised trials (13%) and none of the cluster randomised trials were at overall low risk of bias. Vitamin A did not reduce mortality in individually randomised trials (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.05; I²=32%; p=0.19; 105 trials; moderate certainty), and this effect was not affected by the risk of bias. In individually randomised trials, vitamin A had no effect on mortality in children (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.04; I²=24%; p=0.28; 78 trials, 178 094 participants) nor in adults (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.13; I²=24%; p=0.27; 27 trials, 61 880 participants). Vitamin A reduced mortality in the cluster randomised trials (0.84, 95% CI 0.76 to 0.93; I²=66%; p=0.0008; 15 trials, 14 in children and 1 in adults; 364 343 participants; very low certainty). No trial reported serious adverse events or quality of life. Vitamin A slightly increased bulging fontanelle of neonates and infants. We are uncertain whether vitamin A influences blindness under the conditions examined. CONCLUSIONS: Based on moderate certainty of evidence, vitamin A had no effect on mortality in the individually randomised trials. Very low certainty evidence obtained from cluster randomised trials suggested a beneficial effect of vitamin A on mortality. If preventive vitamin A programmes are to be continued, supporting evidence should come from randomised trials allocating individuals and assessing patient-meaningful outcomes. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42018104347.

Inclusion of Rurality and Social Determinants of Health in Documents for the Primary Prevention of Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review.

Purpose: The type 2 diabetes (T2D) burden is disproportionately concentrated in low- and middle-income economies, particularly among rural populations. The purpose of the systematic review was to evaluate the inclusion of rurality and social determinants of health (SDOH) in documents for T2D primary prevention. Methods: This systematic review is reported following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines. We searched 19 databases, from 2017-2023, for documents on rurality and T2D primary prevention. Furthermore, we searched online for documents from the 216 World Bank economies, categorized by high, upper-middle, lower-middle, and low income status. We extracted data on rurality and the ten World Health Organization SDOH. Two authors independently screened documents and extracted data. Findings: Based on 3318 documents (19 databases and online search), we selected 15 documents for data extraction. The 15 documents applied to 32 economies; 12 of 15 documents were from nongovernment sources, none was from low-income economies, and 10 of 15 documents did not define or describe rurality. Among the SDOH, income and social protection (SDOH 1) and social inclusion and nondiscrimination (SDOH 8) were mentioned in documents for 25 of 29 high-income economies, while food insecurity (SDOH 5) and housing, basic amenities, and the environment (SDOH 6) were mentioned in documents for 1 of 2 lower-middle-income economies. For U.S. documents, none of the authors was from institutions in noncore (most rural) counties. Conclusions: Overall, documents on T2D primary prevention had sparse inclusion of rurality and SDOH, with additional disparity based on economic status. Inclusion of rurality and/or SDOH may improve T2D primary prevention in rural populations.

The effectiveness of interventions to prevent and reduce child maltreatment in high-income countries: An umbrella review.

BACKGROUND: In recent decades, many interventions targeting the occurrence (primary prevention) or the recurrence (secondary prevention) of child abuse and neglect have been tested. Findings have been synthesized in several meta-analyses and systematic reviews. However, the range of interventions addressed in these studies is very broad, and an integrative assessment of this large spectrum is lacking. OBJECTIVE: Focusing on high-income countries, we ask (i) what is known about the effectiveness of interventions to prevent or reduce child abuse and neglect and (ii) how robust this evidence is. METHODS: A systematic review of systematic reviews, called an umbrella review, was conducted. Ten databases on OvidSP and Web of Science were searched up until April 2023. Narrative synthesis was used to document the publications' findings. RESULTS: 44 publications were included in the umbrella review. We did not find that any type of intervention had a clear, consistent, and robust track record of preventing or reducing the occurrence of child abuse and neglect. Rather, publications examining the effectiveness of interventions in all areas frequently reported non-existent, small or inconsistent effects. However, positive effects for particular interventions in specific settings did emerge. Research methodologies showed several and often severe problems. CONCLUSIONS: We suggest several measures to improve the quality of research and call on practitioners to be persistent in developing more effective interventions.

Competing risks of monomorphic vs. non-monomorphic ventricular arrhythmias in primary prevention implantable cardioverter-defibrillator recipients: Global Electrical Heterogeneity and Clinical Outcomes (GEHCO) study.

AIMS: Ablation of monomorphic ventricular tachycardia (MMVT) has been shown to reduce shock frequency and improve survival. We aimed to compare cause-specific risk factors for MMVT and polymorphic ventricular tachycardia (PVT)/ventricular fibrillation (VF) and to develop predictive models. METHODS AND RESULTS: The multicentre retrospective cohort study included 2668 patients (age 63.1 ± 13.0 years; 23% female; 78% white; 43% non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy; left ventricular ejection fraction 28.2 ± 11.1%). Cox models were adjusted for demographic characteristics, heart failure severity and treatment, device programming, and electrocardiogram metrics. Global electrical heterogeneity was measured by spatial QRS-T angle (QRSTa), spatial ventricular gradient elevation (SVGel), azimuth, magnitude (SVGmag), and sum absolute QRST integral (SAIQRST). We compared the out-of-sample performance of the lasso and elastic net for Cox proportional hazards and the Fine-Gray competing risk model. During a median follow-up of 4 years, 359 patients experienced their first sustained MMVT with appropriate implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapy, and 129 patients had their first PVT/VF with appropriate ICD shock. The risk of MMVT was associated with wider QRSTa [hazard ratio (HR) 1.16; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.01-1.34], larger SVGel (HR 1.17; 95% CI 1.05-1.30), and smaller SVGmag (HR 0.74; 95% CI 0.63-0.86) and SAIQRST (HR 0.84; 95% CI 0.71-0.99). The best-performing 3-year competing risk Fine-Gray model for MMVT [time-dependent area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC(t)AUC) 0.728; 95% CI 0.668-0.788] identified high-risk (> 50%) patients with 75% sensitivity and 65% specificity, and PVT/VF prediction model had ROC(t)AUC 0.915 (95% CI 0.868-0.962), both satisfactory calibration. CONCLUSION: We developed and validated models to predict the competing risks of MMVT or PVT/VF that could inform procedural planning and future randomized controlled trials of prophylactic ventricular tachycardia ablation. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL:www.clinicaltrials.gov Unique identifier:NCT03210883.

Lack of Prognostic Value of T-Wave Alternans for Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Benefit in Primary Prevention.

BACKGROUND: New methods to identify patients who benefit from a primary prophylactic implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) are needed. T-wave alternans (TWA) has been shown to associate with arrhythmogenesis of the heart and sudden cardiac death. We hypothesized that TWA might be associated with benefit from ICD implantation in primary prevention. METHODS AND RESULTS: In the EU-CERT-ICD (European Comparative Effectiveness Research to Assess the Use of Primary Prophylactic Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators) study, we prospectively enrolled 2327 candidates for primary prophylactic ICD. A 24-hour Holter monitor reading was taken from all recruited patients at enrollment. TWA was assessed from Holter monitoring using the modified moving average method. Study outcomes were all-cause death, appropriate shock, and survival benefit. TWA was assessed both as a contiguous variable and as a dichotomized variable with cutoff points <47 µV and <60 µV. The final cohort included 1734 valid T-wave alternans samples, 1211 patients with ICD, and 523 control patients with conservative treatment, with a mean follow-up time of 2.3 years. TWA ≥60 µV was a predicter for a higher all-cause death in patients with an ICD on the basis of a univariate Cox regression model (hazard ratio, 1.484 [95% CI, 1.024-2.151]; P=0.0374; concordance statistic, 0.51). In multivariable models, TWA was not prognostic of death or appropriate shocks in patients with an ICD. In addition, TWA was not prognostic of death in control patients. In a propensity score-adjusted Cox regression model, TWA was not a predictor of ICD benefit. CONCLUSIONS: T-wave alternans is poorly prognostic in patients with a primary prophylactic ICD. Although it may be prognostic of life-threatening arrhythmias and sudden cardiac death in several patient populations, it does not seem to be useful in assessing benefit from ICD therapy in primary prevention among patients with an ejection fraction of ≤35%.

Reducing the risks when using benzodiazepines to treat insomnia: A public health approach.

Benzodiazepines are widely used but can cause considerable harm, including sedation, addiction, falls, fractures, and cognitive impairment, especially with long-term use and in elderly patients. The authors propose a public health approach to reduce the potential for harm when using benzodiazepines to treat insomnia. Primary prevention involves judicious patient selection and patient education. Secondary prevention requires keeping the duration of use as short as possible according to guidelines. Tertiary prevention, for patients who have been taking a benzodiazepine for a long time, uses shared decision-making to introduce a gradual and carefully monitored taper.

Primary surgical prevention of lymphedema.

Lymphedema in the upper and lower extremities can lead to significant morbidity in patients, resulting in restricted joint movements, pain, discomfort, and reduced quality of life. While physiological lymphatic reconstructions such as lymphovenous anastomosis (LVA), lymphovenous implantation (LVI), and vascularized lymph node transfer (VLNT) have shown promise in improving patients' conditions, they only provide limited disease progression control or modest reversal. As lymphedema remains an incurable condition, the focus has shifted toward preventive measures in developed countries where most cases are iatrogenic due to cancer treatments. Breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) has been a particular concern, prompting the implementation of preventive measures like axillary reverse mapping. Similarly, techniques with lymph node-preserving concepts have been used to treat lower extremity lymphedema caused by gynecological cancers. Preventive lymphedema measures can be classified into primary, secondary, and tertiary prevention. In this comprehensive review, we will explore the principles and methodologies encompassing lymphatic microsurgical preventive healing approach (LYMPHA), LVA, lymphaticolymphatic anastomosis (LLA), VLNT, and lymph-interpositional-flap transfer (LIFT). By evaluating the advantages and limitations of these techniques, we aim to equip surgeons with the necessary knowledge to effectively address patients at high risk of developing lymphedema.

European and US Guideline-Based Statin Eligibility, Genetically Predicted Coronary Artery Disease, and the Risk of Major Coronary Events.

BACKGROUND: A study was designed to investigate whether the coronary artery disease polygenic risk score (CAD-PRS) may guide lipid-lowering treatment initiation as well as deferral in primary prevention beyond established clinical risk scores. METHODS AND RESULTS: Participants were 311 799 individuals from the UK Biobank free of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, diabetes, chronic kidney disease, and lipid-lowering treatment at baseline. Participants were categorized as statin indicated, statin indication unclear, or statin not indicated as defined by the European and US guidelines on statin use. For a median of 11.9 (11.2-12.6) years, 8196 major coronary events developed. CAD-PRS added to European-Systematic Coronary Risk Evaluation 2 (European-SCORE2) and US-Pooled Cohort Equation (US-PCE) identified 18% and 12% of statin-indication-unclear individuals whose risk of major coronary events were the same as or higher than the average risk of statin-indicated individuals and 16% and 12% of statin-indicated individuals whose major coronary event risks were the same as or lower than the average risk of statin-indication-unclear individuals. For major coronary and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease events, CAD-PRS improved C-statistics greater among statin-indicated or statin-indication-unclear than statin-not-indicated individuals. For atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease events, CAD-PRS added to the European evaluation and US equation resulted in a net reclassification improvement of 13.6% (95% CI, 11.8-15.5) and 14.7% (95% CI, 13.1-16.3) among statin-indicated, 10.8% (95% CI, 9.6-12.0) and 15.3% (95% CI, 13.2-17.5) among statin-indication-unclear, and 0.9% (95% CI, 0.6-1.3) and 3.6% (95% CI, 3.0-4.2) among statin-not-indicated individuals. CONCLUSIONS: CAD-PRS may guide statin initiation as well as deferral among statin-indication-unclear or statin-indicated individuals as defined by the European and US guidelines. CAD-PRS had little clinical utility among statin-not-indicated individuals.

De-imFAR phase II project: a study protocol for a cluster randomised implementation trial to evaluate the effectiveness of de-implementation strategies to reduce low-value statin prescribing in the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease.

INTRODUCTION: This study aims to reduce potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) of statins and foster healthy lifestyle promotion in cardiovascular disease (CVD) primary prevention in low-risk patients. To this end, we will compare the effectiveness and feasibility of several de-implementation strategies developed following the structured design process of the Behaviour Change Wheel targeting key determinants of the clinical decision-making process in CVD prevention. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A cluster randomised implementation trial, with an additional control group, will be launched, involving family physicians (FPs) from 13 Integrated Healthcare Organisations (IHOs) of Osakidetza-Basque Health Service with non-zero incidence rates of PIP of statins in 2021. All FPs will be exposed to a non-reflective decision assistance strategy based on reminders and decision support tools. Additionally, FPs from two of the IHOs will be randomly assigned to one of two increasingly intensive de-implementation strategies: adding a decision information strategy based on knowledge dissemination and a reflective decision structure strategy through audit/feedback. The target population comprises women aged 45-74 years and men aged 40-74 years with moderately elevated cholesterol levels but no diagnosed CVD and low cardiovascular risk (REGICOR<7.5%), who attend at least one appointment with any of the participating FPs (May 2022-May 2023), and will be followed until May 2024. We use the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework to evaluate outcomes. The main outcome will be the change in the incidence rate of PIP of statins and healthy lifestyle counselling in the study population 12 and 24 months after FPs' exposure to the strategies. Moreover, FPs' perception of their feasibility and acceptability, and patient experience regarding the quality of care received will be evaluated. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study was approved by the Basque Country Clinical Research Ethics Committee and was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04022850). Results will be disseminated in scientific peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04022850.

Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease for People Living with Human Immunodeficiency Virus.

People living with HIV (PLWH) have a risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) that is 1.5 to 2 times higher than the general population owing to traditional risk factors, HIV-mediated factors like chronic inflammation and immune dysfunction, and exposure to antiretroviral therapy. Currently available CVD risk estimation calculators tend to underestimate risk in PLWH but can be useful when an individual's HIV history is considered. Improving modifiable risks is the primary intervention for reducing CVD risk in PLWH. Statin therapy is important for specific individuals, but attention should be given to drug interactions with antiretroviral agents used to treat HIV.