BACKGROUND: Screening of high-risk groups for peripheral arterial disease has been advocated because the condition underdiagnosed and secondary prevention can reduce cardiovascular event rates. AIM: To establish the feasibility of screening for peripheral arterial disease in people aged 60 years or over with hypertension, and to estimate the potential to improve secondary preventive treatment. DESIGN OF STUDY: Pilot study and cross-sectional survey. SETTING: Large general practice in north-east Scotland. METHOD: People aged 60 years or over with hypertension but no cardiovascular disease or diabetes were identified from computer records and invited to a screening clinic. Data were collected on ankle brachial pressure index (ABPI), preventive treatment, and risk factors. RESULTS: Of 705 potentially eligible patients, 443 (63%) agreed to participate. Sixty-four were excluded and 364 of 379 patients (96%) attended screening. Thirty patients had peripheral arterial disease (ABPI of 0.9 or less), of whom 24 (7%; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 4 to 10%) were previously undiagnosed. Fifteen (50%) patients took antiplatelets, 13 (45%) had cholesterol <5 mmol/l, and 16 (53%) had blood pressure below 140/85 mmHg. Twenty-two (73%) patients were non-smokers, 14 (47%) had low-fat diets, two (7%) were physically active, and three (10%) ate recommended amounts of fruit and vegetables. CONCLUSIONS: It is feasible to screen for peripheral arterial disease in primary care, but its prevalence is lower than anticipated. There is room for improvement in secondary preventive treatment and lifestyle, so a structured programme could still have important benefits for survival.
BACKGROUND: Screening of high-risk groups for peripheral arterial disease has been advocated because the condition underdiagnosed and secondary prevention can reduce cardiovascular event rates. AIM: To establish the feasibility of screening for peripheral arterial disease in people aged 60 years or over with hypertension, and to estimate the potential to improve secondary preventive treatment. DESIGN OF STUDY: Pilot study and cross-sectional survey. SETTING: Large general practice in north-east Scotland. METHOD:People aged 60 years or over with hypertension but no cardiovascular disease or diabetes were identified from computer records and invited to a screening clinic. Data were collected on ankle brachial pressure index (ABPI), preventive treatment, and risk factors. RESULTS: Of 705 potentially eligible patients, 443 (63%) agreed to participate. Sixty-four were excluded and 364 of 379 patients (96%) attended screening. Thirty patients had peripheral arterial disease (ABPI of 0.9 or less), of whom 24 (7%; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 4 to 10%) were previously undiagnosed. Fifteen (50%) patients took antiplatelets, 13 (45%) had cholesterol <5 mmol/l, and 16 (53%) had blood pressure below 140/85 mmHg. Twenty-two (73%) patients were non-smokers, 14 (47%) had low-fat diets, two (7%) were physically active, and three (10%) ate recommended amounts of fruit and vegetables. CONCLUSIONS: It is feasible to screen for peripheral arterial disease in primary care, but its prevalence is lower than anticipated. There is room for improvement in secondary preventive treatment and lifestyle, so a structured programme could still have important benefits for survival.
Authors: P Little; J Barnett; A L Kinmonth; B Margetts; J Gabbay; R Thompson; D Warm; S Wooton Journal: Br J Gen Pract Date: 2000-01 Impact factor: 5.386
Authors: Jill J F Belch; Eric J Topol; Giancarlo Agnelli; Michel Bertrand; Robert M Califf; Denis L Clement; Mark A Creager; J Donald Easton; James R Gavin; Philip Greenland; Graeme Hankey; Peter Hanrath; Alan T Hirsch; Jürgen Meyer; Sidney C Smith; Frank Sullivan; Michael A Weber Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 2003-04-28
Authors: Stefan Lange; Curt Diehm; Harald Darius; Roman Haberl; Jens Rainer Allenberg; David Pittrow; Alexander Schuster; Berndt von Stritzky; Gerhart Tepohl; Hans Joachim Trampisch Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2003-12 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: A T Hirsch; M H Criqui; D Treat-Jacobson; J G Regensteiner; M A Creager; J W Olin; S H Krook; D B Hunninghake; A J Comerota; M E Walsh; M M McDermott; W R Hiatt Journal: JAMA Date: 2001-09-19 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Ruth E Taylor-Piliae; Joan M Fair; Ann N Varady; Mark A Hlatky; Linda C Norton; Carlos Iribarren; Alan S Go; Stephen P Fortmann Journal: Am Heart J Date: 2011-05 Impact factor: 4.749
Authors: Christopher E Clark; Rod S Taylor; Isabella Butcher; Marlene Cw Stewart; Jackie Price; F Gerald R Fowkes; Angela C Shore; John L Campbell Journal: Br J Gen Pract Date: 2016-04-14 Impact factor: 5.386
Authors: Jane H Davies; Jonathan Richards; Kevin Conway; Joyce E Kenkre; Jane Ea Lewis; E Mark Williams Journal: Br J Gen Pract Date: 2017-02 Impact factor: 5.386