Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

About: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is a government organization based out in Atlanta, Georgia, United States. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Public health. The organization has 58238 authors who have published 82592 publications receiving 4405701 citations. The organization is also known as: CDC & Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

WHO guidelines for the programmatic management of drug-resistant tuberculosis: 2011 update

Abstract: The production of guidelines for the management of drug-resistant tuberculosis (TB) fits the mandate of the World Health Organization (WHO) to support countries in the reinforcement of patient care. WHO commissioned external reviews to summarise evidence on priority questions regarding case-finding, treatment regimens for multidrug-resistant TB (MDR-TB), monitoring the response to MDR-TB treatment, and models of care. A multidisciplinary expert panel used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach to develop recommendations. The recommendations support the wider use of rapid drug susceptibility testing for isoniazid and rifampicin or rifampicin alone using molecular techniques. Monitoring by sputum culture is important for early detection of failure during treatment. Regimens lasting ≥ 20 months and containing pyrazinamide, a fluoroquinolone, a second-line injectable drug, ethionamide (or prothionamide), and either cycloserine or p-aminosalicylic acid are recommended. The guidelines promote the early use of antiretroviral agents for TB patients with HIV on second-line drug regimens. Systems that primarily employ ambulatory models of care are recommended over others based mainly on hospitalisation. Scientific and medical associations should promote the recommendations among practitioners and public health decision makers involved in MDR-TB care. Controlled trials are needed to improve the quality of existing evidence, particularly on the optimal composition and duration of MDR-TB treatment regimens.

A comprehensive immunization strategy to eliminate transmission of hepatitis B virus infection in the United States: recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) Part II: immunization of adults.

Abstract: Hepatitis B vaccination is the most effective measure to prevent hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection and its consequences, including cirrhosis of the liver, liver cancer, liver failure, and death. In adults, ongoing HBV transmission occurs primarily among unvaccinated persons with behavioral risks for HBV transmission (e.g., heterosexuals with multiple sex partners, injection-drug users [IDUs], and men who have sex with men [MSM]) and among household contacts and sex partners of persons with chronic HBV infection. This report, the second of a two-part statement from the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), provides updated recommendations to increase hepatitis B vaccination of adults at risk for HBV infection. The first part of the ACIP statement, which provided recommendations for immunization of infants, children, and adolescents, was published previously (CDC. A comprehensive immunization strategy to eliminate transmission of hepatitis B virus infection in the United States: recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices [ACIP]. Part 1: immunization of infants, children, and adolescents. MMWR 2005;54[No. RR-16]:1-33). In settings in which a high proportion of adults have risks for HBV infection (e.g., sexually transmitted disease/human immunodeficiency virus testing and treatment facilities, drug-abuse treatment and prevention settings, health-care settings targeting services to IDUs, health-care settings targeting services to MSM, and correctional facilities), ACIP recommends universal hepatitis B vaccination for all unvaccinated adults. In other primary care and specialty medical settings in which adults at risk for HBV infection receive care, health-care providers should inform all patients about the health benefits of vaccination, including risks for HBV infection and persons for whom vaccination is recommended, and vaccinate adults who report risks for HBV infection and any adults requesting protection from HBV infection. To promote vaccination in all settings, health-care providers should implement standing orders to identify adults recommended for hepatitis B vaccination and administer vaccination as part of routine clinical services, not require acknowledgment of an HBV infection risk factor for adults to receive vaccine, and use available reimbursement mechanisms to remove financial barriers to hepatitis B vaccination.

Prevalence of the metabolic syndrome defined by the International Diabetes Federation among adults in the U.S.

Abstract: OBJECTIVE —The International Diabetes Federation (IDF) has proposed a new definition of the metabolic syndrome that emphasizes central adiposity as determined by ethnic group–specific thresholds of waist circumference. The objective of this study was to estimate the prevalence of this syndrome using the IDF definition among U.S. adults and to compare it with the prevalence estimated using the definition of the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS —A total of 3,601 men and women aged ≥20 years from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 1999–2002 were included in the analyses. RESULTS —Based on the NCEP definition, the unadjusted prevalence of the metabolic syndrome was 34.5 ± 0.9% (percent ± SE) among all participants, 33.7 ± 1.6% among men, and 35.4 ± 1.2% among women. Based on the IDF definition, the unadjusted prevalence of the metabolic syndrome was 39.0 ± 1.1% among all participants, 39.9 ± 1.7% among men, and 38.1 ± 1.2% among women. The IDF definition led to higher estimates of prevalence in all of the demographic groups, especially among Mexican-American men. The two definitions similarly classified ∼93% of the participants as having or not having the metabolic syndrome. CONCLUSIONS —In the U.S., the use of the IDF definition of the metabolic syndrome leads to a higher prevalence estimate of the metabolic syndrome than the estimate based on the NCEP definition.

Recommendations for Improving Serum Creatinine Measurement: A Report from the Laboratory Working Group of the National Kidney Disease Education Program

Abstract: Background: Reliable serum creatinine measurements in glomerular filtration rate (GFR) estimation are critical to ongoing global public health efforts to increase the diagnosis and treatment of chronic kidney disease (CKD). We present an overview of the commonly used methods for the determination of serum creatinine, method limitations, and method performance in conjunction with the development of analytical performance criteria. Available resources for standardization of serum creatinine measurement are discussed, and recommendations for measurement improvement are given. Methods: The National Kidney Disease Education Program (NKDEP) Laboratory Working Group reviewed problems related to serum creatinine measurement for estimating GFR and prepared recommendations to standardize and improve creatinine measurement. Results: The NKDEP Laboratory Working Group, in collaboration with international professional organizations, has developed a plan that enables standardization and improved accuracy (trueness) of serum creatinine measurements in clinical laboratories worldwide that includes the use of the estimating equation for GFR based on serum creatinine concentration that was developed from the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) study. Conclusions: The current variability in serum creatinine measurements renders all estimating equations for GFR, including the MDRD Study equation, less accurate in the normal and slightly increased range of serum creatinine concentrations [<133 μmol/L (1.5 mg/dL)], which is the relevant range for detecting CKD [<60 mL · min−1 · (1.73 m2)−1]. Many automated routine methods for serum creatinine measurement meet or exceed the required precision; therefore, reduction of analytical bias in creatinine assays is needed. Standardization of calibration does not correct for analytical interferences (nonspecificity bias). The bias and nonspecificity problems associated with some of the routine methods must be addressed.