Sex Differences in the Assessment of Cardiovascular Risk in Primary Health Care: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether sex differences exist in the assessment of cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk scores/risk factors in primary health care. DESIGN/METHODS: PubMed and EMBASE were systematically searched on 31 January 2017. Clinical trials and observational studies were included if they reported on the assessment of CVD risk score, blood pressure (BP), cholesterol or smoking status in primary health care, stratified by sex. Meta-analyses were performed, using random effects models, to determine differences between sexes, separately for adjusted and unadjusted data. RESULTS: Of 14,928 studies found in the search, 22 studies (including 4,754,782 patients) were included in the systematic review with the meta-analysis for quantitative assessment. Overall, the assessment rates of CVD risk score and risk factors were similar in women and men (CVD risk score: 30.7% vs. 35.2% [difference (95% CI): -4.5 (-5.1, -3.9)]; BP: 91.3% vs. 88.5% [2.8 (2.5, 3.0)]; cholesterol: 69.9% vs. 71.0% [-1.1 (-1.5, -0.8)]; and smoking: 85.9% vs. 86.7% [-0.8 (-1.1, -0.5)]). The pooled, adjusted likelihood of having the risk score, BP and cholesterol assessments were comparable between women and men: OR (95% CI): 0.87 (0.70, 1.07); 1.41 (0.89, 2.25); and 1.15 (0.82, 1.60), respectively. However, women were 32% less likely to be assessed for smoking (0.68 [0.47, 1.00]). There was substantial heterogeneity between studies and the risk of publication bias was moderate. CONCLUSION: Despite the guideline recommendations, assessment of CVD risk score in primary health care was low in both sexes. Further, women were less likely to be assessed for their smoking status than men, whereas no sex discrepancies were found for BP and cholesterol assessments.

Goldman score, but not Detsky or Lee indices, predicts mortality 6 months after hip fracture.

BACKGROUND: Over the past years, several cardiac risk indices were evaluated and modified, including Goldman, Detsky, and Lee scores. The predictive capacity of these scores in hip fracture patients is lacking. Thus, our objective was to compare the Goldman, Detsky, and Lee scores as predictors of mortality in 6 months after hip fracture. METHODS: We prospectively evaluated 80 consecutive patients with hip fractures, over the age of 65 admitted to an orthopedic ward at Botucatu Medical School. Patient demographic information, Goldman, Detsky and Lee scores were recorded. All patients were followed for 6 months after hip fracture, and mortality was recorded. Multiple logistic regression analyses were performed for mortality prediction. RESULTS: The mortality rate was 23% after a 6-month follow-up period. Patients who died had advanced age and the majority of them were male. They also had lower values of handgrip strength, and higher values of creatinine and urea. In the multiple logistic regression models when adjusted by age, gender, handgrip strength and creatinine, Goldman's score (OR:3.025; 95%CI:1.022-8.953; p:0.046), but not Detsky (OR:2.328; 95%CI:0.422-12.835; p:0.332) and Lee (OR:1.262; 95%CI:0.649-2.454; p:0.494), was associated with mortality 6 months after hip fracture. Each 1 category increase in Goldman score increased the mortality to more than 3-fold. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, our data suggest that Goldman score, but not Detsky or Lee indices, predicts mortality associated with hip fracture at up to 6 months post-injury.

Polyphenol intake and cardiovascular risk in the PREDIMED-Plus trial. A comparison of different risk equations.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Quantification of cardiovascular risk has been based on scores such as Framingham, Framingham-REGICOR, SCORE or Life's Simple 7 (LS7). In vitro, animal, and randomized clinical studies have shown that polyphenols may provide benefits to the vascular system and reduce the inflammatory response. However, some clinical-epidemiological studies have yielded inconsistent results. Our aim was to assess the possible association between intake of the various polyphenol classes and established cardiovascular scores. METHODS: This cross-sectional analysis involved 6633 PREDIMED-Plus study participants. Food polyphenol content was estimated by a semiquantitative food frequency questionnaire, adjusted for total energy intake according to the residual method. The association between polyphenol intake and cardiovascular risk was tested using linear regression analyses. RESULTS: Total polyphenol and flavonoid intake were directly and significantly associated only with the LS7 scale. Intake of lignans was directly and significantly associated with SCORE and LS7 scales, stilbene intake with SCORE, and phenolic acid intake with Framingham and Framingham-REGICOR scores. Other polyphenol classes were associated in a protective and significant manner in Framingham, SCORE and LS7 scores. In women, intake of all the polyphenol classes, except phenolic acids, showed a protective trend in the results of the Framingham, Framingham-REGICOR scores and LS7 scale. CONCLUSIONS: An inverse association was found between consumption of the 'other polyphenols' class and, especially among women, with estimated cardiovascular risk. The results were similar to those of Framingham, Framingham-REGICOR and LS7 (after eliminating the diet component) and differed from those of SCORE, but the predictors included were limited in the latter case.

Estimated 10-year cardiovascular risk in a large Italian cohort of rheumatoid arthritis patients: Data from the Cardiovascular Obesity and Rheumatic DISease (CORDIS) Study Group.

BACKGROUND: Several cardiovascular (CV) risk algorithms are available to predict CV events in the general population. However, their performance in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) might differ from the general population. This cross-sectional multicentre study aimed to estimate the 10-year CV risk using two different algorithms in a large RA cohort and in patients with osteoarthritis (OA). METHODS: In a consecutive series of RA patients and matched OA controls without prior CV events, clinical and serologic data and traditional CV risk factors were recorded. The 10-year CV risk was assessed with the Systematic COronary Risk Evaluation (SCORE) and the "Progetto Cuore" algorithms. RESULTS: 1,467 RA patients and 342 OA subjects were included. RA patients were more frequently diabetic (9.9% vs 6.4%; p=0.04) and smokers (20.4% vs 12.5%; p=0.002) but had lower prevalence of obesity (15% vs 21%; p=0.003). Dyslipidaemia was more prevalent in OA (32.5% vs 21.7%; p<0.0001). The 10-year estimated CV risk was 1.6% (95%CI 1.3-1.9) in RA and 1.4% (95%CI 1.3-1.6) in OA (p=0.002) according to SCORE and 6.5% (95%CI 6.1-6.9) in RA and 4.4% (95%CI 3.9-5.1) in OA (p<0.001) according to "Progetto Cuore". Regardless of the score used, RA patients had a 3- to-4-fold increased 10-year risk of CV events compared to OA subjects. CONCLUSION: RA patients have a significantly higher 10-year risk of CV events than OA subjects. In addition to effective disease control and joint damage prevention, specific protective measures targeting modifiable traditional CV risk factors should be implemented in RA.