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:ObjectiveThis study assessed the relationship of both depression diagnosis and clinically significant depressive symptoms with individual cardiovascular risk factors and estimated total cardiovascular risk in primary care patients.MethodsThis study used a cross-sectional and retrospective design. Patients who had a primary care encounter between January 2016 and September 2018 and completed depression screening (PHQ-9) during the year prior to their appointment (N = 70,980) were included in this study. Data examining estimated total cardiovascular risk, specific cardiovascular risk factors, and relevant clinical diagnoses (including depression diagnosis) were extracted from the electronic health record. Patients were categorized into three groups: no depression (PHQ-9 < 10 and no depression diagnosis), controlled depression (PHQ-9 < 10 with previous depression diagnosis), and current depression (PHQ-9 ≥ 10). Groups were compared on estimated total risk and specific cardiovascular risk factors (e.g., body mass index [BMI], smoking status, lipids, blood pressure, and glucose).ResultsIn adjusted analyses, patients with current depression (n = 18,267) demonstrated significantly higher 10-year and 30-year cardiovascular risk compared to patients with controlled depression (n = 33,383; 10-year: b = 0.59 [95% CI = 0.44,0.74]; 30-year: OR = 1.32 [95% CI = 1.26,1.39]) and patients without depression (n = 19,330; 10-year: b = 0.55 [95% CI = 0.37,0.73]; 30-year: OR = 1.56 [95% CI = 1.48,1.65]). Except for low-density lipoprotein (LDL), patients with current depression had the greatest cardiovascular risk across specific risk factors.ConclusionsIndividuals who had a depression diagnosis and clinically significant depressive symptoms had the greatest cardiovascular risk. Pathways to prevent cardiovascular disease in those with depression might focus on treating depressive symptoms as well as specific uncontrolled cardiovascular risk factors.

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:BackgroundCardiovascular disease (CVD) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in Canada. Assessment and management of CVD risk is essential in reducing disease burden. This includes both clinical risk factors and socioeconomic factors, though few studies report on socioeconomic status in relation to CVD risk and treatment. The primary objective of this study was to estimate the cardiovascular risk of patients attending primary care practices across Canada; secondly, to evaluate concordance with care indicators suggested by current clinical practice guidelines for statin prescribing according to patients' cardiovascular risk and socioeconomic status.MethodsThis cross-sectional observational study used the Canadian Primary Care Sentinel Surveillance Network (CPCSSN) database, which is comprised of clinical data from primary care electronic medical records. Patients aged 35-75y with at least one visit to their primary care provider between 2012 and 2016 were included. Patients were assigned to a CVD risk category (high, medium, low) and a deprivation quintile was calculated for those with full postal code available. Descriptive analyses were used to determine the proportion of patients in each risk category. Logistic regression was used to evaluate the consistency of statin prescribing according to national clinical guidelines by risk category and deprivation quintile.ResultsA total of 324,526 patients were included. Of those, 116,947 (36%) of patients were assigned to a high CVD risk category, primarily older adults, males, and those with co-morbidities. There were statistically significant differences between least (quintile 1) and most (quintile 5) deprived socioeconomic quintiles, with those at high CVD risk disproportionately in Q5 (odds ratio 1.4). Overall, 48% of high-risk patients had at least one statin prescription in their record. Patients in the lower socioeconomic groups had a higher risk of statin treatment which deviated from clinical guidelines.ConclusionsPrimary care patients who are at high CVD risk are more often male, older, have more co-morbidities and be assigned to more deprived SES quintiles, compared to those at low CVD risk. Additionally, patients who experience more challenging socioeconomic situations may be less likely to receive CVD treatment that is consistent with care guidelines.

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.