Primary prevention of cardiovascular disease using validated risk scores: A systematic review

被引:33
作者
Willis, Andrew [1 ]
Davies, Melanie [2 ]
Yates, Thomas [2 ]
Khunti, Kamlesh [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Leicester, Dept Hlth Sci, Leicester LE1 6TP, Leics, England
[2] Univ Leicester, Dept Cardiovasc Sci, Glenfield Gen Hosp, Leicester LE3 9QP, Leics, England
关键词
CORONARY-HEART-DISEASE; GENERAL-PRACTICE; FOLLOW-UP; INTERVENTION; TRIAL;
D O I
10.1258/jrsm.2012.110193
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Objectives The high prevalence of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and the increased cost of treatment have prompted strategies for the primary prevention of CVD in the UK to move towards the use of validated CVD risk scores to identify individuals at the highest risk. There are no reviews evaluating the effectiveness of this strategy as a means of reducing CVD risk or mortality. This review summarizes current evidence for and against the use of validated CVD risk scores for the primary prevention of CVD. Design We utilized an in depth search strategy to search MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane database of clinical trials, expert opinions were sought and reference lists of identified studies and relevant reviews were checked. Due to a lack of homogeneity in outcomes and risk scores used it was not possible to conduct a meta-analysis of the identified studies. Setting The majority of included trials were carried out in a primary care setting. 2 trials were carried out in North America, 2 in Scandinavia and 1 in the UK. Participants 31,651 participants in total were recruited predominantly from a primary care setting. Participants were aged 18-65 years old and were free from CVD at baseline. Main outcome measures Outcome measures used in the included studies were change in validated CVD risk score and CVD/All-cause mortality. Results We identified 16 papers which matched the inclusion criteria reporting 5 unique trials. Due to a lack of homogeneity in outcomes and risk scores used it was not possible to conduct a meta-analysis of the identified studies. Only one study reported a significant difference in risk score at follow up and one study reported a significant difference in total mortality, however significant differences in individual risk factors were reported by the majority of identified studies. Conclusions This review demonstrates the potential for multifactorial interventions aimed at individuals selected by CVD risk scores for lowering CVD risk and mortality. However, the majority of studies in this area do not provide an intensity of intervention which is sufficient in significantly reducing CVD mortality or validated CVD risk.
引用
收藏
页码:348 / 356
页数:9
相关论文
共 29 条
[1]   CARDIOVASCULAR-DISEASE RISK PROFILES [J].
ANDERSON, KM ;
ODELL, PM ;
WILSON, PWF ;
KANNEL, WB .
AMERICAN HEART JOURNAL, 1991, 121 (01) :293-298
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2008, PUTT PREV 1 VASC CHE
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2013, WORLD HLTH REPORT 20
[4]   Simple scoring scheme for calculating the risk of acute coronary events based on the 10-year follow-up of the Prospective Cardiovascular Munster (PROCAM) study [J].
Assmann, G ;
Cullen, P ;
Schulte, H .
CIRCULATION, 2002, 105 (03) :310-315
[5]   Accuracy and impact of risk assessment in the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease: a systematic review [J].
Brindle, P. ;
Beswick, A. ;
Fahey, T. ;
Ebrahim, S. .
HEART, 2006, 92 (12) :1752-1759
[6]  
British Heart Foundation, 2005, EUR CARD DIS STAT
[7]   BLOOD-PRESSURE, ANTIHYPERTENSIVE DRUG-TREATMENT AND THE RISKS OF STROKE AND OF CORONARY HEART-DISEASE [J].
COLLINS, R ;
MACMAHON, S .
BRITISH MEDICAL BULLETIN, 1994, 50 (02) :272-298
[8]   Multiple risk factor interventions for primary prevention of coronary heart disease [J].
Ebrahim, Shah ;
Taylor, Fiona ;
Ward, Kirsten ;
Beswick, Andrew ;
Burke, Margaret ;
Smith, George Davey .
COCHRANE DATABASE OF SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS, 2011, (01)
[9]  
Edwards AG, 2009, COCHRANE LIB
[10]  
FRANK E, 1993, WESTERN J MED, V159, P83