» Articles » PMID: 7742678

Strategies for Reducing Coronary Risk Factors in Primary Care: Which is Most Cost Effective?

Overview
Journal BMJ
Specialty General Medicine
Date 1995 Apr 29
PMID 7742678
Citations 25
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objective: To examine the relative cost effectiveness of a range of screening and intervention strategies for preventing coronary heart disease in primary care.

Subjects: 7840 patients aged 35-64 years who were participants in a trial of modifying coronary heart disease risk factors in primary care.

Design: Effectiveness of interventions assumed and the potential years of life gained estimated from a risk equation calculated from Framingham study data.

Main Outcome Measure: The cost per year of life gained.

Results: The most cost effective strategy was minimal screening of blood pressure and personal history of vascular disease, which cost 310 pounds-930 pounds per year of life gained for men and 1100 pounds-3460 pounds for women excluding treatment of raised blood pressure. The extra cost per life year gained by adding smoking history to the screening was 400 pounds-6300 pounds in men. All strategies were more cost effective in men than in women and more cost effective in older age groups. Lipid lowering drugs accounted for at least 70% of the estimated costs of all strategies. Cost effectiveness was greatest when drug treatment was limited to those with cholesterol concentrations above 9.5 mmol/l.

Conclusions: Universal screening and intervention strategies are an inefficient approach to reducing the coronary heart disease burden. A basic strategy for screening and intervention, targeted at older men with raised blood pressure and limiting the use of cholesterol lowering drugs to those with very high cholesterol concentrations would be most cost effective.

Citing Articles

Contribution of life course cardiovascular risk factors to racial disparities in dementia incidence.

Ferguson E, Vittinghoff E, Zeki Al Hazzouri A, Allen N, Fitzpatrick A, Yaffe K Front Dement. 2024; 2:1215904.

PMID: 39081968 PMC: 11285666. DOI: 10.3389/frdem.2023.1215904.


A Proposed Strategy against Obesity: How Government Policy Can Counter the Obesogenic Environment.

Temple N Nutrients. 2023; 15(13).

PMID: 37447235 PMC: 10343522. DOI: 10.3390/nu15132910.


Organised and opportunistic prevention in primary health care: estimation of missed opportunities by population based health interview surveys in Hungary.

Sandor J, Tokaji I, Harsha N, Papp M, Adany R, Czifra A BMC Fam Pract. 2020; 21(1):120.

PMID: 32580703 PMC: 7315493. DOI: 10.1186/s12875-020-01200-2.


Should health insurers target prevention of cardiovascular disease? A cost-effectiveness analysis of an individualised programme in Germany based on routine data.

Aljutaili M, Becker C, Witt S, Holle R, Leidl R, Block M BMC Health Serv Res. 2014; 14:263.

PMID: 24938674 PMC: 4086686. DOI: 10.1186/1472-6963-14-263.


The effect of a cardiovascular educational intervention on healthcare utilization and costs.

Nawathe A, Glied S, Weintraub W, Mosca L Am J Manag Care. 2010; 16(5):339-46.

PMID: 20469954 PMC: 2956438.


References
1.
Anderson K, Odell P, Wilson P, Kannel W . Cardiovascular disease risk profiles. Am Heart J. 1991; 121(1 Pt 2):293-8. DOI: 10.1016/0002-8703(91)90861-b. View

2.
Silagy C, Mant D, Carpenter L, Muir J, Neil A . Modelling different strategies to prevent coronary heart disease in primary care. J Clin Epidemiol. 1994; 47(9):993-1001. DOI: 10.1016/0895-4356(94)90114-7. View

3.
Stott N . Screening for cardiovascular risk in general practice. BMJ. 1994; 308(6924):285-6. PMC: 2539271. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.308.6924.285. View