Abstract
Background: Management of borderline hypertension and hypercholesterolaemia is based on an individual's coronary heart disease (CHD) risk rather than arbitrary values for blood pressure or serum cholesterol. Prediction of CHD risk involves using tables, charts, or computer programs based on the Framingham equations. The new Sheffield table and modified joint British societies coronary risk prediction (JBS) chart are widely used. The JBS chart approximates age and systolic blood pressure, and the new Sheffield table dichotomises blood pressure, and these simplifications may lead to diagnostic inaccuracy.
Methods: The diagnostic performance of the charts against an individualised laboratory based CHD risk calculation in 1102 subjects in primary care were evaluated and compared.
Results: The new Sheffield table and modified JBS chart performed equally well with a respective diagnostic sensitivity and specificity of 91.6% (95% confidence interval 86.7% to 95.1%) and 93.8% (91.1% to 97.9%), and 93.6% (90.4% to 96.0%) and 94.7% (92.6% to 96.1%) at 10 year CHD risk of 15%; and of 95.2% (82.8% to 99.4%) and 97.9% (96.8% to 98.7%), and 90.5% (75.6% to 97.4%) and 100% (99.7% to 100%) at 10 year CHD risk of 30%.
The modified JBS chart graphic display provides graded risk, which may be an advantage over the new Sheffield table, which identifies thresholds of risk. The new Sheffield table, unlike any other method, can be used as screening tool for cholesterol measurement.
Conclusions: The new Sheffield table and modified JBS chart are valid for use in primary care since their diagnostic accuracy is unaffected by approximations in age and blood pressure. It is suggested that practitioners should choose whichever risk assessment tool they are comfortable with and use it.
Full Text
The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (89.2 KB).
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Anderson K. M., Odell P. M., Wilson P. W., Kannel W. B. Cardiovascular disease risk profiles. Am Heart J. 1991 Jan;121(1 Pt 2):293–298. doi: 10.1016/0002-8703(91)90861-b. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Bayly G. R., Bartlett W. A., Davies P. H., Husband D., Haddon A., Game F. L., Jones A. F. Laboratory-based calculation of coronary heart disease risk in a hospital diabetic clinic. Diabet Med. 1999 Aug;16(8):697–701. doi: 10.1046/j.1464-5491.1999.00091.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Geberhiwot T., Jones A. F., Bartlett W. A., Husband D., Martin S. C. Laboratory-based calculation of coronary heart disease risk. Clin Chem. 2001 Mar;47(3):589–591. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Grover S. A., Lowensteyn I., Esrey K. L., Steinert Y., Joseph L., Abrahamowicz M. Do doctors accurately assess coronary risk in their patients? Preliminary results of the coronary health assessment study. BMJ. 1995 Apr 15;310(6985):975–978. doi: 10.1136/bmj.310.6985.975. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Haq I. U., Ramsay L. E., Jackson P. R., Wallis E. J. Prediction of coronary risk for primary prevention of coronary heart disease: a comparison of methods. QJM. 1999 Jul;92(7):379–385. doi: 10.1093/qjmed/92.7.379. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Hingorani A. D., Vallance P. A simple computer program for guiding management of cardiovascular risk factors and prescribing. BMJ. 1999 Jan 9;318(7176):101–105. doi: 10.1136/bmj.318.7176.101. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Isles C. G., Ritchie L. D., Murchie P., Norrie J. Risk assessment in primary prevention of coronary heart disease: randomised comparison of three scoring methods. BMJ. 2000 Mar 11;320(7236):690–691. doi: 10.1136/bmj.320.7236.690. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Jones A. F., Walker J., Jewkes C., Game F. L., Bartlett W. A., Marshall T., Bayly G. R. Comparative accuracy of cardiovascular risk prediction methods in primary care patients. Heart. 2001 Jan;85(1):37–43. doi: 10.1136/heart.85.1.37. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Messerli F. H., Mittler B. S. Framingham at 50. Lancet. 1998 Sep 26;352(9133):1006–1006. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(05)60073-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Montgomery A. A., Fahey T., MacKintosh C., Sharp D. J., Peters T. J. Estimation of cardiovascular risk in hypertensive patients in primary care. Br J Gen Pract. 2000 Feb;50(451):127–128. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Pringle M. Preventing ischaemic heart disease in one general practice: from one patient, through clinical audit, needs assessment, and commissioning into quality improvement. BMJ. 1998 Oct 24;317(7166):1120–1124. doi: 10.1136/bmj.317.7166.1120. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Ramachandran S., French J. M., Vanderpump M. P., Croft P., Neary R. H. Using the Framingham model to predict heart disease in the United Kingdom: retrospective study. BMJ. 2000 Mar 11;320(7236):676–677. doi: 10.1136/bmj.320.7236.676. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Ramachandran S., Labib M. H. Hyperlipidaemia and primary prevention of coronary heart disease: are the right patients being treated? J Cardiovasc Risk. 2000 Aug;7(4):245–249. doi: 10.1177/204748730000700401. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Ramsay L. E., Williams B., Johnston G. D., MacGregor G. A., Poston L., Potter J. F., Poulter N. R., Russell G. British Hypertension Society guidelines for hypertension management 1999: summary. BMJ. 1999 Sep 4;319(7210):630–635. doi: 10.1136/bmj.319.7210.630. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Wallis E. J., Ramsay L. E., Ul Haq I., Ghahramani P., Jackson P. R., Rowland-Yeo K., Yeo W. W. Coronary and cardiovascular risk estimation for primary prevention: validation of a new Sheffield table in the 1995 Scottish health survey population. BMJ. 2000 Mar 11;320(7236):671–676. doi: 10.1136/bmj.320.7236.671. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]