A relationship between higher patient volume and both better quality of care and better outcomes has been shown for many acute care conditions. Whether a volume-quality relationship exists for the outpatient management of chronic diseases is uncertain.

Recent federal policy changes attempt to expand veterans' access to providers outside the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). Receipt of prescription medications across unconnected systems of care may increase the risk for unsafe prescribing, particularly in persons with dementia.

Greater integration of medication-assisted treatment (MAT) for opioid use disorder (OUD) in U.S. primary care settings would expand access to treatment for this condition. Models for integrating MAT into primary care vary in structure. This article summarizes findings of a technical report for the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality describing MAT models of care for OUD, based on a literature review and interviews with key informants in the field. The report describes 12 representative models of care for integrating MAT into primary care settings that could be considered for adaptation across diverse health care settings. Common components of existing care models include pharmacotherapy with buprenorphine or naltrexone, provider and community education, coordination and integration of OUD treatment with other medical and psychological needs, and psychosocial services and interventions. Models vary in how each component is implemented. Decisions about adopting MAT models of care should be individualized to address the unique milieu of each implementation setting.

This issue provides a clinical overview of preoperative evaluation for noncardiac surgery, focusing on risk factors, elements of evaluation, medication management, and practice improvement. The content of In the Clinic is drawn from the clinical information and education resources of the American College of Physicians (ACP), including MKSAP (Medical Knowledge and Self-Assessment Program). Annals of Internal Medicine editors develop In the Clinic in collaboration with the ACP's Medical Education and Publishing divisions and with the assistance of additional science writers and physician writers.

The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recently issued guidelines on screening for vitamin D deficiency. The guidelines were based on randomized trials of vitamin D deficiency screening and treatment, as well as on case-control studies nested within the Women's Health Initiative. The USPSTF concluded that current evidence is insufficient to assess the benefits and harms of screening for vitamin D deficiency in asymptomatic adults. Compared with placebo or no treatment, vitamin D was associated with decreased mortality; however, benefits were no longer seen after trials of institutionalized persons were excluded. Vitamin D treatment was associated with a possible decreased risk for at least 1 fall and the total number of falls per person but not for fractures. None of the studies examined the effects of vitamin D screening versus not screening on clinical outcomes. In this Grand Rounds, 2 prominent endocrinologists debate the issue of screening for vitamin D deficiency in a 55-year-old, asymptomatic, postmenopausal woman. They review the data on which the USPSTF recommendations are based and discuss the potential benefits and risks, as well as the challenges and controversies, of screening for vitamin D deficiency in primary care practice.