Key result
The QRISK score was the most applicable cardiovascular risk assessment instrument for Saudi patients (95.3% applicability), whereas the ACC/AHA score was superior in predicting high-risk individuals.
Why the study?
Multiple online cardiovascular risk calculators are available to estimate the probability of CVD without defined appropriate populations, prompting an evaluation of their predictability in Saudi patients.
Cross-Sectional (n=129)
No
In Saudi patients with acute coronary syndrome, the QRISK score was the most applicable risk assessment tool, whereas the ACC/AHA score was superior in identifying high-risk individuals.
Should not yet change risk-score selection in Saudi practice; leaves open prospective validation against incident cardiovascular events.
Introduction Several cardiovascular risk calculators are available online to measure the probability of developing cardiovascular disease (CVD) without defining the appropriate population. In the current study, four risk assessment instruments were investigated with Saudi Arabian patients with CVD to identify the instrument with the best predictability. The chosen instruments were the Framingham Risk Score (FRS), Systematic Coronary Risk Evaluation (SCORE), American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease Risk Estimator, and the United Kingdom score which is called QRISK®. Methods Saudi patients, 40 years and older, with acute coronary syndrome, were recruited. Data related to age, gender, ethnicity, height, weight, systolic blood pressure, total cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein (HDL), smoking status, diabetes mellitus, rheumatoid arthritis, chronic kidney disease, atrial fibrillation, heart attack in a first-degree relative, and use of antihypertensive treatment were recorded. Results Out of 129 patients, the ACC/AHA had higher predictability with low risk (26.3%) and high risk (66.7%) groups. The QRISK® was highly applicable (95.3%); however, the SCORE was not considered applicable (22.5%). Conclusion The QRISK® is easy to implement and applicable in a population-based study, but the ACC/AHA is superior in predicting individuals with a high risk of CVD.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hasabullah et al. (2020) conducted a cross-sectional in Acute coronary syndrome (n=129). QRISK cardiovascular risk score vs. ACC/AHA, FRS, and SCORE risk scores was evaluated on Applicability of the cardiovascular risk assessment instrument. The QRISK score was the most applicable cardiovascular risk assessment instrument for Saudi patients (95.3% applicability), whereas the ACC/AHA score was superior in predicting high-risk individuals.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: