Skip Navigation



Family Practice Advance Access published online on October 21, 2005
Family Practice, doi:10.1093/fampra/cmi092
This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
23/1/28    most recent
cmi092v1
Right arrow E-letters: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Fornasini, M.
Right arrow Articles by Manuel da Pena, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Fornasini, M.
Right arrow Articles by Manuel da Pena, J.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author (2005). Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved.
Received January 17, 2005
Accepted September 1, 2005

Article

Consequences of using different methods to assess cardiovascular risk in primary care

Marco Fornasini 1, Carlos Brotons 2*, Jaume Sellarès 2, Mireia Martinez 2, María Luisa Galán 2, Ignacio Sáenz 2, and José Manuel da Pena 2

1 Sardenya Primary Health Center, Barcelona, Spain; Universidad San Francisco de Quito, Quito, Ecuador
2 Sardenya Primary Health Center, Barcelona, Spain

* To whom correspondence should be addressed.
Carlos Brotons, E-mail: cbrotons{at}eapsardenya.net


  Abstract

Background. There are two promising methods to assess cardiovascular risk: the Adult Treatment Panel III (ATPIII) and the Systematic Coronary Risk Evaluation (SCORE). The ATPIII calculates the 10-year risk of coronary events based on an adaptation of the original Framingham function. The SCORE chart is based on European studies and measures the absolute risk of cardiovascular mortality in the next 10 years.

Objective. To evaluate the clinical consequences of using different methods to calculate cardiovascular risk and different primary prevention guidelines.

Methods. A cross sectional study of 914 dyslipidemic patients from three primary health centres from Catalonia, Spain, was conducted. Outcome variables were the risk level according to the different equations (classical Framingham table by Anderson, ATPIII adapted Framingham table, and SCORE system), and candidates for lipid lowering treatment according to European and ATPIII guidelines.

Results. The proportion of high-risk patients according to the three equations and excluding diabetic patients was 13.5%, 11.4% and 7.1%, respectively, and 20.2%, 25.7% and 29.2%, respectively when including diabetic patients. The prevalence of candidates for lipid lowering treatment according to European guidelines and ATPIII guidelines were 28.8% and 39.3%, respectively. A 49% disagreement with a Kappa of - 0.1, and a 37% disagreement with a Kappa of 0.08 were observed when comparing candidates identified for lipid lowering treatment and patients actually receiving that treatment, according to ATPIII and SCORE guidelines, respectively.

Conclusion. Our results suggest important clinical and economic consequences when comparing European guidelines or ATPIII guidelines for the treatment of dyslipidemic patients in general practice.

Keywords: Cardiovascular risk assessment; lipid lowering drugs; primary care.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Br Med BullHome page
U. Chauhan
Cardiovascular disease prevention in primary care
Br. Med. Bull., March 5, 2007; (2007) ldm002v1.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.