2 resultados para risk assessments

em Université de Lausanne, Switzerland


Relevância:

70.00% 70.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

BACKGROUND: Clinical scores may help physicians to better assess the individual risk/benefit of oral anticoagulant therapy. We aimed to externally validate and compare the prognostic performance of 7 clinical prediction scores for major bleeding events during oral anticoagulation therapy. METHODS: We followed 515 adult patients taking oral anticoagulants to measure the first major bleeding event over a 12-month follow-up period. The performance of each score to predict the risk of major bleeding and the physician's subjective assessment of bleeding risk were compared with the C statistic. RESULTS: The cumulative incidence of a first major bleeding event during follow-up was 6.8% (35/515). According to the 7 scoring systems, the proportions of major bleeding ranged from 3.0% to 5.7% for low-risk, 6.7% to 9.9% for intermediate-risk, and 7.4% to 15.4% for high-risk patients. The overall predictive accuracy of the scores was poor, with the C statistic ranging from 0.54 to 0.61 and not significantly different from each other (P=.84). Only the Anticoagulation and Risk Factors in Atrial Fibrillation score performed slightly better than would be expected by chance (C statistic, 0.61; 95% confidence interval, 0.52-0.70). The performance of the scores was not statistically better than physicians' subjective risk assessments (C statistic, 0.55; P=.94). CONCLUSION: The performance of 7 clinical scoring systems in predicting major bleeding events in patients receiving oral anticoagulation therapy was poor and not better than physicians' subjective assessments.

Relevância:

70.00% 70.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

BACKGROUND: Recommendations for statin use for primary prevention of coronary heart disease (CHD) are based on estimation of the 10- year CHD risk. We compared the 10-year CHD risk assessments and eligibility percentages for statin therapy using three scoring algorithms currently used in Europe. METHODS: We studied 5683 women and men, aged 35-75, without overt cardiovascular disease (CVD), in a population-based study in Switzerland. We compared the 10-year CHD risk using three scoring schemes, i.e., the Framingham risk score (FRS) from the U.S. National Cholesterol Education Program's Adult Treatment Panel III (ATP III), the PROCAM scoring scheme from the International Atherosclerosis Society (IAS), and the European risk SCORE for low-risk countries, without and with extrapolation to 60 years as recommended by the European Society of Cardiology guidelines (ESC). With FRS and PROCAM, high-risk was defined as a 10- year risk of fatal or non-fatal CHD>20% and a 10-year risk of fatal CVD≥5% with SCORE. We compared the proportions of high-risk participants and eligibility for statin use according to these three schemes. For each guideline, we estimated the impact of increased statin use from current partial compliance to full compliance on potential CHD deaths averted over 10 years, using a success proportion of 27% for statins. RESULTS: Participants classified at high-risk (both genders) were 5.8% according to FRS and 3.0% to the PROCAM, whereas the European risk SCORE classified 12.5% at high-risk (15.4% with extrapolation to 60 years). For the primary prevention of CHD, 18.5% of participants were eligible for statin therapy using ATP III, 16.6% using IAS, and 10.3% using ESC (13.0% with extrapolation) because ESC guidelines recommend statin therapy only in high-risk subjects. In comparison with IAS, agreement to identify eligible adults for statins was good with ATP III, but moderate with ESC. Using a population perspective, a full compliance with ATP III guidelines would reduce up to 17.9% of the 24′ 310 CHD deaths expected over 10 years in Switzerland, 17.3% with IAS and 10.8% with ESC (11.5% with extrapolation). CONCLUSIONS: Full compliance with guidelines for statin therapy would result in substantial health benefits, but proportions of high-risk adults and eligible adults for statin use varied substantially depending on the scoring systems and corresponding guidelines used for estimating CHD risk in Europe.