Cargando…

Validity of a method for the self-screening of cardiovascular risk

BACKGROUND: The validity of a cardiovascular risk self-screening method was assessed. The results obtained for self-measurement of blood pressure, a point-of-care system’s assessment of lipid profile and glycated hemoglobin, and a self-administered questionnaire (sex, age, diabetes, tobacco consumpt...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Barroso, María, Pérez-Fernández, Silvia, Vila, M Mar, Zomeño, M Dolors, Martí-Lluch, Ruth, Cordon, Ferran, Ramos, Rafel, Elosua, Roberto, Degano, Irene R, Fitó, Montse, Cabezas, Carmen, Salvador, Gemma, Castell, Conxa, Grau, María
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove Medical Press 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5953309/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29785141
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CLEP.S158358
_version_ 1783323336648949760
author Barroso, María
Pérez-Fernández, Silvia
Vila, M Mar
Zomeño, M Dolors
Martí-Lluch, Ruth
Cordon, Ferran
Ramos, Rafel
Elosua, Roberto
Degano, Irene R
Fitó, Montse
Cabezas, Carmen
Salvador, Gemma
Castell, Conxa
Grau, María
author_facet Barroso, María
Pérez-Fernández, Silvia
Vila, M Mar
Zomeño, M Dolors
Martí-Lluch, Ruth
Cordon, Ferran
Ramos, Rafel
Elosua, Roberto
Degano, Irene R
Fitó, Montse
Cabezas, Carmen
Salvador, Gemma
Castell, Conxa
Grau, María
author_sort Barroso, María
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The validity of a cardiovascular risk self-screening method was assessed. The results obtained for self-measurement of blood pressure, a point-of-care system’s assessment of lipid profile and glycated hemoglobin, and a self-administered questionnaire (sex, age, diabetes, tobacco consumption) were compared with the standard screening (gold standard) conducted by a health professional. METHODS: Crossover clinical trial on a population-based sample from Girona (north-eastern Spain), aged 35–74, with no cardiovascular disease at recruitment. Participants were randomized to one of the two risk assessment sequences (standard screening followed by self-screening or vice versa). Cardiovascular risk was estimated with the Framingham-REGICOR function. Concordance between methods was estimated with the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were estimated, considering 5% cardiovascular risk as the cutoff point. ClinicalTrials.gov Registration #NCT02373319. Clinical Research Ethic Committee of the Parc de Salut Mar Registration #2014/5815/I. RESULTS: The median cardiovascular risk in men was 2.56 (interquartile range: 1.42–4.35) estimated by standard methods and 2.25 (1.28–4.07) by self-screening with ICC=0.92 (95% CI: 0.90–0.93). In women, the cardiovascular risk was 1.14 (0.61–2.10) by standard methods and 1.10 (0.56–2.00) by self-screening, with ICC=0.89 (0.87–0.90). The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values for the self-screening method were 0.74 (0.63–0.82), 0.97 (0.95–0.99), 0.86 (0.77–0.93), and 0.94 (0.91–0.96), respectively, in men. In women, these values were 0.50 (0.30–0.70), 0.99 (0.98–1), 0.81 (0.54–0.96), and 0.97 (0.95–0.99), respectively. CONCLUSION: The self-screening method for assessing cardiovascular risk provided similar results to the standard method. Self-screening had high clinical performance to rule out intermediate or high cardiovascular risk.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5953309
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Dove Medical Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-59533092018-05-21 Validity of a method for the self-screening of cardiovascular risk Barroso, María Pérez-Fernández, Silvia Vila, M Mar Zomeño, M Dolors Martí-Lluch, Ruth Cordon, Ferran Ramos, Rafel Elosua, Roberto Degano, Irene R Fitó, Montse Cabezas, Carmen Salvador, Gemma Castell, Conxa Grau, María Clin Epidemiol Original Research BACKGROUND: The validity of a cardiovascular risk self-screening method was assessed. The results obtained for self-measurement of blood pressure, a point-of-care system’s assessment of lipid profile and glycated hemoglobin, and a self-administered questionnaire (sex, age, diabetes, tobacco consumption) were compared with the standard screening (gold standard) conducted by a health professional. METHODS: Crossover clinical trial on a population-based sample from Girona (north-eastern Spain), aged 35–74, with no cardiovascular disease at recruitment. Participants were randomized to one of the two risk assessment sequences (standard screening followed by self-screening or vice versa). Cardiovascular risk was estimated with the Framingham-REGICOR function. Concordance between methods was estimated with the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were estimated, considering 5% cardiovascular risk as the cutoff point. ClinicalTrials.gov Registration #NCT02373319. Clinical Research Ethic Committee of the Parc de Salut Mar Registration #2014/5815/I. RESULTS: The median cardiovascular risk in men was 2.56 (interquartile range: 1.42–4.35) estimated by standard methods and 2.25 (1.28–4.07) by self-screening with ICC=0.92 (95% CI: 0.90–0.93). In women, the cardiovascular risk was 1.14 (0.61–2.10) by standard methods and 1.10 (0.56–2.00) by self-screening, with ICC=0.89 (0.87–0.90). The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values for the self-screening method were 0.74 (0.63–0.82), 0.97 (0.95–0.99), 0.86 (0.77–0.93), and 0.94 (0.91–0.96), respectively, in men. In women, these values were 0.50 (0.30–0.70), 0.99 (0.98–1), 0.81 (0.54–0.96), and 0.97 (0.95–0.99), respectively. CONCLUSION: The self-screening method for assessing cardiovascular risk provided similar results to the standard method. Self-screening had high clinical performance to rule out intermediate or high cardiovascular risk. Dove Medical Press 2018-05-10 /pmc/articles/PMC5953309/ /pubmed/29785141 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CLEP.S158358 Text en © 2018 Barroso et al. This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed.
spellingShingle Original Research
Barroso, María
Pérez-Fernández, Silvia
Vila, M Mar
Zomeño, M Dolors
Martí-Lluch, Ruth
Cordon, Ferran
Ramos, Rafel
Elosua, Roberto
Degano, Irene R
Fitó, Montse
Cabezas, Carmen
Salvador, Gemma
Castell, Conxa
Grau, María
Validity of a method for the self-screening of cardiovascular risk
title Validity of a method for the self-screening of cardiovascular risk
title_full Validity of a method for the self-screening of cardiovascular risk
title_fullStr Validity of a method for the self-screening of cardiovascular risk
title_full_unstemmed Validity of a method for the self-screening of cardiovascular risk
title_short Validity of a method for the self-screening of cardiovascular risk
title_sort validity of a method for the self-screening of cardiovascular risk
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5953309/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29785141
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CLEP.S158358
work_keys_str_mv AT barrosomaria validityofamethodfortheselfscreeningofcardiovascularrisk
AT perezfernandezsilvia validityofamethodfortheselfscreeningofcardiovascularrisk
AT vilammar validityofamethodfortheselfscreeningofcardiovascularrisk
AT zomenomdolors validityofamethodfortheselfscreeningofcardiovascularrisk
AT martilluchruth validityofamethodfortheselfscreeningofcardiovascularrisk
AT cordonferran validityofamethodfortheselfscreeningofcardiovascularrisk
AT ramosrafel validityofamethodfortheselfscreeningofcardiovascularrisk
AT elosuaroberto validityofamethodfortheselfscreeningofcardiovascularrisk
AT deganoirener validityofamethodfortheselfscreeningofcardiovascularrisk
AT fitomontse validityofamethodfortheselfscreeningofcardiovascularrisk
AT cabezascarmen validityofamethodfortheselfscreeningofcardiovascularrisk
AT salvadorgemma validityofamethodfortheselfscreeningofcardiovascularrisk
AT castellconxa validityofamethodfortheselfscreeningofcardiovascularrisk
AT graumaria validityofamethodfortheselfscreeningofcardiovascularrisk