Cardiovascular risk assessment in diabetes mellitus: comparison of the general Framingham risk profile versus the World Health Organization/International Society of Hypertension risk prediction charts in Arabs--clinical implications.

We estimated the prevalence of cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk and its clinical implications among 1 110 Omani patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) using 2 different CVD risk tools: the general Framingham risk profile (GFRP) and the joint World Health Organization/International Society of Hypertension (WHO/ISH) risk prediction charts. The GFRP tool identified higher proportion of patients compared with joint WHO/ISH tool at 10-year CVD risk 10% to <20% and at 20% to <30%. At CVD risk ≥30%, both assessment tools identified similar proportions of patients (22% vs 24%; P=.120). Compared with WHO/ISH charts, the GFRP identified almost double the number of men eligible for aspirin treatment at CVD risk thresholds of ≥10% (86% vs 43%). In women, the proportions were, 66% and 45%, respectively. For statins, the figures were, 60% and 37%, for men and 28% and 36%, for women. In conclusion, the GFRP overestimates the number of patients eligible for primary prevention of CVD compared with the joint WHO/ISH method.