Amariles, P. , MACHUCA GONZÁLEZ, MANUEL JESÚS, Faus, M. J. , Baena, M. I. , Martinez-Martinez, F. , Jimenez-Martin, J.
No
J. Clin. Pharm. Ther.
Article
Científica
1.755
0.519
01/10/2008
000259310000003
Background: The assessment and follow-up of patients with risk factors, or with cardiovascular disease (CVD), involves estimating and monitoring their CVD risk (CVDR). There are different opinions about the most appropriate method for this. Objective: To compare the SCORE system and the Wilson-Grundy system (based on Framingham's study). Methods: A descriptive, observational study over 15 days in six pharmacies, with patients aged between 25 and 74 years, and with a prescription for medications related to hypertension, dyslipidaemia, CVD prevention or type-2 diabetes. Results of patients' absolute CVDR were assessed and compared using the SCORE system and the Wilson-Grundy method, adapted for Spain. The Chi-square test was used to compare proportions, and the Student t-test was used to compare mean values, including odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95%CI). Result: A total of 257 patients [165 women, 92 men; mean (SD) age, 60.9 (10.8) years; percentage of previous medical history of hypertension (70.0%), dyslipidaemia (42.4%), type-2 diabetes (19.5%) and CVD (22.6%)] participated. With the CVDR assessed with SCORE, the distribution was as follows: low 35.8%, intermediate 21.0% and high 43.2%. The corresponding values using the Wilson-Grundy system was low 60.7%, intermediate 8.2% and high 31.1%. Conclusion: The cardiovascular risk of patients that attend community pharmacies with prescriptions for cardiovascular medications is significantly higher when assessed using the SCORE system than with the Wilson-Grundy method.
cardiovascular disease risk; community pharmacies; pharmacotherapeutic follow-up; SCORE system; Wilson-Grundy method