Effect of using cardiovascular risk scoring in routine risk assessment in primary prevention of cardiovascular disease: an overview of systematic reviews.
Cardiovascular diseases
Cardiovascular system
Primary prevention
Risk assessment
Risk factors
Journal
BMC cardiovascular disorders
ISSN: 1471-2261
Titre abrégé: BMC Cardiovasc Disord
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968539
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
09 01 2019
09 01 2019
Historique:
received:
26
07
2018
accepted:
21
12
2018
entrez:
11
1
2019
pubmed:
11
1
2019
medline:
18
12
2019
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Our objectives were to critically appraise and summarise the current evidence for the effectiveness of using cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk scoring (total risk assessment - TRA) in routine risk assessment in primary prevention of CVD compared with standard care with regards to patients outcomes, clinical risk factor levels, medication prescribing, and adverse effects. We carried out an overview of existing systematic reviews (SRs). Presentation of the results aligned guidelines from the PRISMA statement. The data is presented as a narrative synthesis. We searched MEDLINE (Ovid), EMBASE, CENTRAL and SCOPUS databases from January 1990 to March 2017, reviewed the reference lists of all included SRs and searched for ongoing SRs in PROSPERO database. We encompassed SRs and meta-analyses which took into account RCTs, quasi-RCTs, and observational studies investigating the effect of using CVD risk scoring. Only studies performed in a primary care setting, with adult participants free of clinical CVD were eligible. Intervention was CVD risk assessment with use of the total CVD risk scoring compared with standard care with no use of TRA . We identified 2157 records, we then recognised and analysed 10 relevant SRs. One SR reported statistically insignificant reduction of CVD death, when using TRA, the second SR presented meta-analysis which reported no effect on fatal and non-fatal CV events compared with conventional care (5.4% vs 5.3%; RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.08; I There is limited evidence, of low overall quality, suggesting a possible lack of effectiveness of TRA in reducing CVD events and mortality, as well as a clinically insignificant influence on individual risk factor levels. Using TRA does not cause harm to patients. Systematic review protocol was registered with the International PROSPERO database - registration number CRD42016046898 .
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Our objectives were to critically appraise and summarise the current evidence for the effectiveness of using cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk scoring (total risk assessment - TRA) in routine risk assessment in primary prevention of CVD compared with standard care with regards to patients outcomes, clinical risk factor levels, medication prescribing, and adverse effects.
METHODS
We carried out an overview of existing systematic reviews (SRs). Presentation of the results aligned guidelines from the PRISMA statement. The data is presented as a narrative synthesis. We searched MEDLINE (Ovid), EMBASE, CENTRAL and SCOPUS databases from January 1990 to March 2017, reviewed the reference lists of all included SRs and searched for ongoing SRs in PROSPERO database. We encompassed SRs and meta-analyses which took into account RCTs, quasi-RCTs, and observational studies investigating the effect of using CVD risk scoring. Only studies performed in a primary care setting, with adult participants free of clinical CVD were eligible. Intervention was CVD risk assessment with use of the total CVD risk scoring compared with standard care with no use of TRA .
RESULTS
We identified 2157 records, we then recognised and analysed 10 relevant SRs. One SR reported statistically insignificant reduction of CVD death, when using TRA, the second SR presented meta-analysis which reported no effect on fatal and non-fatal CV events compared with conventional care (5.4% vs 5.3%; RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.08; I
CONCLUSIONS
There is limited evidence, of low overall quality, suggesting a possible lack of effectiveness of TRA in reducing CVD events and mortality, as well as a clinically insignificant influence on individual risk factor levels. Using TRA does not cause harm to patients.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
Systematic review protocol was registered with the International PROSPERO database - registration number CRD42016046898 .
Identifiants
pubmed: 30626326
doi: 10.1186/s12872-018-0990-2
pii: 10.1186/s12872-018-0990-2
pmc: PMC6327540
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
11Références
Medicine (Baltimore). 2015 Dec;94(50):e2313
pubmed: 26683970
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Mar 14;3:CD006887
pubmed: 28290160
Br J Gen Pract. 2014 Jan;64(618):e47-53
pubmed: 24567582
BMJ Open. 2017 Mar 8;7(3):e014206
pubmed: 28274967
J Clin Epidemiol. 2014 Apr;67(4):368-75
pubmed: 24581293
BMJ. 2012 Nov 20;345:e7191
pubmed: 23169868
Heart. 2014 Apr;100 Suppl 2:ii1-ii67
pubmed: 24667225
Lancet. 2015 Nov 28;386(10009):2145-91
pubmed: 26321261
Ann Intern Med. 1961 Jul;55:33-50
pubmed: 13751193
J Am Coll Cardiol. 1999 Oct;34(4):1348-59
pubmed: 10520820
Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2009 Jul;25 Suppl 1:182-95
pubmed: 19534840
BMJ. 2014 Jun 09;348:g3617
pubmed: 24912589
Heart. 2012 Mar;98(5):360-9
pubmed: 22184101
J Clin Epidemiol. 2012 Dec;65(12):1267-73
pubmed: 22959594
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Jan 29;(1):CD010411
pubmed: 26824223
Eur Heart J. 2016 Aug 1;37(29):2315-2381
pubmed: 27222591
J R Soc Med. 2012 Aug;105(8):348-56
pubmed: 22907552
Lancet. 2012 Dec 15;380(9859):2095-128
pubmed: 23245604
Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2017 Mar;5(3):196-213
pubmed: 28126460
Can J Cardiol. 2013 Feb;29(2):151-67
pubmed: 23351925
BMJ. 2016 May 16;353:i2416
pubmed: 27184143
Circulation. 2014 Jun 24;129(25 Suppl 2):S49-73
pubmed: 24222018
Prog Cardiovasc Dis. 2010 Jul-Aug;53(1):68-78
pubmed: 20620429
BMJ. 2014 Jun 09;348:g3680
pubmed: 24912801
Prev Med. 1985 May;14(3):272-8
pubmed: 3903732
Patient Educ Couns. 2011 Feb;82(2):169-81
pubmed: 20471766
Oral Health Dent Manag. 2013 Mar;12(1):9-16
pubmed: 23474576
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2011 Feb 03;11(1):15
pubmed: 21291558
Eur Heart J. 2003 Jun;24(11):987-1003
pubmed: 12788299
Arch Intern Med. 2010 Feb 8;170(3):230-9
pubmed: 20142567
BMC Health Serv Res. 2008 Mar 20;8:60
pubmed: 18366711
Heart. 2006 Dec;92(12):1752-9
pubmed: 16621883
Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis. 2005 Feb;15(1):79-85
pubmed: 15871855
JAMA. 1982 Sep 24;248(12):1465-77
pubmed: 7050440
Circulation. 2014 Jun 24;129(25 Suppl 2):S1-45
pubmed: 24222016
BMJ Open. 2015 Oct 26;5(10):e008717
pubmed: 26503388
BMJ Open. 2017 Mar 24;7(3):e013650
pubmed: 28341688
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011 Jan 19;(1):CD001561
pubmed: 21249647
BMJ. 2005 Jan 8;330(7482):68
pubmed: 15619601
J Clin Epidemiol. 2009 Oct;62(10):1006-12
pubmed: 19631508
BMJ. 2008 Jun 28;336(7659):1475-82
pubmed: 18573856
Acta Cardiol. 2017 Aug;72(4):370-379
pubmed: 28705107