Dataset Information

General practitioners' use of absolute risk versus individual risk factors in cardiovascular disease prevention: an experimental study.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To understand general practitioners' (GPs) use of individual risk factors (blood pressure and cholesterol levels) versus absolute risk in cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk management decision-making.

Design

Randomised experiment. Absolute risk, systolic blood pressure (SBP), cholesterol ratio (total cholesterol/high-density lipoprotein (TC/HDL)) and age were systematically varied in hypothetical cases. High absolute risk was defined as 5-year risk of a cardiovascular event >15%, high blood pressure levels varied between SBP 147 and 179?mm?Hg and high cholesterol (TC/HDL ratio) between 6.5 and 7.2?mmol/L.

Setting

4 GP conferences in Australia.

Participants

144 Australian GPs.

Outcomes

GPs indicated whether they would prescribe cholesterol and/or blood pressure lowering medication. Analyses involved logistic regression.

Results

For patients with high blood pressure: 93% (95% CI 86% to 96%) of high absolute risk patients and 83% (95% CI 76% to 88%) of lower absolute risk patients were prescribed blood pressure medication. Conversely, 30% (95% CI 25% to 36%) of lower blood pressure patients were prescribed blood pressure medication if absolute risk was high and 4% (95% CI 3% to 5%) if lower. 69% of high cholesterol/high absolute risk patients were prescribed cholesterol medication (95% CI 61% to 77%) versus 34% of high cholesterol/lower absolute risk patients (95% CI 28% to 41%). 36% of patients with lower cholesterol (95% CI 30% to 43%) were prescribed cholesterol medication if absolute risk was high versus 10% if lower (95% CI 8% to 13%).

Conclusions

GPs' decision-making was more consistent with the management of individual risk factors than an absolute risk approach, especially when prescribing blood pressure medication. The results suggest medical treatment of lower risk patients (5-year risk of CVD event <15%) with mildly elevated blood pressure or cholesterol levels is likely to occur even when an absolute risk assessment is specifically provided. The results indicate a need for improving uptake of absolute risk guidelines and GP understanding of the rationale for using absolute risk.

SUBMITTER: Jansen J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4025465 | biostudies-literature | 2014 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

General practitioners' use of absolute risk versus individual risk factors in cardiovascular disease prevention: an experimental study.

Jansen Jesse J Bonner Carissa C McKinn Shannon S Irwig Les L Glasziou Paul P Doust Jenny J Teixeira-Pinto Armando A Hayen Andrew A Turner Robin R McCaffery Kirsten K

BMJ open 20140515 5

<h4>Objective</h4>To understand general practitioners' (GPs) use of individual risk factors (blood pressure and cholesterol levels) versus absolute risk in cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk management decision-making.<h4>Design</h4>Randomised experiment. Absolute risk, systolic blood pressure (SBP), cholesterol ratio (total cholesterol/high-density lipoprotein (TC/HDL)) and age were systematically varied in hypothetical cases. High absolute risk was defined as 5-year risk of a cardiovascular eve ...[more]

PMID: 24833688

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCommunicating risk is part of primary prevention of coronary heart disease and stroke, collectively referred to as cardiovascular disease (CVD). In Australia, health organisations have promoted an absolute risk approach, thereby raising the question of suitable standardised formats for risk communication.MethodsSixteen formats of risk representation were prepared including statements, icons, graphical formats, alone or in combination, and with variable use of colours. All presented the same risk, i.e., the absolute risk for a 55 year old woman, 16% risk of CVD in five years. Preferences for a five or ten-year timeframe were explored. Australian GPs and consumers were recruited for participation in focus groups, with the data analysed thematically and preferred formats tallied.ResultsThree focus groups with health consumers and three with GPs were held, involving 19 consumers and 18 GPs. Consumers and GPs had similar views on which formats were more easily comprehended and which conveyed 16% risk as a high risk. A simple summation of preferences resulted in three graphical formats (thermometers, vertical bar chart) and one statement format as the top choices. The use of colour to distinguish risk (red, yellow, green) and comparative information (age, sex, smoking status) were important ingredients. Consumers found formats which combined information helpful, such as colour, effect of changing behaviour on risk, or comparison with a healthy older person. GPs preferred formats that helped them relate the information about risk of CVD to their patients, and could be used to motivate patients to change behaviour.Several formats were reported as confusing, such as a percentage risk with no contextual information, line graphs, and icons, particularly those with larger numbers. Whilst consumers and GPs shared preferences, the use of one format for all situations was not recommended. Overall, people across groups felt that risk expressed over five years was preferable to a ten-year risk, the latter being too remote.ConclusionsConsumers and GPs shared preferences for risk representation formats. Both groups liked the option to combine formats and tailor the risk information to reflect a specific individual's risk, to maximise understanding and provide a good basis for discussion.

Project description:ObjectivesTo describe general practitioners' (GPs') absolute cardiovascular disease risk (ACVDR) self-reported assessment practices and their relationship to knowledge, attitudes and beliefs about ACVDR.DesignCross-sectional survey with opportunistic sampling (October-December 2017).SettingSunshine Coast region, Queensland, Australia.Participants111 GPs responded to the survey.Primary and secondary outcome measuresProportion of GPs reporting a high (≥80%) versus moderate (60%-79%)/low (<60%) percentage of eligible patients receiving ACVDR assessment; proportion agreeing with statements pertaining to knowledge, attitudes and beliefs about ACVDR and associations between these factors.ResultsOf the 111 respondents, 78% reported using the Australian ACVDR calculator; 45% reported high, 25% moderate and 30% low ACVDR assessment rates; >85% reported knowing how to use ACVDR assessment tools, believed assessment valuable and were comfortable with providing guideline-recommended treatment. Around half believed patients understood the concept of high risk and were willing to adopt recommendations. High assessment rates (vs moderate/low) were less likely among older GPs (≥45 vs ≤34 years, age-adjusted and sex-adjusted OR (aOR) 0.36, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.97). Those who answered knowledge-based questions about the guidelines incorrectly had lower assessment rates, including those who answered questions on patient eligibility (aOR 0.13, 95% CI 0.02 to 1.11). A high assessment rate was more likely among GPs who believed there was sufficient time to do the assessment (aOR 3.79, 95% CI 1.23 to 11.61) and that their patients were willing to undertake lifestyle modification (aOR 2.29, 95% CI 1.02 to 5.15). Over 75% of GPs agreed better patient education, nurse-led assessment and computer-reminder prompts would enable higher assessment rates.ConclusionsAlthough the majority of GPs report using the ACVDR calculator when undertaking a CVD risk assessment, there is a need to increase the actual proportion of eligible patients undergoing ACVDR assessment. This may be achieved by improving GP assessment practices such as GP and patient knowledge of CVD risk, providing sufficient time and nurse-led assessment.

Project description:ObjectiveTo construct a typology of general practitioners' (GPs) responses regarding their justification of therapeutic inertia in cardiovascular primary prevention for high-risk patients with hypertension.DesignEmpirically grounded construction of typology. Types were defined by attributes derived from the qualitative analysis of GPs' reported reasons for inaction.Participants256 GPs randomised in the intervention group of a cluster randomised controlled trial.SettingGPs members of 23 French Regional Colleges of Teachers in General Practice, included in the EffectS of a multifaceted intervention on CArdiovascular risk factors in high-risk hyPErtensive patients (ESCAPE) trial.Data collection and analysisThe database consisted of 2638 written responses given by the GPs to an open-ended question asking for the reasons why drug treatment was not changed as suggested by the national guidelines. All answers were coded using constant comparison analysis. A matrix analysis of codes per GP allowed the construction of a response typology, where types were defined by codes as attributes. Initial coding and definition of types were performed independently by two teams.ResultsInitial coding resulted in a list of 69 codes in the final codebook, representing 4764 coded references in the question responses. A typology including seven types was constructed. 100 GPs were allocated to one and only one of these types, while 25 GPs did not provide enough data to allow classification. Types (numbers of GPs allocated) were: 'optimists' (28), 'negotiators' (20), 'checkers' (15), 'contextualisers' (13), 'cautious' (11), 'rounders' (8) and 'scientists' (5). For the 36 GPs that provided 50 or more coded references, analysis of the code evolution over time and across patients showed a consistent belonging to the initial type for any given GP.ConclusionThis typology could provide GPs with some insight into their general ways of considering changes in the treatment/management of cardiovascular risk factors and guide design of specific physician-centred interventions to reduce inappropriate inaction.Trial registration numberNCT00348855.

Project description:ObjectiveCardiovascular disease (CVD) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally, and prevention of CVD is a public health priority. This paper aims to describe the perspectives of general practitioners (GPs) on the prevention of CVD across different contexts.DesignSystematic review and thematic synthesis of qualitative studies using the Enhancing Transparency of Reporting the Synthesis of Qualitative research (ENTREQ) framework.Data sourcesMEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and CINAHL from database inception to April 2018.Eligibility criteria for selecting studiesWe included qualitative studies on the perspectives of GPs on CVD prevention.Data extraction and synthesisWe used HyperRESEARCH to code the primary papers and identified themes.ResultsWe selected 34 studies involving 1223 participants across nine countries. We identified six themes: defining own primary role (duty to prescribe medication, refraining from risking patients' lives, mediating between patients and specialists, delegating responsibility to patients, providing holistic care); trusting external expertise (depending on credible evidence and opinion, entrusting care to other health professionals, integrating into patient context); motivating behavioural change for prevention (highlighting tangible improvements, negotiating patient acceptance, enabling autonomy and empowerment, harnessing the power of fear, disappointment with futility of advice); recognising and accepting patient capacities (ascertaining patient's drive for lifestyle change, conceding to ingrained habits, prioritising urgent comorbidities, tailoring to patient environment and literacy); avoiding overmedicalisation (averting long-term dependence on medications, preventing a false sense of security, minimising stress of sickness) and minimising economic burdens (avoiding unjustified costs to patients, delivering practice within budget, alleviating healthcare expenses).ConclusionsGPs sought to empower patients to prevent CVD, but consideration of patients' individual factors was challenging. Community-based strategies for assessing CVD risk involving other health professionals, and decision aids that address the individuality of the patient's health and environment, may support GPs in their decisions regarding CVD prevention.

Project description:BackgroundCardiovascular prevention guidelines use estimated 10-year atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk based on the pooled cohort equations to guide treatment decisions and engage patients in shared decision-making. We sought to determine patient perceived versus actual risk of atherosclerotic CVD and associations with willingness for preventive therapy.MethodsWe evaluated calculated and perceived CVD risk among 4187 patients across 124 sites in the Patient and Provider Assessment of Lipid Management Registry. Ten-year risk was assessed using the pooled cohort equations; risk relative-to-peers was determined based on age-, sex-, and race-based percentiles; and patient estimates of risk were assessed using patient surveys. Poisson regression models evaluated associations between risk estimates, statin use, and willingness to take prevention therapy.ResultsOverall, there was no correlation between patients' estimates of their 10-year CVD risk and calculated 10-year risk (ρ=-0.01, Pcorrelation=0.46), regardless of age, sex, race, or socioeconomic status. The majority (72.2%) overestimated their 10-year CVD risk relative to the pooled cohorts equation (mean perceived 33.3% versus mean calculated 17.1%, Pdifference<0.01). Patients' perceptions of their risk relative-to-peers were slightly correlated with standardized risk percentiles (ρ=0.19, P<0.01), although most had overly optimistic views of how risk compared with their peers. Increasing perceived risk was not associated with current statin use (P=0.18) but was associated with willingness to consider future prevention therapy (P<0.01). Perceived risk relative-to-peers was associated with increased prevalent statin use (risk ratio 1.04 per category increase [95% CI, 1.02-1.06]) and reported willingness for prevention therapy (risk ratio 1.11 [95% CI, 1.07-1.16]).ConclusionsWhen asked, most patients overestimate their 10-year risk but hold an optimistic bias of their risk relative to age-, race-, and sex-matched peers. Providing accurate absolute risk assessments to patients without proper context may paradoxically decrease many patients' perceived risk of CVD, thereby disincentivizing initiation of CVD risk reduction therapy.

Project description:The population of Fiji has experienced emergence of non-communicable disease (NCD) and a plateau in life expectancy over the past 20 years.A mini-STEPS survey (n = 2765) was conducted in Viseisei in Western Fiji to assess NCD risk factors (RFs) in i-Taukei (Melanesians) and those of Indian descent aged 25-64 years (response 73 %). Hypertension (HT) was defined as systolic blood pressure (BP) ≥140 mmHg or diastolic BP ≥90 mmHg or on medication for HT; type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) as fasting plasma glucose ≥7.0 mmol/L or on medication for T2DM; and obesity as a body mass index (kilograms/height(metres)(2)) ≥30. Data were age-adjusted to 2007 Fiji Census. Associations between RFs and ethnicity/education were investigated. Comparisons with Fiji STEPS surveys were undertaken, and the absolute risk of a cardiovascular disease (CVD) event/death in 10 years was estimated from multiple RF charts.NCD/RFs increased with age except excessive alcohol intake and daily smoking (women) which declined. Daily smoking was higher in men 33 % (95 % confidence interval: 31-36) than women 14 % (12-116); women were more obese 40 % (37-43) than men 23 % (20-26); HT was similar in men 37 % (34-40) and women 34 % (31-36), as was T2DM in men 15 % (13-17) and women 17 % (15-19). i-Taukei men had an odds ratio (OR) of 0.41 (0.28-0.58) for T2DM compared to Indians (1.00); and i-Taukei (both sexes) had a higher OR for obesity and low fruit/vegetable intake, daily smoking, excessive alcohol intake and HT in females. Increasing education correlated with lesser smoking, but with higher obesity and lower fruit/vegetable intake. Compared to the 2011 Fiji STEPS survey, no significant differences were evident in obesity, HT or T2DM prevalences. The proportion (40-64 years) classified at high or very high risk (≥20 %) of a CVD event/death (over 10 years) based on multiple RFs was 8.3 % for men (8.1 % i-Taukei, 8.5 % Indian), and 6.7 % for women (7.9 % i-Taukei, 6.0 % Indian).The results of the survey highlight the need for individual and community interventions to address the high levels of NCD/RFs. Evaluation of interventions is needed in order to inform NCD control policies in Fiji and other Pacific Island nations.

Dataset Information

General practitioners' use of absolute risk versus individual risk factors in cardiovascular disease prevention: an experimental study.

Objective

Design

Setting

Participants

Outcomes

Results

Conclusions

Publications

General practitioners' use of absolute risk versus individual risk factors in cardiovascular disease prevention: an experimental study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets