Is opportunistic disease prevention in the consultation ethically justifiable?

To access publisher version of this article. Please click on the hyperlink in Additional Links fieldTo access full text version of this article. Please click on the hyperlink "View/Open" at the bottom of this pageMedical resources are increasingly shifting from making patients better to preventing them from becoming ill. Genetic testing is likely to extend the list of conditions that can be screened for. Is it time to stop and consider whom we screen and how we approach it

Estimating the high risk group for cardiovascular disease in the Norwegian HUNT 2 population according to the 2003 European guidelines: modelling study.

To access publisher full text version of this article. Please click on the hyperlink in Additional Links fieldOBJECTIVE: To estimate the high risk group for cardiovascular disease in a well defined Norwegian population according to European guidelines and the systematic coronary risk evaluation system. DESIGN: Modelling study. SETTING: Nord-Tröndelag health study 1995-7 (HUNT 2), Norway. PARTICIPANTS: 5548 participants of the Nord-Tröndelag health study 1995-7, aged 40, 50, 55, 60, and 65. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Distribution of risk categories for cardiovascular disease, with emphasis on the high risk group. MAIN RESULTS: At age 40, 22.5% (95% confidence interval 19.3% to 25.7%) of women and 85.9% (83.2% to 88.6%) of men were at high risk of cardiovascular disease. Corresponding numbers at age 50 were 39.5% (35.9% to 43.1%) and 88.7% (86.3% to 91.0%) and at age 65 were 84.0% (80.6% to 87.4%) and 91.6% (88.6% to 94.1%). At age 40, one out of 10 women and no men would be classified at low risk for cardiovascular disease. CONCLUSION: Implementation of the 2003 European guidelines on prevention of cardiovascular disease in clinical practice would classify most adult Norwegians at high risk for fatal cardiovascular disease

Body Configuration as a Predictor of Mortality: Comparison of Five Anthropometric Measures in a 12 Year Follow-Up of the Norwegian HUNT 2 Study

Background: Distribution of body fat is more important than the amount of fat as a prognostic factor for life expectancy. Despite that, body mass index (BMI) still holds its status as the most used indicator of obesity in clinical work. Methods: We assessed the association of five different anthropometric measures with mortality in general and cardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality in particular using Cox proportional hazards models. Predictive properties were compared by computing integrated discrimination improvement and net reclassification improvement for two different prediction models. The measures studied were BMI, waist circumference, hip circumference, waist-to-hip ratio (WHR), and waist-to-height ratio (WHtR). The study population was a prospective cohort of 62,223 Norwegians, age 20–79, followed up for mortality from 1995–1997 to the end of 2008 (mean follow-up 12.0 years) in the Nord-Trøndelag Health Study (HUNT 2). Results: After adjusting for age, smoking and physical activity WHR and WHtR were found to be the strongest predictors of death. Hazard ratios (HRs) for CVD mortality per increase in WHR of one standard deviation were 1.23 for men and 1.27 for women. For WHtR, these HRs were 1.24 for men and 1.23 for women. WHR offered the greatest integrated discrimination improvement to the prediction models studied, followed by WHtR and waist circumference. Hip circumference was in strong inverse association with mortality when adjusting for waist circumference. In all analyses, BMI had weaker association with mortality than three of the other four measures studied. Conclusions: Our study adds further knowledge to the evidence that BMI is not the most appropriate measure of obesity in everyday clinical practice. WHR can reliably be measured and is as easy to calculate as BMI and is currently better documented than WHtR. It appears reasonable to recommend WHR as the primary measure of body composition and obesity

Current European guidelines for management of arterial hypertension: Are they adequate for use in primary care? Modelling study based on the Norwegian HUNT 2 population

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Previous studies indicate that clinical guidelines using combined risk evaluation for cardiovascular diseases (CVD) may overestimate risk. The aim of this study was to model and discuss implementation of the current (2007) hypertension guidelines in a general Norwegian population.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Implementation of the current <it>European Guidelines for the Management of Arterial Hypertension </it>was modelled on data from a cross-sectional, representative Norwegian population study (The Nord-Trøndelag Health Study 1995-97), comprising 65,028 adults, aged 20-89, of whom 51,066 (79%) were eligible for modelling.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Among individuals with blood pressure ≥120/80 mmHg, 93% (74% of the total, adult population) would need regular clinical attention and/or drug treatment, based on their total CVD risk profile. This translates into 296,624 follow-up visits/100,000 adults/year. In the Norwegian healthcare environment, 99 general practitioner (GP) positions would be required in the study region for this task alone. The number of GPs currently serving the adult population in the study area is 87 per 100,000 adults.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The potential workload associated with the European hypertension guidelines could destabilise the healthcare system in Norway, one of the world's most long- and healthy-living nations, by international comparison. Large-scale, preventive medical enterprises can hardly be regarded as scientifically sound and ethically justifiable, unless issues of practical feasibility, sustainability and social determinants of health are considered.</p

Mild-to-Moderate Kidney Dysfunction and Cardiovascular Disease: Observational and Mendelian Randomization Analyses

BACKGROUND: End-stage renal disease is associated with a high risk of cardiovascular events. It is unknown, however, whether mild-to-moderate kidney dysfunction is causally related to coronary heart disease (CHD) and stroke. METHODS: Observational analyses were conducted using individual-level data from 4 population data sources (Emerging Risk Factors Collaboration, EPIC-CVD [European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition-Cardiovascular Disease Study], Million Veteran Program, and UK Biobank), comprising 648 135 participants with no history of cardiovascular disease or diabetes at baseline, yielding 42 858 and 15 693 incident CHD and stroke events, respectively, during 6.8 million personyears of follow-up. Using a genetic risk score of 218 variants for estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), we conducted Mendelian randomization analyses involving 413 718 participants (25917 CHD and 8622 strokes) in EPIC-CVD, Million Veteran Program, and UK Biobank. RESULTS: There were U-shaped observational associations of creatinine-based eGFR with CHD and stroke, with higher risk in participants with eG FR values 105 mL.min(-1).1.73 m(-2), compared with those with eG FR between 60 and 105 mL.min(-1).1.73 m(-2). Mendelian randomization analyses for CHD showed an association among participants with eGFR 105 mL.min(-1).1.73 m(-2). Results were not materially different after adjustment for factors associated with the eGFR genetic risk score, such as lipoprotein(a), triglycerides, hemoglobin Alc, and blood pressure. Mendelian randomization results for stroke were nonsignificant but broadly similar to those for CHD. CONCLUSIONS: In people without manifest cardiovascular disease or diabetes, mild-to-moderate kidney dysfunction is causally related to risk of CHD, highlighting the potential value of preventive approaches that preserve and modulate kidney function