Cargando…

GPs’ familiarity with and use of cardiovascular clinical prediction rules: a UK survey study

BACKGROUND: Clinical prediction rules (CPRs) can help general practitioners (GPs) address challenges in cardiovascular disease. A survey published in 2014 evaluated GPs’ awareness and use of CPRs in the UK. However, many new CPRs have been published since and it is unknown which cardiovascular CPRs...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ban, Jong-Wook, Perera, Rafael, Stevens, Richard
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Royal College of General Practitioners 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7880194/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33023870
http://dx.doi.org/10.3399/bjgpopen20X101081
_version_ 1783650662901350400
author Ban, Jong-Wook
Perera, Rafael
Stevens, Richard
author_facet Ban, Jong-Wook
Perera, Rafael
Stevens, Richard
author_sort Ban, Jong-Wook
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Clinical prediction rules (CPRs) can help general practitioners (GPs) address challenges in cardiovascular disease. A survey published in 2014 evaluated GPs’ awareness and use of CPRs in the UK. However, many new CPRs have been published since and it is unknown which cardiovascular CPRs are currently recognised and used. AIM: To identify cardiovascular CPRs recognised and used by GPs, and to assess how GPs’ familiarity and use have changed over time. DESIGN & SETTING: An online survey of GPs in the UK was undertaken. METHOD: Using comparable methods to the 2014 survey, GPs were recruited from a network of doctors in the UK. They were asked how familiar they were with cardiovascular CPRs, how frequently they used them, and why they used them. The results were compared with the 2014 survey. RESULTS: Most of 401 GPs were familiar with QRISK scores, ABCD scores, CHADS scores, HAS-BLED score, Wells scores for deep vein thrombosis, and Wells scores for pulmonary embolism. The proportions of GPs using these CPRs were 96.3%, 65.1%, 97.3%, 93.0%, 92.5%, and 82.0%, respectively. GPs’ use increased by 31.2% for QRISK scores, by 13.5% for ABCD scores, by 54.6% for CHADS scores, by 33.2% for Wells scores for deep vein thrombosis, and by 43.6% for Wells scores for pulmonary embolism; and decreased by 45.9% for the Joint British Societies (JBS) risk calculator, by 38.7% for Framingham risk scores, and by 8.7% for New Zealand tables. GPs most commonly used cardiovascular CPRs to guide therapy and referral. CONCLUSION: The study found GPs’ familiarity and use of cardiovascular CPRs changed substantially. Integrating CPRs into guidelines and practice software might increase familiarity and use.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7880194
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Royal College of General Practitioners
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-78801942021-02-23 GPs’ familiarity with and use of cardiovascular clinical prediction rules: a UK survey study Ban, Jong-Wook Perera, Rafael Stevens, Richard BJGP Open Research BACKGROUND: Clinical prediction rules (CPRs) can help general practitioners (GPs) address challenges in cardiovascular disease. A survey published in 2014 evaluated GPs’ awareness and use of CPRs in the UK. However, many new CPRs have been published since and it is unknown which cardiovascular CPRs are currently recognised and used. AIM: To identify cardiovascular CPRs recognised and used by GPs, and to assess how GPs’ familiarity and use have changed over time. DESIGN & SETTING: An online survey of GPs in the UK was undertaken. METHOD: Using comparable methods to the 2014 survey, GPs were recruited from a network of doctors in the UK. They were asked how familiar they were with cardiovascular CPRs, how frequently they used them, and why they used them. The results were compared with the 2014 survey. RESULTS: Most of 401 GPs were familiar with QRISK scores, ABCD scores, CHADS scores, HAS-BLED score, Wells scores for deep vein thrombosis, and Wells scores for pulmonary embolism. The proportions of GPs using these CPRs were 96.3%, 65.1%, 97.3%, 93.0%, 92.5%, and 82.0%, respectively. GPs’ use increased by 31.2% for QRISK scores, by 13.5% for ABCD scores, by 54.6% for CHADS scores, by 33.2% for Wells scores for deep vein thrombosis, and by 43.6% for Wells scores for pulmonary embolism; and decreased by 45.9% for the Joint British Societies (JBS) risk calculator, by 38.7% for Framingham risk scores, and by 8.7% for New Zealand tables. GPs most commonly used cardiovascular CPRs to guide therapy and referral. CONCLUSION: The study found GPs’ familiarity and use of cardiovascular CPRs changed substantially. Integrating CPRs into guidelines and practice software might increase familiarity and use. Royal College of General Practitioners 2020-10-07 /pmc/articles/PMC7880194/ /pubmed/33023870 http://dx.doi.org/10.3399/bjgpopen20X101081 Text en Copyright © 2020, The Authors https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This article is Open Access: CC BY license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
spellingShingle Research
Ban, Jong-Wook
Perera, Rafael
Stevens, Richard
GPs’ familiarity with and use of cardiovascular clinical prediction rules: a UK survey study
title GPs’ familiarity with and use of cardiovascular clinical prediction rules: a UK survey study
title_full GPs’ familiarity with and use of cardiovascular clinical prediction rules: a UK survey study
title_fullStr GPs’ familiarity with and use of cardiovascular clinical prediction rules: a UK survey study
title_full_unstemmed GPs’ familiarity with and use of cardiovascular clinical prediction rules: a UK survey study
title_short GPs’ familiarity with and use of cardiovascular clinical prediction rules: a UK survey study
title_sort gps’ familiarity with and use of cardiovascular clinical prediction rules: a uk survey study
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7880194/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33023870
http://dx.doi.org/10.3399/bjgpopen20X101081
work_keys_str_mv AT banjongwook gpsfamiliaritywithanduseofcardiovascularclinicalpredictionrulesauksurveystudy
AT pererarafael gpsfamiliaritywithanduseofcardiovascularclinicalpredictionrulesauksurveystudy
AT stevensrichard gpsfamiliaritywithanduseofcardiovascularclinicalpredictionrulesauksurveystudy