Evaluation of the American Heart Association Cardiovascular Disease Prevention Guideline for Women
- 1 March 2010
- journal article
- clinical trial
- Published by Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health) in Circulation: Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes
- Vol. 3 (2), 128-134
- https://doi.org/10.1161/circoutcomes.108.842385
Abstract
Background— The 2007 update to the American Heart Association (AHA) guidelines for cardiovascular disease prevention in women recommend a simplified approach to risk stratification. We assigned Women’s Health Initiative participants to risk categories as described in the guideline and evaluated clinical event rates within and between strata. Methods and Results— The Women’s Health Initiative enrolled 161 808 women ages 50 to 79 years and followed them prospectively for 7.8 years (mean). Applying the 2007 AHA guideline categories, 11% of women were high risk, 72% at-risk, and 4% at optimal risk; 13% of women did not fall into any category, that is, lacked risk factors but did not adhere to a healthy lifestyle (moderate intensity exercise for 30 minute most days and P for trend P for interaction=0.002). The AHA guideline predicted coronary events with accuracy similar to current Framingham risk categories (area under receiver operating characteristic curve for Framingham risk, 0.665; for AHA risk, 0.664; P =0.94) but less well than proposed Framingham 10-year risk categories of 20% (area under receiver operating characteristic curve for Framingham risk, 0.724; for AHA risk, 0.664; P Conclusions— Risk stratification as proposed in the 2007 AHA guideline is simple, accessible to patients and providers, and identifies cardiovascular risk with accuracy similar to that of the current Framingham algorithm. Clinical Trial Registration— clinicaltrials.gov. Identifier: NCT00000611.Keywords
This publication has 29 references indexed in Scilit:
- Who exceeds ATP-III risk thresholds? Systematic examination of the effect of varying age and risk factor levels in the ATP-III risk assessment toolPreventive Medicine, 2008
- Discordance Between Physicians' Estimation of Patient Cardiovascular Risk and Use of Evidence-Based Medical TherapyThe American Journal of Cardiology, 2008
- Does the routine use of global coronary heart disease risk scores translate into clinical benefits or harms? A systematic review of the literatureBMC Health Services Research, 2008
- Evidence-Based Guidelines for Cardiovascular Disease Prevention in Women: 2007 UpdateCirculation, 2007
- Effects of Conjugated Equine Estrogen on Stroke in the Women’s Health InitiativeCirculation, 2006
- Quality of cardiovascular disease preventive care and physician/practice characteristicsJournal of General Internal Medicine, 2006
- Should Age and Time Be Eliminated From Cardiovascular Risk Prediction Models?Circulation, 2005
- Framingham risk score and prediction of lifetime risk for coronary heart diseaseThe American Journal of Cardiology, 2004
- Response to Letter to the Editor regarding “The Completeness, Validity, and Timeliness of AIDS Surveillance Data”Annals of Epidemiology, 2003
- Walking Compared with Vigorous Exercise for the Prevention of Cardiovascular Events in WomenThe New England Journal of Medicine, 2002