Literature DB >> 9022493

Information needed to decide about cardiovascular treatment in primary care.

J Robson1.   

Abstract

There is growing consensus that treatment of cardiovascular risks should be based on multiple rather than single factors and on absolute rather than relative risks. Thresholds for treatment should reflect the level of absolute risk at which the benefits and hazards of treating outweigh the benefits and hazards of not treating. Once a decision has been made to initiate a treatment programme, clinicians need to know the patient's absolute risk. At this level of risk do the benefits of treatment outweigh the hazards? Given this information, which treatment option does the patient prefer? Using cardiovascular disease as an example, I review some measures that assist decision making in primary care. Practice guidelines should routinely include accessible presentation of treatment outcomes on benefit, hazard, and costs for a range of absolute risks. These measures enable patients and their doctors to weigh the pros and cons of treatment in their particular circumstances.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9022493      PMCID: PMC2125739          DOI: 10.1136/bmj.314.7076.277

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


  5 in total

1.  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

2.  Priority setting in cardiac surgery: a survey of decision making and ethical issues.

Authors:  L Ridderstolpe; G Collste; H Rutberg; H Ahlfeldt
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 2.903

Review 3.  Pharmacoeconomic considerations in the management of hypertension.

Authors:  H Pardell; R Tresserras; P Armario; R Hernández del Rey
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 9.546

4.  Quantification of the Risk of Corticosteroid-induced Diabetes Mellitus Among the Elderly.

Authors:  David Blackburn; Janet Hux; Muhammad Mamdani
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 5.128

Review 5.  Does the routine use of global coronary heart disease risk scores translate into clinical benefits or harms? A systematic review of the literature.

Authors:  Stacey L Sheridan; Eric Crespo
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2008-03-20       Impact factor: 2.655

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.