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
  • [21] Barriers to adherence to secondary prevention therapy in patients with ischemic heart disease: a cross-sectional study of a Mexican reference center
    Orozco-Moreno, Jose R.
    Berrios-Barcenas, Enrique A.
    Palacios-Gutierrez, Dante
    Aldaco-Rodriguez, Alfonso R.
    Avila-Vanzzini, Nydia
    Cossio-Aranda, Jorge E.
    Del Valle-Chavez, Claudia
    Leyva-Balderas, Mario
    Maza-Larrea, Jose A.
    Roldan-Gomez, Francisco J.
    ARCHIVOS DE CARDIOLOGIA DE MEXICO, 2024,
  • [22] Periodontal disease, tooth loss and coronary heart disease assessed by coronary angiography: a cross-sectional observational study
    Zanella, S. M.
    Pereira, S. S.
    Barbisan, J. N.
    Vieira, L.
    Saba-Chujfi, E.
    Haas, A. N.
    Roesing, C. K.
    JOURNAL OF PERIODONTAL RESEARCH, 2016, 51 (02) : 221 - 227
  • [23] Drug Prescribing for Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease in General Practice: a Cross-Sectional Study
    Mahner, Maria
    Raus, Christina
    Ludwig, Fabian
    Weckmann, Gesine
    Stracke, Sylvia
    Chenot, Jean-Francois
    DEUTSCHE MEDIZINISCHE WOCHENSCHRIFT, 2018, 143 (12) : E99 - E107
  • [24] Prevalence of inflammatory bowel disease in the Australian general practice population: A cross-sectional study
    Busingye, Doreen
    Pollack, Allan
    Chidwick, Kendal
    PLOS ONE, 2021, 16 (05):
  • [25] General practice workload implications of the national service framework for coronary heart disease: cross sectional survey
    Hippisley-Cox, J
    Pringle, M
    BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2001, 323 (7307): : 269 - 270
  • [26] Gender and age differences in the secondary prevention of coronary heart disease in Scotland: a cross sectional study using primary care data
    Simpson, CR
    Hannaford, PJ
    Williams, D
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY, 2004, 57 (05) : 672 - 673
  • [27] Predicting Coronary Heart Disease in Remote Settings: A Prospective, Cross-sectional Observational Study
    Dwivedi, J.
    Sutcliffe, S.
    Easterbrook, L.
    Woods, C.
    Maguire, G. P.
    HEART LUNG AND CIRCULATION, 2014, 23 (08): : 737 - 742
  • [28] Learning Needs of Iranian Patients with Coronary Heart Disease: A Cross-sectional, Comparative Study
    Hassankhani, Hadi
    Haririan, Hamidreza
    Jafari, Arezoo
    Porter, Joanne E.
    O'Brien, Frances
    Feizollahzadeh, Hossein
    CLINICAL NURSING RESEARCH, 2021, 30 (02) : 193 - 199
  • [29] Wound care costs in general practice: a cross-sectional study
    Whitlock, Elizabeth
    Morcom, Jenny
    Spurling, Geoffrey
    Janamian, Tina
    Ryan, Seamus
    AUSTRALIAN FAMILY PHYSICIAN, 2014, 43 (03) : 143 - 146
  • [30] Secondary prevention of coronary heart disease in clinical practice: choosing the treatment
    Bubnova, M. G.
    CARDIOVASCULAR THERAPY AND PREVENTION, 2009, 8 (08): : 97 - 107