Cargando…

Treatment in a preventive cardiology clinic utilizing advanced practice providers effectively closes atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk‐management gaps among a primary‐prevention population compared with a propensity‐matched primary‐care cohort: A team‐based care model and its impact on lipid and blood pressure management

BACKGROUND: Advanced practice providers (APPs) can fill care gaps created by physician shortages and improve adherence/compliance with preventive ASCVD interventions. HYPOTHESIS: APPs utilizing guideline‐based algorithms will more frequently escalate ASCVD risk factor therapies. METHODS: We retrospe...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Fentanes, Emilio, Vande Hei, Anthony G., Holuby, R. Scott, Suarez, Norma, Slim, Yousif, Slim, Jennifer N., Slim, Ahmad M., Thomas, Dustin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wiley Periodicals, Inc. 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6489740/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29667200
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/clc.22963
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Advanced practice providers (APPs) can fill care gaps created by physician shortages and improve adherence/compliance with preventive ASCVD interventions. HYPOTHESIS: APPs utilizing guideline‐based algorithms will more frequently escalate ASCVD risk factor therapies. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed data on 595 patients enrolled in a preventive cardiology clinic (PCC) utilizing APPs compared with a propensity‐matched cohort (PMC) of 595 patients enrolled in primary‐care clinics alone. PCC patients were risk‐stratified using Framingham Risk Score (FRS) and coronary artery calcium scoring (CACS). RESULTS: Baseline demographics were balanced between the groups. CACS was more commonly obtained in PCC patients (P < 0.001), resulting in reclassification of 30.6% patients to a higher risk category, including statin therapy in 26.6% of low‐FRS PCC patients with CACS ≥75th MESA percentile. Aspirin initiation was higher for high and intermediate FRS patients in the PCC (P < 0.001). Post‐intervention mean LDL‐C, non–HDL‐C, and triglycerides (all P < 0.05) were lower in the PCC group. Compliance with appropriate lipid treatment was higher in intermediate to high FRS patients (P = 0.004) in the PCC group. Aggressive LDL‐C and non–HDL‐C treatment goals (<70 mg/dL, P = 0.005 and < 130 mg/dL, P < 0.001, respectively), were more commonly achieved in high‐FRS PCC patients. Median post‐intervention SBP was lower among intermediate and low FRS patients (P = 0.001 and P < 0.001, respectively). Cumulatively, this resulted in a reduction in median post‐intervention PCC FRS across all initial FRS risk categories (P < 0.001 for all). CONCLUSIONS: APPs within a PCC effectively risk‐stratify and aggressively manage ASCVD risk factors, resulting in a reduction in post‐intervention FRS.