Background There is a considerable gap between the recommended prevention of coronary heart disease (CHD) in the guidelines from the European Society of Cardiology and the actually conducted clinical practice in preventive cardiology. A new method for implementing the recommended clinical practice in preventive cardiology is described.
Aim To develop a comprehensive and flexible health educational computer program (the PRECARD® program) for individual coronary risk prediction and multifactorial prevention.
Material and methods The PRECARD® program contains a new coronary risk score (the Copenhagen Risk Score) for myocardial infarction and a model for calculating the effect of intervention. Two Danish population studies (n=11765) with 10 years of follow up were used to establish the risk score. The included risk factors were: Age, sex, cholesterol (incl. HDL), systolic blood pressure, smoking, body mass index, diabetes, familial predisposition and previous heart disease. Nine randomized clinical trials were used to estimate the effect of intervention.
Results The findings in the Copenhagen Risk Score and the estimated effect of intervention deducted from the clinical trials were comparable to other similar studies. The PRECARD® program gives a graphical or numerical presentation of absolute coronary risk, the potential benefit of intervention, the relative impact of modifiable risk factors and numbers needed to treat. The program compiles individually tailored health messages in print for the patient. The program can easily be adjusted to different regional risk scores, other end-points and languages.
Conclusion The PRECARD® program may promote the recommended clinical practice in preventive cardiology by serving as an integrated part of the lifestyle consultation.
SansSKestelootHKromhoutD.The burden of cardiovascular diseases mortality in Europe. Task Force of the European Society of Cardiology on Cardiovascular Mortality and Morbidity Statistics in Europe. Eur Heart J1997; 18:1231–1248.
2.
JousilahtiPVartiainenETuomilehtoJPekkanenJPuskaP.Effect of risk factors and changes in risk factors on coronary mortality in three cohorts of middle-aged people in eastern Finland. Am J Epidemiol1995; 141:50–60.
3.
WoodDDe BackerGFaergemanOGrahamIManciaG.Prevention of coronary heart disease in clinical practice. Atherosclerosis1998; 140:199–270.
4.
EUROASPIRE Study Group.Clinical reality of coronary prevention guidelines: A comparison of EUROASPIRE I and II in nine countries. EUROASPIRE I and II Group. European Action on Secondary Prevention by Intervention to Reduce Events. Lancet2001; 357:995–1001.
5.
CollinsRPetoRMacMahonSHebertPFiebachNHEberleinKABlood pressure, stroke, and coronary heart disease. Part 2, Short-term reductions in blood pressure: Overview of randomised drug trials in their epidemiological context. Lancet1990; 335:827–838.
6.
SchrollMJorgensenTIngerslevJ.The Glostrup Population Studies, 1964–1992. Dan Med Bull1992; 39:204–207.
7.
The Copenhagen City Heart Study Group.The Copenhagen City Heart Study. Østerbroundersogelsen. A book of tables with data from the first examination (1976–78) and a five year follow-up (1981–83). Scand J Soc Med Suppl1989; 41:1–160.
8.
ShepherdJCobbeSMFordIIslesCGLorimerARMacFarlanePWPrevention of coronary heart disease with pravastatin in men with hypercholesterolemia. New Engl J Med1995; 333:1301–1307.
9.
The Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study Group.Randomised trial of cholesterol lowering in 4444 patients with coronary heart disease: The Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study (4S). Lancet1994; 344:1383–1389.
10.
Lipid research council.The Lipid Research Clinics Coronary Primary Prevention Trial Results. JAMA1984; 251:365–374.
11.
SacksFMPfefferMAMoyeLARouleauJLRutherfordJDColeTGThe effect of pravastatin on coronary events after myocardial infarction in patients with average cholesterol levels. New Engl J Med1996; 335:1001–1009.
12.
MRC Working Party.MRC trial of treatment of mild hypertension: Principal results. BMJ1985; 291:97–104.
13.
DahlofBLindholmLHHanssonLScherstenBEkbomTWesterPOLindholmLHHanssonL.Morbidity and mortality in the Swedish Trial in Old Patients with Hypertension (STOP-Hypertension). Lancet1991; 338:1281–1285.
14.
SHEP Cooperative Research Group.Prevention of stroke by antihypertensive drug treatment in older persons with isolated systolic hypertension. Final results of the Systolic Hypertension in the Elderly program (SHEP). JAMA1991; 265:3255–3264.
15.
The Syst-Eur Trial Investigators.Randomised double-blind comparison of placebo and active treatment for older patient with isolated systolic hypertension. Lancet1997; 350:757–764.
16.
MRC Working Party.MRC trial of treatment of hypertension in older adults: Principal results. BMJ1992; 304:405–412.
17.
CoxD.Regression models and life-tables. J Roy Stat Soc1972; B34:187–202.
18.
CookRJSackettDL.The number needed to treat: A clinically useful measure of treatment effect. BMJ1995; 310:452–454.
19.
WilsonPWFCastelliWPKannelWB.Coronary risk prediction in adults (The Framingham heart study). Am J Cardiol1987; 59:91G–94G.
20.
AndersonKMWilsonPWFOdellPMKannelWB.An updated coronary risk profile. A statement for health professionals. Circulation1991; 83:356–362.
21.
LeeI-MMansonJEHennekensCHPaffenbargerRS.Body weight and mortality. A 27-year follow-up of middle-aged men. JAMA1993; 270:2823–2828.
22.
KannelWBMcGeeDL.Diabetes and glucose tolerance as risk factors for cardiovascular disease: The Framingham study. Diabetes Care1979; 2:120–126.
23.
PhillipsANShaperAGPocockSJWalkerMMacFarlanePW.The role of risk factors in heart attacks occurring in men with pre-existing ischaemic heart disease. Br Heart J1988; 60:404–410.
24.
JousilahtiPPuskaPVartiainenEPekkanenJTuomilehtoJ.Parental history of premature coronary heart disease: An independent risk factor of myocardial infarction. J Clin Epidemiol1996; 49:497–503.
25.
GroverSLowensteynIEsreyKSteinertYJosephLAbrahamowichM.Do doctors accurately assess coronary risk in their patients? Preliminary results of the coronary health assessment study. BMJ1995; 310:975–978.
26.
HuntDLHaynesRBHannaSESmithK.Effects of computer-based clinical decision support systems on physician performance and patient outcomes: A systematic review [see comments]. JAMA1998; 280:1339–1346.
27.
MontgomeryAAFaheyT.A systematic review of the use of computers in the management of hypertension. J Epidemiol Community Health1998; 52:520–525.
28.
BolmanCde VriesH.Psycho-social Determinants and Motivational Phases in Smoking Behaviour of Cardiac Inpatients. Prev Med1998; 27:738–747.
29.
ProchaskaJODiClementeCVelicerWRossiJ.Standardized, individualized, interactive and personalized self-help programs for smoking cessation. Health Psychology1999; 12:399–405.
30.
EdwardsAElwynGGwynR.General practice registrar responses to the use of different risk communication tools in simulated consultations: A focus group study. BMJ1999; 319:749–752.
31.
JacksonR.Guidelines on preventing cardiovascular disease in clinical practice. Absolute risk rules-but raises the question of population screening. BMJ2000; 320:659–661.
32.
MenottiAPudduPELantiM.Comparison of the Framingham risk function-based coronary chart with risk function from an Italian population study. Eur Heart J2000; 21:365–370.
33.
AndersenPBorganØGillRKeidingN.Statistical Models Based on counting Processes. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1993.
