Advanced

A novel programme to evaluate and communicate 10-year risk of CHD reduces predicted risk and improves patients' modifiable risk factor profile

Benner, J. S.; Erhardt, Leif RW LU ; Flammer, M.; Moller, R. A.; Rajicic, N.; Changela, K.; Yunis, C.; Cherry, S. B.; Gaciong, Z. and Johnson, E. S., et al. (2008) In International Journal of Clinical Practice 62(10). p.1484-1498
Abstract
Aims: We assessed whether a novel programme to evaluate/communicate predicted coronary heart disease (CHD) risk could lower patients' predicted Framingham CHD risk vs. usual care. Methods: The Risk Evaluation and Communication Health Outcomes and Utilization Trial was a prospective, controlled, cluster-randomised trial in nine European countries, among patients at moderate cardiovascular risk. Following baseline assessments, physicians in the intervention group calculated patients' predicted CHD risk and were instructed to advise patients according to a risk evaluation/communication programme. Usual care physicians did not calculate patients' risk and provided usual care only. The primary end-point was Framingham 10-year CHD risk at 6... (More)
Aims: We assessed whether a novel programme to evaluate/communicate predicted coronary heart disease (CHD) risk could lower patients' predicted Framingham CHD risk vs. usual care. Methods: The Risk Evaluation and Communication Health Outcomes and Utilization Trial was a prospective, controlled, cluster-randomised trial in nine European countries, among patients at moderate cardiovascular risk. Following baseline assessments, physicians in the intervention group calculated patients' predicted CHD risk and were instructed to advise patients according to a risk evaluation/communication programme. Usual care physicians did not calculate patients' risk and provided usual care only. The primary end-point was Framingham 10-year CHD risk at 6 months with intervention vs. usual care. Results: Of 1103 patients across 100 sites, 524 patients receiving intervention, and 461 receiving usual care, were analysed for efficacy. After 6 months, mean predicted risks were 12.5% with intervention, and 13.7% with usual care [odds ratio = 0.896; p = 0.001, adjusted for risk at baseline (17.2% intervention; 16.9% usual care) and other covariates]. The proportion of patients achieving both blood pressure and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol targets was significantly higher with intervention (25.4%) than usual care (14.1%; p < 0.001), and 29.3% of smokers in the intervention group quit smoking vs. 21.4% of those receiving usual care (p = 0.04). Conclusions: A physician-implemented CHD risk evaluation/communication programme improved patients' modifiable risk factor profile, and lowered predicted CHD risk compared with usual care. By combining this strategy with more intensive treatment to reduce residual modifiable risk, we believe that substantial improvements in cardiovascular disease prevention could be achieved in clinical practice. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
, et al. (More)
(Less)
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
in
International Journal of Clinical Practice
volume
62
issue
10
pages
1484 - 1498
publisher
Wiley-Blackwell
external identifiers
  • wos:000259025500007
  • scopus:51349094651
ISSN
1742-1241
DOI
10.1111/j.1742-1241.2008.01872.x
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
7fe7b47e-5072-43fd-b903-f114ef75329f (old id 1247250)
date added to LUP
2008-11-20 08:57:30
date last changed
2017-05-21 04:01:03
@article{7fe7b47e-5072-43fd-b903-f114ef75329f,
  abstract     = {Aims: We assessed whether a novel programme to evaluate/communicate predicted coronary heart disease (CHD) risk could lower patients' predicted Framingham CHD risk vs. usual care. Methods: The Risk Evaluation and Communication Health Outcomes and Utilization Trial was a prospective, controlled, cluster-randomised trial in nine European countries, among patients at moderate cardiovascular risk. Following baseline assessments, physicians in the intervention group calculated patients' predicted CHD risk and were instructed to advise patients according to a risk evaluation/communication programme. Usual care physicians did not calculate patients' risk and provided usual care only. The primary end-point was Framingham 10-year CHD risk at 6 months with intervention vs. usual care. Results: Of 1103 patients across 100 sites, 524 patients receiving intervention, and 461 receiving usual care, were analysed for efficacy. After 6 months, mean predicted risks were 12.5% with intervention, and 13.7% with usual care [odds ratio = 0.896; p = 0.001, adjusted for risk at baseline (17.2% intervention; 16.9% usual care) and other covariates]. The proportion of patients achieving both blood pressure and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol targets was significantly higher with intervention (25.4%) than usual care (14.1%; p &lt; 0.001), and 29.3% of smokers in the intervention group quit smoking vs. 21.4% of those receiving usual care (p = 0.04). Conclusions: A physician-implemented CHD risk evaluation/communication programme improved patients' modifiable risk factor profile, and lowered predicted CHD risk compared with usual care. By combining this strategy with more intensive treatment to reduce residual modifiable risk, we believe that substantial improvements in cardiovascular disease prevention could be achieved in clinical practice.},
  author       = {Benner, J. S. and Erhardt, Leif RW and Flammer, M. and Moller, R. A. and Rajicic, N. and Changela, K. and Yunis, C. and Cherry, S. B. and Gaciong, Z. and Johnson, E. S. and Sturkenboom, M. C. J. M. and Garcia-Puig, J. and Girerd, X.},
  issn         = {1742-1241},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {10},
  pages        = {1484--1498},
  publisher    = {Wiley-Blackwell},
  series       = {International Journal of Clinical Practice},
  title        = {A novel programme to evaluate and communicate 10-year risk of CHD reduces predicted risk and improves patients' modifiable risk factor profile},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1742-1241.2008.01872.x},
  volume       = {62},
  year         = {2008},
}