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

dc.contributor.authorBarroso, María
dc.contributor.authorPérez Fernández, Silvia
dc.contributor.authorVila Muñoz, Maria del Mar
dc.contributor.authorZomeño Fajardo, María Dolores
dc.contributor.authorMartí Lluch, Ruth
dc.contributor.authorCordón Granados, Ferran
dc.contributor.authorRamos, Rafel
dc.contributor.authorElosua, Roberto
dc.contributor.authorDegano, Irene R.
dc.contributor.authorFitó Colomer, Montserrat
dc.contributor.authorCabezas, Carmen
dc.contributor.authorSalvador i Castell, Gemma
dc.contributor.authorCastell, Conxa
dc.contributor.authorGrau, Maria
dc.date.accessioned2021-06-10T15:33:45Z
dc.date.available2021-06-10T15:33:45Z
dc.date.issued2018-05-10
dc.date.updated2021-06-10T15:33:45Z
dc.description.abstractBackground: 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.
dc.format.extent28 p.
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.identifier.idgrec696065
dc.identifier.issn1179-1349
dc.identifier.pmid29785141
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2445/178232
dc.language.isoeng
dc.relation.isformatofhttps://doi.org/10.2147/CLEP.S158358
dc.relation.ispartofClinical Epidemiology, 2018, vol. 10, p. 549-560
dc.relation.urihttps://doi.org/10.2147/CLEP.S158358
dc.rights, 2018
dc.rights.accessRightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.sourceArticles publicats en revistes (Medicina)
dc.subject.classificationMalalties cardiovasculars
dc.subject.classificationEpidemiologia
dc.subject.otherCardiovascular diseases
dc.subject.otherEpidemiology
dc.titleValidity of a method for the self-screening of cardiovascular risk
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/article

Fitxers

Paquet original

Mostrant 1 - 1 de 1
Carregant...
Miniatura
Nom:
696065.pdf
Mida:
400.42 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format