Literature DB >> 10710573

Coronary and cardiovascular risk estimation for primary prevention: validation of a new Sheffield table in the 1995 Scottish health survey population.

E J Wallis1, L E Ramsay, I Ul Haq, P Ghahramani, P R Jackson, K Rowland-Yeo, W W Yeo.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To examine the accuracy of a new version of the Sheffield table designed to aid decisions on lipids screening and detect thresholds for risk of coronary heart disease needed to implement current guidelines for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease.
DESIGN: Comparison of decisions made on the basis of the table with absolute risk of coronary heart disease or cardiovascular disease calculated by the Framingham risk function. The decisions related to statin treatment when coronary risk is >/=30% over 10 years; aspirin treatment when the risk is >/=15% over 10 years; and the treatment of mild hypertension when the cardiovascular risk is >/=20% over 10 years.
SETTING: The table is designed for use in general practice.
SUBJECTS: Random sample of 1000 people aged 35-64 years from the 1995 Scottish health survey. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of the table.
RESULTS: 13% of people had a coronary risk of >/=15%, and 2. 2% a risk of >/=30%, over 10 years. 22% had mild hypertension (systolic blood pressure 140-159 mm Hg). The table indicated lipids screening for everyone with a coronary risk of >/=15% over 10 years, for 95% of people with a ratio of total cholesterol to high density lipoprotein cholesterol of >/=8.0, but for <50% with a coronary risk of <5% over 10 years. Sensitivity and specificity were 97% and 95% respectively for a coronary risk of >/=15% over 10 years; 82% and 99% for a coronary risk of >/=30% over 10 years; and 88% and 90% for a cardiovascular risk of >/=20% over 10 years in mild hypertension.
CONCLUSION: The table identifies all high risk people for lipids screening, reduces screening of low risk people by more than half, and ensures that treatments are prescribed appropriately to those at high risk, while avoiding inappropriate treatment of people at low risk.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10710573      PMCID: PMC27307          DOI: 10.1136/bmj.320.7236.671

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BMJ        ISSN: 0959-8138


  18 in total

1.  Cost effectiveness of HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor (statin) treatment related to the risk of coronary heart disease and cost of drug treatment.

Authors:  D M Pickin; C J McCabe; L E Ramsay; N Payne; I U Haq; W W Yeo; P R Jackson
Journal:  Heart       Date:  1999-09       Impact factor: 5.994

2.  Joint British recommendations on prevention of coronary heart disease in clinical practice. British Cardiac Society, British Hyperlipidaemia Association, British Hypertension Society, endorsed by the British Diabetic Association.

Authors: 
Journal:  Heart       Date:  1998-12       Impact factor: 5.994

3.  1999 World Health Organization-International Society of Hypertension Guidelines for the Management of Hypertension. Guidelines Subcommittee.

Authors: 
Journal:  J Hypertens       Date:  1999-02       Impact factor: 4.844

4.  Is the Framingham risk function valid for northern European populations? A comparison of methods for estimating absolute coronary risk in high risk men.

Authors:  I U Haq; L E Ramsay; W W Yeo; P R Jackson; E J Wallis
Journal:  Heart       Date:  1999-01       Impact factor: 5.994

5.  Prediction of coronary risk for primary prevention of coronary heart disease: a comparison of methods.

Authors:  I U Haq; L E Ramsay; P R Jackson; E J Wallis
Journal:  QJM       Date:  1999-07

6.  National Cholesterol Education Program. Second Report of the Expert Panel on Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol in Adults (Adult Treatment Panel II).

Authors: 
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  1994-03       Impact factor: 29.690

7.  British Hypertension Society guidelines for hypertension management 1999: summary.

Authors:  L E Ramsay; B Williams; G D Johnston; G A MacGregor; L Poston; J F Potter; N R Poulter; G Russell
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1999-09-04

8.  Cardiovascular disease risk profiles.

Authors:  K M Anderson; P M Odell; P W Wilson; W B Kannel
Journal:  Am Heart J       Date:  1991-01       Impact factor: 4.749

9.  Identifying adults at increased risk of coronary disease. How well do the current cholesterol guidelines work?

Authors:  S A Grover; L Coupal; X P Hu
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1995-09-13       Impact factor: 56.272

10.  Sheffield risk and treatment table for cholesterol lowering for primary prevention of coronary heart disease.

Authors:  I U Haq; P R Jackson; W W Yeo; L E Ramsay
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1995-12-02       Impact factor: 79.321

View more
  40 in total

1.  Management of UTI in general practice: a cost effective analysis. A commentary to facilitate an understanding of economic evaluation.

Authors:  D Kernick
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 5.386

2.  Statins and the prevention of coronary heart disease: striking a balance that is desirable, affordable, and achievable.

Authors:  L D Ritchie
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 5.386

3.  The primary prevention of coronary heart disease with statins: practice headache or public health?

Authors:  P H Evans
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 5.386

4.  Statins: underused by those who would benefit.

Authors:  S B Hulley; D Grady; W S Browner
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2000-10-21

5.  National service framework for coronary heart disease. Ambiguities need to be clarified.

Authors:  R Lloyd-Mostyn
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2000-09-09

6.  Treating the patient or the population? Part 2. Judging the benefit of a treatment to society as a whole.

Authors:  T D Heller; R F Heller; S Pattison; R Fletcher
Journal:  West J Med       Date:  2001-08

7.  Family history is important in estimating coronary risk.

Authors:  J Younger
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2000-08-12

8.  Risk in cardiovascular disease. Merit of using risk reduction rather than absolute risk for lipid lowering drugs.

Authors:  R Neary; S Ramachandran
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2000-07-15

9.  Comparison of methods of estimating coronary risk. Authors did not use latest version of Sheffield table.

Authors:  E J Wallis; L E Ramsay; J I Yikona; P R Jackson
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2000-07-15

Review 10.  Framingham-based tools to calculate the global risk of coronary heart disease: a systematic review of tools for clinicians.

Authors:  Stacey Sheridan; Michael Pignone; Cynthia Mulrow
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 5.128

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.