Key result
The Framingham General Cardiovascular Risk Profile classified fewer patients as having <10% 10-year cardiovascular risk than the WHO/ISH Risk Prediction Charts (30.6% vs 71.6%).
Why the study?
Addressing all modifiable cardiovascular risk factors in a composite manner requires assessment tools, but the agreement between WHO/ISH and Framingham risk scores in this population was unclear.
Cross-Sectional (n=180)
No
Addressing all modifiable risk factors in a composite manner, instead of treating individual risk factors is the current approach in the management of cardiovascular diseases. In patients, attending chronic disease clinic in Urban Health Centre (UHC) functioning under a tertiary care teaching hospital, this study aims to assess 10-year cardiovascular risk using ‘WHO/ISH Cardiovascular Risk Prediction Charts’ and ‘Framingham General Cardiovascular Risk Profile using lipid levels’ and compare the level of agreement between the results obtained. A retrospective record review was carried out in urban chronic disease clinic during the months of May and June 2013. Records of 280 patients attending the Urban Health Centre were screened using a structured proforma and 180 of them were included subject to selection criteria. The analysis was carried out using IBM SPSS v 21. 10-year cardiovascular risk was calculated using the joint WHO/ISH charts and the General Framingham Cardiovascular Risk Profile charts. Level of agreement between the risk scores was compared using kappa statistics. Institution ethics committee approval was obtained before starting the project. 81.7% of the patients were women with a median age of 58 years. Less than half of the patients (45%) had hypertension and another 37.2% had both diabetes and hypertension. 71.6% of the patients had a <10% risk for any cardiovascular event in the next 10 years by using WHO ISH Risk Prediction Charts whereas the same was found in only 30.6% by using Frahmingham Risk Profile. Framingham Risk Profile was found to identify more patients as belonging to the higher risk category as compared to WHO/ISH charts.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kar et al. (2016) conducted a cross-sectional in Cardiovascular disease risk (n=180). Framingham General Cardiovascular Risk Profile vs. WHO/ISH Cardiovascular Risk Prediction Charts was evaluated on <10% risk for any cardiovascular event in the next 10 years. The Framingham General Cardiovascular Risk Profile classified fewer patients as having <10% 10-year cardiovascular risk than the WHO/ISH Risk Prediction Charts (30.6% vs 71.6%).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: