Accuracy and impact of risk assessment in the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease: a systematic review

P Brindle¹, A Beswick¹, T Fahey², S Ebrahim³

¹ Department of Social Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
² Tayside Centre for General Practice, University of Dundee, Dundee, UK
³ London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK

Correspondence to:
Dr Peter Brindle
Department of Social Medicine, University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, Whiteladies Road, Bristol BS8 2PR, UK; peter.brindle{at}nhs.net

Objective: To determine the accuracy of assessing cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk in the primary prevention of CVD and its impact on clinical outcomes.

Design: Systematic review.

Data sources: Published studies retrieved from Medline and other databases. Reference lists of identified articles were inspected for further relevant articles.

Selection of studies: Any study that compared the predicted risk of coronary heart disease (CHD) or CVD, with observed 10-year risk based on the widely recommended Framingham methods (review A). Randomised controlled trials examining the effect on clinical outcomes of a healthcare professional assigning a cardiovascular risk score to people predominantly without CVD (review B).

Review methods: Data were extracted on the ratio of the predicted to the observed 10-year risk of CVD and CHD (review A), and on cardiovascular or coronary fatal or non-fatal events, risk factor levels, absolute cardiovascular or coronary risk, prescription of risk-reducing drugs and changes in health-related behaviour (review B).

Results: 27 studies with data from 71 727 participants on predicted and observed risk for either CHD or CVD were identified. For CHD, the predicted to observed ratios ranged from an underprediction of 0.43 (95% CI 0.27 to 0.67) in a high-risk population to an overprediction of 2.87 (95% CI 1.91 to 4.31) in a lower-risk population. In review B, four randomised controlled trials confined to people with hypertension or diabetes found no strong evidence that a cardiovascular risk assessment performed by a clinician improves health outcomes.

Conclusion: The performance of the Framingham risk scores varies considerably between populations and evidence supporting the use of cardiovascular risk scores for primary prevention is scarce.

Abbreviations: CHD, coronary heart disease; CVD, cardiovascular disease; INSIGHT, Intervention as a Goal in Hypertension Treatment

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Jontell, M., Glick, M. (2009). Oral Health Care Professionals' Identification of Cardiovascular Disease Risk Among Patients in Private Dental Offices in Sweden. Journal of the American Dental Association 140: 1385-1391 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Varady, K. A, Bhutani, S., Church, E. C, Klempel, M. C (2009). Short-term modified alternate-day fasting: a novel dietary strategy for weight loss and cardioprotection in obese adults. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 90: 1138-1143 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Mohan, A. V., Mohan, C. P., Balaban, R. (2009). Responses to USPSTF Guideline on Aspirin for Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease. ANN INTERN MED 151: 587-588 [Full Text]  
• Cooney, M. T., Dudina, A. L., Graham, I. M. (2009). Value and limitations of existing scores for the assessment of cardiovascular risk: a review for clinicians.. J Am Coll Cardiol 54: 1209-1227 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Collins, G. S, Altman, D. G (2009). An independent external validation and evaluation of QRISK cardiovascular risk prediction: a prospective open cohort study. BMJ 339: b2584-b2584 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Han, P. K. J., Klein, W. M. P., Lehman, T. C., Massett, H., Lee, S. C., Freedman, A. N. (2009). Laypersons' Responses to the Communication of Uncertainty Regarding Cancer Risk Estimates. Med Decis Making 29: 391-403 [Abstract]  
• Simmons, R. K., Coleman, R. L., Price, H. C., Holman, R. R., Khaw, K.-T., Wareham, N. J., Griffin, S. J. (2009). Performance of the UK Prospective Diabetes Study Risk Engine and the Framingham Risk Equations in Estimating Cardiovascular Disease in the EPIC- Norfolk Cohort. Diabetes Care 32: 708-713 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Bulugahapitiya, U, Siyambalapitiya, S, Sithole, J, Fernando, D J, Idris, I (2008). Age threshold for vascular prophylaxis by aspirin in patients without diabetes. Heart 94: 1429-1432 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Norheim, O. F. (2008). Clinical priority setting. BMJ 337: a1846-a1846 [Full Text]  
• Capewell, S. (2008). Will screening individuals at high risk of cardiovascular events deliver large benefits? No. BMJ 337: a1395-a1395 [Full Text]  
• Ankle Brachial Index Collaboration, (2008). Ankle Brachial Index Combined With Framingham Risk Score to Predict Cardiovascular Events and Mortality: A Meta-analysis. JAMA 300: 197-208 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Simmons, R. K., Sharp, S., Boekholdt, S. M., Sargeant, L. A., Khaw, K.-T., Wareham, N. J., Griffin, S. J. (2008). Evaluation of the Framingham Risk Score in the European Prospective Investigation of Cancer-Norfolk Cohort: Does Adding Glycated Hemoglobin Improve the Prediction of Coronary Heart Disease Events?. Arch Intern Med 168: 1209-1216 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Kiberd, B., Panek, R. (2008). Cardiovascular Outcomes in the Outpatient Kidney Transplant Clinic: The Framingham Risk Score Revisited. CJASN 3: 822-828 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• D'Agostino, R. B. Sr, Vasan, R. S., Pencina, M. J., Wolf, P. A., Cobain, M., Massaro, J. M., Kannel, W. B. (2008). General Cardiovascular Risk Profile for Use in Primary Care: The Framingham Heart Study. Circulation 117: 743-753 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Lipkus, I. M. (2007). Numeric, Verbal, and Visual Formats of Conveying Health Risks: Suggested Best Practices and Future Recommendations. Med Decis Making 27: 696-713 [Abstract]  
• Hippisley-Cox, J., Coupland, C., Vinogradova, Y., Robson, J., May, M., Brindle, P. (2007). Derivation and validation of QRISK, a new cardiovascular disease risk score for the United Kingdom: prospective open cohort study. BMJ 335: 136-136 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Havranek, E. P (2007). Review: Framingham risk scores have variable accuracy in predicting CVD events in different patient populations. Evid. Based Med. 12: 87-87 [Full Text]  
• Kullo, I. J., Malik, A. R. (2007). Arterial Ultrasonography and Tonometry as Adjuncts to Cardiovascular Risk Stratification. J Am Coll Cardiol 49: 1413-1426 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Chauhan, U. (2007). Cardiovascular disease prevention in primary care. Br Med Bull 0: ldm002v1-15 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• (2006). Cardiovascular risk assessment for primary prevention is often inaccurate. BMJ 333: 0-0 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
• Jurgensen, J S (2006). The value of risk scores. Heart 92: 1713-1714 [Abstract] [Full Text]