Comparison of estimates and calculations of risk of coronary heart disease by doctors and nurses using different calculation tools in general practice: cross sectional study

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of using different risk calculation tools on how general practitioners and practice nurses evaluate the risk of coronary heart disease with clinical data routinely available in patients' records. DESIGN: Subjective estimates of the risk of coronary heart disease and results of four different methods of calculation of risk were compared with each other and a reference standard that had been calculated with the Framingham equation; calculations were based on a sample of patients' records, randomly selected from groups at risk of coronary heart disease. SETTING: General practices in central England. PARTICIPANTS: 18 general practitioners and 18 practice nurses. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Agreement of results of risk estimation and risk calculation with reference calculation; agreement of general practitioners with practice nurses; sensitivity and specificity of the different methods of risk calculation to detect patients at high or low risk of coronary heart disease. RESULTS: Only a minority of patients' records contained all of the risk factors required for the formal calculation of the risk of coronary heart disease (concentrations of high density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol were present in only 21%). Agreement of risk calculations with the reference standard was moderate (kappa=0.33-0.65 for practice nurses and 0.33 to 0.65 for general practitioners, depending on calculation tool), showing a trend for underestimation of risk. Moderate agreement was seen between the risks calculated by general practitioners and practice nurses for the same patients (kappa=0.47 to 0.58). The British charts gave the most sensitive results for risk of coronary heart disease (practice nurses 79%, general practitioners 80%), and it also gave the most specific results for practice nurses (100%), whereas the Sheffield table was the most specific method for general practitioners (89%). CONCLUSIONS: Routine calculation of the risk of coronary heart disease in primary care is hampered by poor availability of data on risk factors. General practitioners and practice nurses are able to evaluate the risk of coronary heart disease with only moderate accuracy. Data about risk factors need to be collected systematically, to allow the use of the most appropriate calculation tools.

How do older people with sight loss manage their general health? A qualitative study

Purpose: Older people with sight loss experience a number of barriers to managing their health. The purpose of this qualitative study was to explore how older people with sight loss manage their general health and explore the techniques used and strategies employed for health management. Methods: Semi-structured face-to-face interviews were conducted with 30 participants. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using thematic analysis. Results: Health management challenges experienced included: managing multiple health conditions; accessing information; engaging in health behaviours and maintaining wellbeing. Positive strategies included: joining support groups, clubs and societies; using low vision aids; seeking support from family and friends and accessing support through health and social care services. Conclusion: Healthcare professionals need to be more aware of the challenges faced by older people with sight loss. Improved promotion of group support and charity services which are best placed to share information, provide fora to learn about coping techniques and strategies, and give older people social support to prevent isolation is needed. Rehabilitation and support services and equipment can only be beneficial if patients know what is available and how to access them. Over-reliance on self-advocacy in current healthcare systems is not conducive to patient-centred care. Implications for Rehabilitation Sight loss in older people can impact on many factors including health management. This study identifies challenges to health management and highlights strategies used by older people with sight loss to manage their health. Access to support often relies on patients seeking information for themselves. However, self-advocacy is challenging due to information accessibility barriers. Informal groups and charities play an important role in educating patients about their condition and advising on available support to facilitate health management.