Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:The American Heart Association created the Life's Simple 7 (LS7) metrics to promote cardiovascular health by achieving optimal levels of blood pressure, cholesterol, blood sugar, physical activity, diet, weight, and smoking status. The degree to which psychosocial factors such as stress and depression impact one's ability to achieve optimal cardiovascular health is unclear, particularly among hypertensive African Americans. METHODS:Cross-sectional analyses included 1,819 African Americans with hypertension participating in the Jackson Heart Study (2000-2004). Outcomes were LS7 composite and individual component scores (defined as poor, intermediate, ideal). High perceived chronic stress was defined as the top quartile of Weekly Stress Inventory scores. High depressive symptoms were defined as Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression scale scores of ≥16. We compared four groups: high stress alone; high depressive symptoms alone; high stress and high depressive symptoms; low stress and low depressive symptoms (reference) using linear regression for total LS7 scores and logistic regression for LS7 components. RESULTS:Participants with both high stress and depressive symptoms had lower composite LS7 scores (B [95% confidence interval-CI]= -0.34 [-0.65 to -0.02]) than those with low stress and depressive symptoms in unadjusted and age/sex-adjusted models. They also had poorer health status for smoking (OR [95% CI]= 0.52 [0.35-0.78]) and physical activity [OR (95% CI)= 0.71 (0.52-0.95)] after full covariate adjustment. CONCLUSIONS:The combination of high stress and high depressive symptoms was associated with poorer LS7 metrics in hypertensive African Americans. Psychosocial interventions may increase the likelihood of engaging in behaviors that promote optimal cardiovascular health.

Hypertension is a risk factor for cardiovascular disease. Black women have high rates of hypertension compared to women of other racial or ethnic groups and are disproportionately affected by psychosocial stressors such as racial discrimination, gender discrimination, and caregiving stress. Evidence suggests that stress is associated with incident hypertension and hypertension risk. Stress management is associated with improvements improved blood pressure outcomes. The purpose of this review is to synthesize evidence on effects of stress management interventions on blood pressure in Black women. A comprehensive search of scientific databases was conducted. Inclusion criteria included studies that were: (1) primary research that tested an intervention; (2) in the English language; (3) included African-American women; (4) incorporated stress in the intervention; (5) included blood pressure as an outcome; and (6) were US based. Eighteen studies met inclusion criteria. Ten (56%) studies tested meditation-based interventions, two (11%) tested coping and affirmation interventions, and six (33%) tested lifestyle modification interventions that included stress management content. Thirteen of the studies were randomized controlled trials. Reductions in blood pressure were observed in all of the meditation-based interventions, although the magnitude and statistical significance varied. Comprehensive lifestyle interventions were also efficacious for reducing blood pressure, although the relative contribution of stress management versus behavior modification could not be evaluated. Coping and affirmation interventions did not affect blood pressure. Most of the reviewed studies included small numbers of Black women and did not stratify results by race and gender, so effects remain unclear. This review highlights the urgent need for studies specifically focusing on Black women. Given the extensive disparities in cardiovascular disease morbidity and mortality, whether stress management can lower blood pressure and improve primary and secondary cardiovascular disease prevention among Black women is an important question for future research.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has exacerbated the structural inequities in healthcare and the challenges of translating research into public discourse. This article highlights key antiracist considerations, presents previously noted core challenges, and provides recommendations for writing and reporting. Importantly, this article contributes to combating racialized science in the biomedical community.

Importance:Colorectal cancer is the third leading cause of cancer death for both men and women, with an estimated 52 980 persons in the US projected to die of colorectal cancer in 2021. Colorectal cancer is most frequently diagnosed among persons aged 65 to 74 years. It is estimated that 10.5% of new colorectal cancer cases occur in persons younger than 50 years. Incidence of colorectal cancer (specifically adenocarcinoma) in adults aged 40 to 49 years has increased by almost 15% from 2000-2002 to 2014-2016. In 2016, 26% of eligible adults in the US had never been screened for colorectal cancer and in 2018, 31% were not up to date with screening. Objective:To update its 2016 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the benefits and harms of screening for colorectal cancer in adults 40 years or older. The review also examined whether these findings varied by age, sex, or race/ethnicity. In addition, as in 2016, the USPSTF commissioned a report from the Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network Colorectal Cancer Working Group to provide information from comparative modeling on how estimated life-years gained, colorectal cancer cases averted, and colorectal cancer deaths averted vary by different starting and stopping ages for various screening strategies. Population:Asymptomatic adults 45 years or older at average risk of colorectal cancer (ie, no prior diagnosis of colorectal cancer, adenomatous polyps, or inflammatory bowel disease; no personal diagnosis or family history of known genetic disorders that predispose them to a high lifetime risk of colorectal cancer [such as Lynch syndrome or familial adenomatous polyposis]). Evidence Assessment:The USPSTF concludes with high certainty that screening for colorectal cancer in adults aged 50 to 75 years has substantial net benefit. The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that screening for colorectal cancer in adults aged 45 to 49 years has moderate net benefit. The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that screening for colorectal cancer in adults aged 76 to 85 years who have been previously screened has small net benefit. Adults who have never been screened for colorectal cancer are more likely to benefit. Recommendation:The USPSTF recommends screening for colorectal cancer in all adults aged 50 to 75 years. (A recommendation) The USPSTF recommends screening for colorectal cancer in adults aged 45 to 49 years. (B recommendation) The USPSTF recommends that clinicians selectively offer screening for colorectal cancer in adults aged 76 to 85 years. Evidence indicates that the net benefit of screening all persons in this age group is small. In determining whether this service is appropriate in individual cases, patients and clinicians should consider the patient's overall health, prior screening history, and preferences. (C recommendation).

Importance:The prevalence of overweight and obesity is increasing among persons of childbearing age and pregnant persons. In 2015, almost half of all persons began pregnancy with overweight (24%) or obesity (24%). Reported rates of overweight and obesity are higher among Black, Alaska Native/American Indian, and Hispanic women and lower among White and Asian women. Excess weight at the beginning of pregnancy and excess gestational weight gain have been associated with adverse maternal and infant health outcomes such as a large for gestational age infant, cesarean delivery, or preterm birth. Objective:The USPSTF commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the benefits and harms of behavioral counseling interventions to prevent adverse health outcomes associated with obesity during pregnancy and to evaluate intermediate outcomes, including excess gestational weight gain. This is a new recommendation. Population:Pregnant adolescents and adults in primary care settings. Evidence Assessment:The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that behavioral counseling interventions aimed at promoting healthy weight gain and preventing excess gestational weight gain in pregnancy have a moderate net benefit for pregnant persons. Recommendation:The USPSTF recommends that clinicians offer pregnant persons effective behavioral counseling interventions aimed at promoting healthy weight gain and preventing excess gestational weight gain in pregnancy. (B recommendation).

Depression is associated with adverse outcomes in epilepsy but is undertreated in this population. Project UPLIFT, a telephone-based depression self-management program, was developed for adults with epilepsy and has been shown to reduce depressive symptoms in English-speaking patients. There remains an unmet need for accessible mental health programs for Hispanic adults with epilepsy. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the feasibility, acceptability, and effects on depressive symptoms of a culturally adapted version of UPLIFT for the Hispanic community. Hispanic patients with elevated depressive symptoms (n = 72) were enrolled from epilepsy clinics in New York City and randomized to UPLIFT or usual care. UPLIFT was delivered in English or Spanish to small groups in eight weekly telephone sessions. Feasibility was assessed by recruitment, retention, and adherence rates and acceptability was assessed by self-reported satisfaction with the intervention. Depressive symptoms (PHQ-9 scores) were compared between study arms over 12 months. The mean age was 43.3±11.3, 71% of participants were female and 67% were primary Spanish speakers. Recruitment (76% consent rate) and retention rates (86-93%) were high. UPLIFT participants completed a median of six out of eight sessions and satisfaction ratings were high, but rates of long-term practice were low. Rates of clinically significant depressive symptoms (PHQ-9 ≥5) were lower in UPLIFT versus usual care throughout follow-up (63% vs. 72%, 8 weeks; 40% vs. 70%, 6 months; 47% vs. 70%, 12 months). Multivariable-adjusted regressions demonstrated statistically significant differences at 6 months (OR = 0.24, 95% CI, 0.06-0.93), which were slightly reduced at 12 months (OR = 0.30, 95% CI, 0.08-1.16). Results suggest that UPLIFT is feasible and acceptable among Hispanic adults with epilepsy and demonstrate promising effects on depressive symptoms. Larger trials in geographically diverse samples are warranted.

High blood pressure (BP) based on measurements obtained in the office setting has been associated with the presence and level of coronary artery calcification (CAC)-a measure of subclinical atherosclerosis. We studied the association between out-of-office BP and CAC among 557 participants who underwent 24-hour ambulatory BP monitoring at visit 1 in 2000-2004 and a computed tomography scan at visit 2 in 2005-2008 as part of the JHS (Jackson Heart Study)-a community-based cohort of African American adults. Mean awake, asleep, and 24-hour BP were calculated for each participant. Among participants included in this analysis, 279 (50%) had any CAC defined by an Agatston score >0. After multivariable adjustment including office systolic BP (SBP), the prevalence ratios for any CAC comparing the highest versus the lowest quartiles of SBP on ambulatory BP monitoring were 1.08 (95% CI, 0.84-1.39) for awake SBP, 1.32 (95% CI, 1.01-1.74) for asleep SBP, and 1.19 (95% CI, 0.91-1.55) for 24-hour SBP. After multivariable adjustment including office diastolic BP, the prevalence ratios for any CAC comparing the highest versus the lowest quartiles of awake, asleep, and 24-hour diastolic BP were 1.27 (95% CI, 1.02-1.59), 1.29 (95% CI, 1.02-1.64), and 1.25 (95% CI, 0.99-1.59), respectively. The current results suggest that higher asleep SBP and higher awake and asleep diastolic BP may be risk factors for subclinical atherosclerosis and underscore the potential role of ambulatory BP monitoring in identifying individuals at high risk for coronary artery disease.

Importance:Age-related sensorineural hearing loss is a common health problem among adults. Nearly 16% of US adults 18 years or older report difficulty hearing. The prevalence of perceived hearing loss increases with age. Hearing loss can adversely affect an individual's quality of life and ability to function independently and has been associated with increased risk of falls, hospitalizations, social isolation, and cognitive decline. Objective:To update its 2012 recommendation, the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review on screening for hearing loss in adults 50 years or older. Population:Asymptomatic adults 50 years or older with age-related hearing loss. Evidence Assessment:Because of a lack of evidence, the USPSTF concludes that the benefits and harms of screening for hearing loss in asymptomatic older adults are uncertain and that the balance of benefits and harms cannot be determined. More research is needed. Recommendation:The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for hearing loss in older adults. (I statement).