Validation’s importance of cardiovascular risk calculation in primary health care

Authors

  • Maria Gouveia Médica Interna de Medicina Geral e Familiar. USF São Julião, ACeS Lisboa Ocidental e Oeiras.
  • Inês Pimenta Rodrigues Médica Interna de Medicina Intensiva. Hospital Garcia de Orta, EPE.
  • Daniel Pinto Médico de família. USF São Julião, ACeS Lisboa Ocidental e Oeiras. Unidade de Medicina Geral e Familiar, NOVA Medical School, Faculdade de Ciências Médicas, Universidade Nova de Lisboa

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.32385/rpmgf.v34i3.12449

Keywords:

Cardiovascular diseases, Cardiovascular models, Validation studies, Primary health care.

Abstract

Introduction: Cardiovascular diseases are the most important cause of death in developed countries and non-fatal cardiovascular events contribute to significant morbidity in the population of these countries. Cardiovascular risk models currently used: Cardiovascular risk models consider the sum of risk factors present in a patient, attribute a quantitative value to the cardiovascular risk to certain fatal and non-fatal events and allow us to establish cut-offs to introduce preventive therapeutic measures. Among the most used cardiovascular risk models are the Systematic Coronary Risk Evaluation (SCORE) and Framingham equations. Validation studies of cardiovascular risk models: Despite their clinical utility, European studies showed that these models overestimate the observed risk of fatal and non-fatal cardiovascular events when applied to populations different from those they were derived from. Discussion: Currently there is no literature validating the use of these cardiovascular risk models in the Portuguese population, hence there is uncertainty whether or not the recommended models accurately measure risk in our population and if they should be used in clinical practice.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Published

2018-05-01

How to Cite

Validation’s importance of cardiovascular risk calculation in primary health care. (2018). Portuguese Journal of Family Medicine and General Practice, 34(3), 101-3. https://doi.org/10.32385/rpmgf.v34i3.12449

Most read articles by the same author(s)

1 2 3 > >>