4.4 Article

Estimated 10-year cardiovascular risk in a British population: results of a national screening project

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PRACTICE
卷 62, 期 9, 页码 1322-1331

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1742-1241.2008.01828.x

关键词

-

资金

  1. MRC [MC_U137686857] Funding Source: UKRI
  2. Medical Research Council [MC_U137686857] Funding Source: Medline
  3. Medical Research Council [MC_U137686857] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: To estimate 10-year cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk using the risk equation and risk categories of the Joint British Societies' Guidelines on Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease in Clinical Practice (2005). Methods: A cross-sectional CVD screening programme was conducted in 35 towns in Great Britain. In total, 27,776 men and 43,261 women aged at least 18 years were screened. The estimated 10-year risk of CVD was calculated and directly standardised to the population of Great Britain. Results: The age standardised combined prevalence of known CVD, diabetes, lipid-lowering or antihypertensive drug therapy, which preclude multifactorial risk assessment, was 18.0% for men and 18.1% for women. CVD risk was calculated for 56,863 individuals, and the age-standardised prevalence of an estimated 10-year CVD risk < 10% was 42.7% (95% CI: 42.2-43.1) for men and 60.4% (95% CI: 60.1-60.7) for women; 10% to < 20% was 19.6% (19.1-20.6) and 15.6% (15.2-15.9); and >= 20% was 19.6% (19.1-20.0) and 6.0% (5.8-6.2) respectively. After aggregating known CVD, diabetes, antihypertensive or lipid-lowering drug therapy, or an estimated CVD risk of >= 20%, the combined standardised prevalence of high CVD risk for individuals aged 50 years or more was 74.1% (73.5-74.8) for men (n = 14,787) and 45.5% (44.8-46.2) for women (n = 24,400). Conclusions: Using current risk thresholds, there is a substantial unmet need for primary prevention of CVD, particularly among middle-aged men. The results emphasise the scale of intervention that a strategy of individual risk assessment and pharmacological intervention requires.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据