The importance of validating the diagnosis of coronary heart disease when measuring secondary prevention: a cross-sectional study in general practice

被引:11
|
作者
Connolly, P
Cupples, ME
Cuene-Grandidier, H
Johnston, D
Passmore, P
机构
[1] Dunluce Hlth Ctr, Belfast BT9 7HR, Antrim, North Ireland
[2] Queens Univ Belfast, Dept Gen Practice, Data Retrieval Gen Practice Project, Belfast, Antrim, North Ireland
[3] Queens Univ Belfast, Dept Therapeut & Pharmacol, Belfast, Antrim, North Ireland
[4] Queens Univ Belfast, Dept Geriatr Med, Belfast, Antrim, North Ireland
关键词
coronary heart disease; secondary prevention; validation of diagnosis;
D O I
10.1002/pds.709
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要
Purpose To compare levels of recorded risk factors and drug treatment between patients with validated and non-validated diagnoses of coronary heart disease (CHD) in Northern Ireland. Methods Patients with a nitrate prescription in the previous year or a CHD Read code were identified from computer records of 25 practices, stratified by partnership size and area board. Computer and paper records of a random sample of 10% of these were searched for specified criteria to validate the diagnosis of CHD. The diagnosis was considered valid if the patient was found to have one or more positive investigations for CHD. Records of blood pressure, cholesterol, blood sugar, body mass index and drugs prescribed were taken into account. Results The combined practice population was 151071; 7338 (4.86%) were identified by the computer search as meeting the defined entry criteria for CHD. Among the 10% random sample the diagnosis of CHD could not be validated for 36.5% (265/27). Significantly more patients with a validated than non-validated diagnosis had recorded cholesterol levels below 5.0 mmol/l (55.8 vs. 34.5%, p < 0.001) and were prescribed aspirin (75.3 vs. 40.8%, p < 0.001), beta-blockers (51.5 vs. 28.3%, p < 0.001), angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors (29.2 vs. 15.5%, p < 0.001) and lipid-lowering drugs (50.9 vs. 23.0%, p < 0.001). A recent nitrate prescription had a higher predictive value for validated CHD than a Read code for CHD alone (71.2 vs. 53.1%, p < 0.001). No other significant differences were found between the two group, regarding the extent or levels of recorded risk factors. Conclusions Patients with a validated diagnosis of CHD appear to be better managed than those whose diagnosis has not been confirmed. Validation of diagnosis has important implications for assessing the provision of secondary prevention and for clinical governance. Copyright (C) 2002 John Wiley Sons, Ltd.
引用
下载
收藏
页码:311 / 317
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Primary prevention of coronary heart disease in general practice: a cross sectional population study
    Devroey, D
    Kartounian, J
    Vandevoorde, J
    Betz, W
    Cogge, M
    De Man, B
    De Ridder, L
    Block, P
    Van Gaal, L
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PRACTICE, 2004, 58 (02) : 130 - 138
  • [2] A Cross-Sectional Study of Risk Factors for Coronary Heart Disease in Secondary Prevention for Patients With the Disease in China
    Shen, Qianqian
    Wu, Yiyuan
    Zhou, Ying
    Yang, Na
    Yu, Juping
    Ouyang, Xinping
    He, Pingping
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NURSING, 2024,
  • [3] A cross-sectional study of skin cancer secondary prevention in rural general practice
    Kitchener, Scott
    Pinidiyapathirage, Janani
    Hunter, Keegan
    AUSTRALIAN JOURNAL OF GENERAL PRACTICE, 2020, 49 (07) : 447 - 450
  • [4] Comparing secondary prevention for patients with coronary heart disease and stroke attending Australian general practices: a cross-sectional study using nationwide electronicdatabase
    Yue, Jason
    Kazi, Samia
    Nguyen, Tu
    Chow, Clara Kayei
    BMJ QUALITY & SAFETY, 2024, 33 (08) : 499 - 510
  • [5] Emergency admissions for coronary heart disease: A cross-sectional study of general practice, population and hospital factors in England
    Purdy, S.
    Griffin, T.
    Salisbury, C.
    Sharp, D.
    PUBLIC HEALTH, 2011, 125 (01) : 46 - 54
  • [6] Secondary prevention in coronary heart disease: baseline survey of provision in general practice
    Campbell, NC
    Thain, J
    Deans, HG
    Ritchie, LD
    Rawles, JM
    BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 1998, 316 (7142): : 1430 - 1434
  • [7] Medical treatment and secondary prevention of coronary heart disease in general practice in Iceland
    Sigurdsson, EL
    Jónsson, JS
    Thorgeirsson, G
    SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF PRIMARY HEALTH CARE, 2002, 20 (01) : 10 - 15
  • [8] Secondary prevention of coronary heart disease: a cross-sectional analysis on the Brazilian Longitudinal Study of Adult Health (ELSA-Brasil)
    Birck, Marina Gabriela
    Goulart, Alessandra Carvalho
    Lotufo, Paulo Andrade
    Bensenor, Isabela Martins
    SAO PAULO MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2019, 137 (03): : 223 - 233
  • [9] Patient empowerment and general self-efficacy in patients with coronary heart disease: a cross-sectional study
    Kohler, Anita Karner
    Tingstrom, Pia
    Jaarsma, Tiny
    Nilsson, Staffan
    BMC FAMILY PRACTICE, 2018, 19
  • [10] Patient empowerment and general self-efficacy in patients with coronary heart disease: a cross-sectional study
    Anita Kärner Köhler
    Pia Tingström
    Tiny Jaarsma
    Staffan Nilsson
    BMC Family Practice, 19