Implications of applying widely accepted cholesterol screening and management guidelines to a British adult population: cross sectional study of cardiovascular disease and risk factors
- 24 October 1998
- Vol. 317 (7166) , 1125-1130
- https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.317.7166.1125
Abstract
Objective: To compare the implications of four widely used cholesterol screening and treatment guidelines by applying them to a population in the United Kingdom. Design: Guidelines were applied to population based data from a cross sectional study of cardiovascular disease and risk factors. Setting: Newcastle upon Tyne,United Kingdom. Subjects: General population sample (predominantly of European origin) of 322 men and 319 women aged 25-64 years. Main outcome measures: Proportions recommended for screening and treatment. Methods:Criteria from the British Hyperlipidaemia Association, the British Drugs and Therapeutics Bulletin (which used the Sheffield table), the European Atherosclerosis Society, and the American national cholesterol education programme were applied to the population. Results: Proportions recommended for treatment varied appreciably. Based on the British Drugs and Therapeutics Bulletin guidelines, treatment was recommended for 5.3% (95% confidence interval 2.9% to 7.7%) of men and 3.3% (1.5% to 5.3%) of women, while equivalent respective values were 4.6 (2.3 to 6.9) and 2.8 (1.0 to 4.6) for the British Hyperlipidaemia Association, 23% (18.4% to 27.6%) and 10.6% (7.3% to 14.0%) for the European Atherosclerosis Society, and 37.2% (31.9% to 42.5%) and 22.2% (17.6% to 26.8%) for the national cholesterol education programme. Only the British Hyperlipidaemia Association and Drugs and Therapeutics Bulletin guidelines recommend selective screening. Applying British Hyperlipidaemia Association guidelines,from 7.1% (4.3% to 9.9%) of men in level one to 56.7% (51.3% to 62.1%) of men in level three, and from 4.4% (2.1% to 6.7%) of women in level one to 54.4% (48.9% to 59.9%) of women in level three would have been recommended for cholesterol screening. Had the Drugs andTherapeutics Bulletin guidelines been applied, 22.2% (16.5% to27.9%) of men and 12.2% (8.6% to 15.8%) of women would have been screened. Conclusions: Without evidence based guidelines, there are problems of variation. A consistent approach needs to be developed and agreed across the United Kingdom.Keywords
This publication has 19 references indexed in Scilit:
- Low levels of cardiovascular risk factors and coronary heart disease in a UK Chinese population.Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 1997
- Body mass index, waist circumference, waist-hip ratio, and glucose intolerance in Chinese and Europid adults in Newcastle, UK.Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 1997
- Management of hyperlipidaemiaDrug and Therapeutics Bulletin, 1996
- The Effect of Pravastatin on Coronary Events after Myocardial Infarction in Patients with Average Cholesterol LevelsNew England Journal of Medicine, 1996
- Prevention of Coronary Heart Disease with Pravastatin in Men with HypercholesterolemiaNew England Journal of Medicine, 1995
- Randomised trial of cholesterol lowering in 4444 patients with coronary heart disease: the Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study (4S)The Lancet, 1994
- Antibodies to glutamic acid decarboxylase as predictors of insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus before clinical onset of diseaseThe Lancet, 1994
- Effect of clinical guidelines on medical practice: a systematic review of rigorous evaluationsPublished by Elsevier ,1993
- Management of hyperlipidaemia: guidelines of the British Hyperlipidaemia AssociationPublished by Oxford University Press (OUP) ,1993
- The classification of ethnic status using name information.Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 1988