Literature DB >> 22171711

Cardiovascular risk tables: opinion and degree of use of primary care doctors from Madrid, Spain.

Sofía Garrido Elustondo1, Pedro Nogales Aguado, Cristina García de La Rasilla Cooper, Juanma Pinar Manzanet, Domingo Sánchez Sendín.   

Abstract

AIMS AND
OBJECTIVES: To determine the opinion of primary care doctors regarding the cardiovascular risk tables, their degree of use in clinical practice and the specific difficulties encountered when using them.
METHOD: Transversal descriptive study. LOCATION: Primary Care, Madrid, Spain. PARTICIPANTS: Primary care doctors from four of Madrid's sanitary areas. PRINCIPAL MEASUREMENTS: Anonymous self-administered questionnaire that studies age, gender, professional data, variables related with the opinion on cardiovascular risk tables, with their application in daily clinical practice, and main barriers for their use. A total of 34 closed questions and one open question were performed.
RESULTS: Four hundred and sixty-two questionnaires were received (46% replied). Ninety-three per cent agrees that prevention based on a global evaluation of cardiovascular risk is more convenient than the one based on an independent assessment of each factor. When a new diagnosis of hypertension or elevated cholesterol is performed, 45 and 52% respectively estimate the cardiovascular risk systematically. Twenty per cent uses this information to start a treatment for hypertension and 32% for raised cholesterol. Seventy-three per cent is aware of the tool available in the computer program to estimate the cardiovascular risk and 35% uses it. Eighty-seven per cent gives their patients information about cardiovascular risk. Main identified barriers: lack of time, lack of consensus and absence of computer support.
CONCLUSIONS: Primary care doctors are aware of the need to estimate a global cardiovascular risk, recognize the usefulness of the tables but find problems in their practical application. In order to make their application feasible, tables should be simplified and unified, and their format should be improved.
© 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 22171711     DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2011.01785.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Eval Clin Pract        ISSN: 1356-1294            Impact factor:   2.431


  2 in total

1.  GPs' familiarity with and use of cardiovascular clinical prediction rules: a UK survey study.

Authors:  Jong-Wook Ban; Rafael Perera; Richard Stevens
Journal:  BJGP Open       Date:  2020-12-15

2.  Understanding clinical prediction models as 'innovations': a mixed methods study in UK family practice.

Authors:  Benjamin Brown; Sudeh Cheraghi-Sohi; Thomas Jaki; Ting-Li Su; Iain Buchan; Matthew Sperrin
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2016-08-09       Impact factor: 2.796

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.