Dataset Information

Can doctors and patients correctly estimate cardiovascular risk? A cross-sectional study in primary care

ABSTRACT:

Objective

Accurate cardiovascular risk estimations by patients and doctors are important as these affect health behaviour and medical decision making. We aimed to determine if doctors and patients were accurately estimating the absolute cardiovascular risk of patients in primary care.

Methods

A cross-sectional study was carried out in primary care clinics in Malaysia in 2014. Patients aged 35 years and above without known cardiovascular disease (CVDs) were included. Face-to-face interviews with a structured questionnaire were used to collect sociodemographic and clinical data as well as patients’ perception and doctors’ estimate of the patients’ CVD risk. Associations were tested using ?2, correlation and independent t-tests.

Results

We recruited 1094 patients and 57 doctors. Using the Framingham Risk Score (FRS) alone, 508 patients (46.4%) were in the high-risk group. When diabetes was included as high risk, the number increased to 776 (70.9%). Only 34.4% of patients and 55.7% of doctors correctly estimated the patient’s CVD risk in comparison with the reference FRS. Of the high-risk patients, 664 (85.6%) underestimated their CV risk. Factors associated with underestimation by patients included not having family history of CVD (adjusted OR (AOR): 2.705, 95% CI 1.538 to 4.757), smaller waist circumference (AOR: 0.979,95% CI 0.960 to 0.999) and ethnicity in comparison with the Malay as reference group (indigenous/others: AOR: 0.129,?95% CI 0.071 to 0.235). Doctors underestimated risk in 59.8% of the high-risk group. Factors associated with underestimation by doctors were patients factors such as being female (AOR: 2.232, 95% CI 1.460 to 3.410), younger age (AOR: 0.908, 95% CI 0.886 to 0.930), non-hypertensive (AOR: 1.731, 95% CI 1.067 to 2.808), non-diabetic (AOR: 1.931, 95% CI 1.114 to 3.348), higher high-density lipoprotein levels (AOR: 3.546, 95% CI 2.025 to 6.209), lower systolic blood pressure (AOR: 0.970, 95% CI 0.957 to 0.982), non-smoker (AOR: 2.246, 95% CI 1.354 to 3.726) and ethnicity in comparison with the Malay as reference group (Indian: AOR: 0.430, 95% CI 0.257 to 0.720; indigenous/others: AOR: 2.498, 95% CI 1.346 to 4.636).

Conclusions

The majority of consultations occurring between doctors and patients are being informed by inaccurate cardiovascular risk estimation.

SUBMITTER: Liew S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5855472 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundRegular physical activity had been shown to reduce morbidity and mortality from chronic diseases such as cardiovascular diseases, hypertension, type 2 diabetes mellitus, dyslipidaemia, obesity/metabolic syndrome, osteoarthritis, osteoporosis, bronchial asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Research had shown that physically active doctors were more likely to offer exercise counselling to patients. However, few studies looked into this association with counselling practices to patients with specific chronic diseases. This study aims to determine the association between physical activity levels of primary care doctors (PCDs) in Malaysian private practice with physical activity counselling to patients with chronic diseases.MethodologyA cross-sectional study involving PCDs in private practice in 3 states was done. Participants were recruited from members of the Malaysian Academy of Family Physicians and attendees of a conference. A self-administered questionnaire obtained information on sociodemography, initiation of exercise counselling to patients with chronic diseases as well as physical activity levels using the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ).ResultsThe response rate was 32.3% (272/842). 47.1% of the respondents were post-graduate holders. 50% of participants had a moderate level of physical activity and 24.3% a high level. Most respondents answered 'always' or 'often' for initiation of exercise counselling to patients with cardiovascular diseases (59.9%), hypertension (72.8%), type 2 diabetes mellitus (78.6%), obesity/metabolic syndrome (86.4%), dyslipidaemia (81.6%), osteoarthritis/osteoporosis (41.9%) and bronchial asthma/COPD (29.5%). PCDs being physically active and non-smokers were associated with a higher initiation of exercise counselling to patients with cardiovascular diseases. Doctors with post-graduate degrees were more likely to offer exercise counselling to hypertensive patients.ConclusionThe association between PCDs' physical activity levels and their physical activity counselling varies between different types of chronic diseases. Primary care doctors with higher physical activity levels were more likely to initiate physical activity counselling in patients with cardiovascular disease during chronic disease follow up visits.

Project description:BackgroundHypertension is the most common chronic disease and is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality. Its screening, diagnosis, and management depend heavily on accurate blood pressure (BP) measurement. It is recommended that the diagnosis of hypertension should be confirmed or corroborated by out-of-office BP values, measured using ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) and home BP monitoring (HBPM). When office BP is used, automated office BP (AOBP) measurement method, which automatically provides an average of 3-5 BP readings, should be preferred. This study aimed to describe the BP measurement methods commonly used by doctors in primary care in Hong Kong, to screen, diagnose, and manage hypertensive patients.MethodsIn this cross-sectional survey, all doctors registered in the Hong Kong "Primary Care Directory" were mailed a questionnaire, asking their preferred BP-measuring methods to screen, diagnose, and manage hypertensive patients. Furthermore, we also elicited information on the usual number of office BP or HBPM readings obtained, to diagnose or manage hypertension.ResultsOf the 1738 doctors included from the directory, 445 responded. Manual measurement using a mercury or aneroid device was found to be the commonest method to screen (63.1%), diagnose (56.4%), and manage (72.4%) hypertension. There was a significant underutilisation of ABPM, with only 1.6% doctors using this method to diagnose hypertension. HBPM was used by 22.2% and 56.8% of the respondents to diagnose and manage hypertension, respectively. A quarter (26.7%) of the respondents reported using only one in-office BP reading, while around 40% participants reported using ≥12 HBPM readings. Doctors with specialist qualification in family medicine were more likely to use AOBP in clinics and to obtain the recommended number of office BP readings for diagnosis and management of hypertension.ConclusionPrimary Care doctors in Hong Kong prefer to use manual office BP values, measured using mercury or aneroid devices, to screen, diagnose, and manage hypertension, highlighting a marked underutilisation of AOBP and out-of-office BP measuring techniques, especially that of ABPM. Further studies are indicated to understand the underlying reasons and to minimise the gap between real-life clinical practice and those recommended, based on scientific advances.Trial registrationClinicaltrial.gov; ref. no.: NCT03926897.

Project description:Primary care providers play an important role in preventing and managing cardiovascular disease. This study compared the quality of preventive cardiovascular care delivery amongst different primary care models.This is a secondary analysis of a larger randomized control trial, known as the Improved Delivery of Cardiovascular Care (IDOCC) through Outreach Facilitation. Using baseline data collected through IDOCC, we conducted a cross-sectional study of 82 primary care practices from three delivery models in Eastern Ontario, Canada: 43 fee-for-service, 27 blended-capitation and 12 community health centres with salary-based physicians. Medical chart audits from 4,808 patients with or at high risk of developing cardiovascular disease were used to examine each practice's adherence to ten evidence-based processes of care for diabetes, chronic kidney disease, dyslipidemia, hypertension, weight management, and smoking cessation care. Generalized estimating equation models adjusting for age, sex, rurality, number of cardiovascular-related comorbidities, and year of data collection were used to compare guideline adherence amongst the three models.The percentage of patients with diabetes that received two hemoglobin A1c tests during the study year was significantly higher in community health centres (69%) than in fee-for-service (45%) practices (Adjusted Odds Ratio (AOR) = 2.4 [95% CI 1.4-4.2], p = 0.001). Blended capitation practices had a significantly higher percentage of patients who had their waistlines monitored than in fee-for-service practices (19% vs. 5%, AOR = 3.7 [1.8-7.8], p = 0.0006), and who were recommended a smoking cessation drug when compared to community health centres (33% vs. 16%, AOR = 2.4 [1.3-4.6], p = 0.007). Overall, quality of diabetes care was higher in community health centres, while smoking cessation care and weight management was higher in the blended-capitation models. Fee-for-service practices had the greatest gaps in care, most noticeably in diabetes care and weight management.This study adds to the evidence suggesting that primary care delivery model impacts quality of care. These findings support current Ontario reforms to move away from the traditional fee-for-service practice.ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00574808.

Project description:Globally, cardiovascular diseases are the leading cause of disease burden and death. Timely and appropriate provision of primary care may lead to sizeable reductions in hospitalizations for a range of chronic and acute health conditions. In this paper, we study the impact of Brazil's More Doctors Program (MDP) on hospitalizations due to cerebrovascular disease and hypertension. We exploit the geographic variation in the uptake of the MPD and combine coarsened exact matching and difference-in-difference methods to construct valid counterfactual estimates. We use data from the Hospital Information System in Unified Health System, the MDP administrative records, the Brazilian Regulatory Agency, the Ministry of Health, and the Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics, covering the years from 2009 to 2017. Our analysis resulted in estimated coefficients of -1.47 (95%CI: -4.04,1.10) for hospitalizations for cerebrovascular disease and -1.20 (95%CI: -5.50,3.11) for hypertension, suggesting an inverse relationship between the MDP and hospitalizations. For cerebrovascular disease, the estimated MDP coefficient was -0.50 (95%CI: -2.94,1.95) in the year of program introduction, -5.21 (95%CI: -9.43,-0.99) and -8.21 (95%CI: -13.68,-2.75) in its third and fourth year of implementation, respectively. Our results further suggest that the beneficial impact of MDP on hospitalizations due to cerebrovascular disease became discernable in urban municipalities starting from the fourth year of implementation. We found no evidence that the MDP led to reductions in hospitalizations due to hypertension. Our results highlight that increased investment in resources devoted to primary care led to improvements in hospitalizations for selected cardiovascular conditions. However, it took time for the beneficial effects of the MDP to become discernable and the Program did not guarantee declines in hospitalizations for all cardiovascular conditions, suggesting that further improvements may be needed to enhance the beneficial impact of the MDP on the level and distribution of population health in Brazil.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Risk perception in relation to pregnancy and birth is a complex process influenced by multiple personal, psychological and societal factors. Traditionally, the risk perception of healthcare professionals has been presented as more objective and authoritative than that of pregnant women. Doctors have been presented as more concerned with biomedical risk than midwives. Such dichotomies oversimplify and obscure the complexity of the process. This study examines pregnancy-related risk perception in women and healthcare professionals, and what women and professionals believe about each other's risk perception. METHODS:A cross sectional survey of set in UK maternity services. Participants were doctors working in obstetrics (N?=?53), midwives (N?=?59), pregnant women (N?=?68). Participants were recruited in person from two hospitals. Doctors were also recruited online. Participants completed a questionnaire measuring the degree of perceived risk in various childbirth-related scenarios; and the extent to which they believed others agreed with them about the degree of risk generally involved in childbirth. Main outcome measures were the degree of risk perceived to the mother in baby in pregnancy scenarios, and beliefs about own perception of risk in comparison to their own group and other groups. RESULTS:There were significant differences in total risk scores between pregnant women, doctors and midwives in perception of risk to the mother in 68/80 scenarios. Doctors most frequently rated risks lowest. Total scores for perceived risk to the baby were not significantly different. There was substantial variation within each group. There was more agreement on the ranking of scenarios according to risk. Each group believed doctors perceived most risk whereas actually doctors most frequently rated risks lowest. Each group incorrectly believed their peers rated risk similarly to themselves. CONCLUSIONS:Individuals cannot assume others share their perception of risk or that they make correct assessments regarding others' risk perception. Further research should consider what factors are taken into account when making risk assessments.

Project description:BackgroundIncreasingly, consultations in health care settings are conducted remotely using a range of communication technologies. Email allows for 2-way text-based communication, occurring asynchronously. Studies have explored the content and nature of email consultations to understand the use, structure, and function of email consultations. Most previous content analyses of email consultations in primary care settings have been conducted in North America, and these have shown that concerns and assumptions about how email consultations work have not been realized. There has not been a UK-based content analysis of email consultations.ObjectiveThis study aims to explore and delineate the content of consultations conducted via email in English general practice by conducting a content analysis of email consultations between general practitioners (GPs) and patients.MethodsWe conducted a content analysis of anonymized email consultations between GPs and patients in 2 general practices in the United Kingdom. We examined the descriptive elements of the correspondence to ascertain when the emails were sent, the number of emails in an email consultation, and the nature of the content. We used a normative approach to analyze the content of the email consultations to explore the use and function of email consultation.ResultsWe obtained 100 email consultations from 85 patients, which totaled 262 individual emails. Most email users were older than 40 years, and over half of the users were male. The email consultations were mostly short and completed in a few days. Emails were mostly sent and received during the day. The emails were mostly clinical in content rather than administrative and covered a wide range of clinical presentations. There were 3 key themes to the use and function of the email consultations: the role of the GP and email consultation, the transactional nature of an email consultation, and the operationalization of an email consultation.ConclusionsMost cases where emails are used to have a consultation with a patient in general practice have a shorter consultation, are clinical in nature, and are resolved quickly. GPs approach email consultations using key elements similar to that of the face-to-face consultation; however, using email consultations has the potential to alter the role of the GP, leading them to engage in more administrative tasks than usual. Email consultations were not a replacement for face-to-face consultations.