Missed opportunities for the secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease in Canada

Treatment Inertia in Patients With Familial Hypercholesterolemia

Background

We studied care gap in patients with familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) with respect to lipid‐lowering therapy.

Methods and Results

We enrolled patients with cardiovascular disease (CVD) or FH and low‐density lipoprotein‐cholesterol >2.0 mmol/L despite maximally tolerated statin therapy. During follow‐up physicians received online reminders of treatment recommendations of 2009 patients (median age, 63 years, 42% women), 52.4% had CVD only, 31.7% FH only, and 15.9% both CVD and FH. Patients with FH were younger and more likely to be women and non‐White with significantly higher baseline low‐density lipoprotein‐cholesterol level (mmol/L) as compared with patients with CVD (FH 3.92±1.48 versus CVD 2.96±0.94, P<0.0001). Patients with FH received less statin (70.6% versus 79.2%, P=0.0001) at baseline but not ezetimibe (28.1% versus 20.4%, P=0.0003). Among patients with FH only, 45.3% were at low‐density lipoprotein target (≥ 50% reduction from pre‐treatment level or low‐density lipoprotein <2.5 mmol/L) at baseline and increasing to 65.8% and 73.6% by visit 2 and 3, respectively. Among patients with CVD only, none were at recommended level (≤2.0 mmol/L) at baseline and 44.3% and 53.3% were at recommended level on second and third visit, respectively. When primary end point was analyzed as a difference between baseline and last available follow‐up observation, only 22.0% of patients with FH only achieved it as compared with 45.8% with CVD only (P<0.0001) and 55.2% with both FH+CVD (P<0.0001).

Conclusions

There is significant treatment inertia in patients with FH including those with CVD. Education focused on patients with FH should continue to be undertaken.

Does management of lipid lowering differ between specialists and primary care: Insights from GOAL Canada

BACKGROUND

We studied whether significant differences in care gaps exist between specialists and primary care physicians (PCPs).

METHODS

GOAL Canada enrolled patients with CVD or familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) and LDL-C > 2.0 mmol/L despite maximally tolerated statin therapy. During follow-up, physicians received online reminders of treatment recommendations based on Canadian Guidelines.

RESULTS

A total of 177 physicians (58% PCPs) enrolled 2009 patients; approximately half of the patients were enrolled by each physician group. Patients enrolled by specialists were slightly older (mean age 63 years vs 62), female (45% vs 40%), Caucasian (77% vs 65%), and had a slightly higher systolic pressure and lower heart rate. Patients enrolled by specialists had less frequent history of FH, diabetes, hypertension, chronic kidney disease and liver disease but more frequent history of coronary artery disease, atrial fibrillation and premature family history of CVD. There was no significant baseline difference in LDL-C, HDL-C or non-HDL-C, although total cholesterol and triglycerides were slightly higher in patients managed by PCPs. At baseline, PCPs were more likely to use statins (80% vs 73%, P = .0002) and other therapies such as niacin or fibrate (10% vs 6%, P = .0006) but similar use of ezetimibe (24% vs 27%, P = .15). At the end of follow-up, specialists used less statins (70% vs 77%, P = .0005) and other therapies (6% vs 10%, P = .007) but more ezetimibe (45% vs 38%, P = .01) and the same frequency of PCSK9i (28% vs 27%, P = .65). The proportion of patients achieving the recommended LDL-C level of 2.0 mmol/L or below (primary endpoint) was similar at last available visit between specialists and PCPs (44% vs 42%, P = .32).

CONCLUSION

Despite minor differences in the clinical profile of their patients, both PCPs and specialists actively participate in the management of lipid-lowering therapy in high-risk CVD patients and experience similar challenges and care gaps.

GOAL Canada: Physician Education and Support Can Improve Patient Management

BACKGROUND

Despite the widespread use of statins, approximately 40% to 50% of Canadian patients with known cardiovascular disease do not achieve the low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goal. Guidelines Oriented Approach to Lipid lowering (GOAL) is an investigator-initiated study aiming to ascertain the use of second- and third-line therapy and its impact on LDL-C goal achievement in a real-world setting.

METHODS

GOAL enrolled patients with clinical vascular disease or familial hypercholesterolemia and LDL-C > 2.0 mmol/L despite maximally tolerated statin therapy. During follow-up, physicians managed patients as clinically indicated but with online reminders of guideline recommendations.

RESULTS

Of 2009 patients enrolled (median age 63 years, 42% were female), baseline total cholesterol was 5.5 ± 1.4 mmol/L, LDL-C was 3.3 ± 1.3 mmol/L, non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol was 4.1 ± 1.4 mmol/L, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol was 1.3 ± 0.4 mmol/L, and triglycerides were 2.0 ± 1.5 mmol/L. Lipid-lowering therapy used at baseline was statin therapy in 76% (with 24% statin intolerant) and ezetimibe in 25%. During follow-up, the proportion of patients achieving an LDL-C level of < 2.0 mmol/L increased significantly to 50.8% as a result of additional lipid-lowering therapy. Patients achieving the recommended LDL-C level were more likely to not be statin intolerant (83.8% vs 70.7%, P < 0.0001) and to be taking a high-efficacy type and dose of statin (52.4% vs 35.9%, P < 0.0001). The 3 top reasons for not using the recommended therapy with ezetimibe were patient refusal in 33%, not needed in 22%, and intolerance in 20%, whereas for PCSK9i the reasons were cost in 26%, not needed in 27%, or patient refusal in 25%.

CONCLUSION

The results indicate the feasibility of optimizing management, resulting in achievement of the guideline-recommended LDL-C level. This has the potential to translate into reductions in cardiovascular morbidity and mortality of Canadian patients.

Lasso Regression for the Prediction of Intermediate Outcomes Related to Cardiovascular Disease Prevention Using the TRANSIT Quality Indicators

BACKGROUND

Cardiovascular disease morbidity and mortality are largely influenced by poor control of hypertension, dyslipidemia, and diabetes. Process indicators are essential to monitor the effectiveness of quality improvement strategies. However, process indicators should be validated by demonstrating their ability to predict desirable outcomes. The objective of this study is to identify an effective method for building prediction models and to assess the predictive validity of the TRANSIT indicators.

METHODS

On the basis of blood pressure readings and laboratory test results at baseline, the TRANSIT study population was divided into 3 overlapping subpopulations: uncontrolled hypertension, uncontrolled dyslipidemia, and uncontrolled diabetes. A classic statistical method, a sparse machine learning technique, and a hybrid method combining both were used to build prediction models for whether a patient reached therapeutic targets for hypertension, dyslipidemia, and diabetes. The final models' performance for predicting these intermediate outcomes was established using cross-validated area under the curves (cvAUC).

RESULTS

At baseline, 320, 247, and 303 patients were uncontrolled for hypertension, dyslipidemia, and diabetes, respectively. Among the 3 techniques used to predict reaching therapeutic targets, the hybrid method had a better discriminative capacity (cvAUCs=0.73 for hypertension, 0.64 for dyslipidemia, and 0.79 for diabetes) and succeeded in identifying indicators with a better capacity for predicting intermediate outcomes related to cardiovascular disease prevention.

CONCLUSIONS

Even though this study was conducted in a complex population of patients, a set of 5 process indicators were found to have good predictive validity based on the hybrid method.

Psychometric analysis of the TRANSIT quality indicators for cardiovascular disease prevention in primary care

Objective

To assess a selection of psychometric properties of the TRANSIT indicators.

Design

Using medical records, indicators were documented retrospectively during the 14 months preceding the end of the TRANSIT study.

Setting

Primary care in Quebec, Canada.

Participants

Indicators were documented in a random subsample (n = 123 patients) of the TRANSIT study population (n = 759).

Interventions

For every patient, the mean compliance to all indicators of a category (subscale score) and to the complete set of indicators (overall scale score) were established. To evaluate test-retest and inter-rater reliabilities, indicators were applied twice, two months apart, by the same evaluator and independently by different evaluators, respectively. To evaluate convergent validity, correlations between TRANSIT indicators, Burge et al. indicators and Institut national d'excellence en santé et en services sociaux (INESSS) indicators were examined.

Main Outcome Measures

Test-retest reliability, inter-rater reliability, and convergent validity.

Results

Test-retest reliability, as measured by intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) was equal to 0.99 (0.99-0.99) for the overall scale score while inter-rater reliability was equal to 0.95 (0.93-0.97) for the overall scale score. Convergent validity, as measured by Pearson's correlation coefficients, was equal to 0.77 (P < 0.001) for the overall scale score when the TRANSIT indicators were compared to Burge et al. indicators and to 0.82 (P < 0.001) for the overall scale score when the TRANSIT indicators were compared to INESSS indicators.

Conclusions

Reliability was excellent except for eleven indicators while convergent validity was strong except for domains related to the management of CVD risk factors.

Underuse of Effective Cardiac Medications Among Women, Middle-Aged Adults, and Racial/Ethnic Minorities With Coronary Artery Disease (from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2005 to 2014)

Given the proven effectiveness of several cardiac medications for patients with coronary artery disease (CAD), we examined the national use of 4 classes of effective medications, overall and by age, sex, and race/ethnicity in 2005 to 2014. We used data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, including a self-reported diagnosis of CAD and independently verified medication use. Weighting procedures extrapolated our data to the adult US population with CAD. Analyses included 1,789 US adults aged ≥45 years with a history of CAD. The average age of this population was 68 years; 40% were women and 79% were non-Hispanic whites. In 2005 to 2014, 53.2% (standard error [SE] = 1.5) reported use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blockers, 58.5% (SE = 1.5) β blockers, and 67.2% (SE = 1.4) statins. Two of these medications were used by 64.1% (SE = 1.5) of the study population and all 3 by 29.1% (SE = 1.3). In 2011 to 2014, 68.5% (SE = 2.4) of American adults with a history of CAD reported use of aspirin. The use of statins increased from 63.1% in 2005/2006 to 76.8% in 2013/2014. Adults aged 45 to 64 years old, women, and racial/ethnic minorities had lower use of effective cardiac medications compared with older adults, men, and non-Hispanic whites. In conclusion, the use of statins, but not other medications, has increased over the past 10 years among American adults with previously diagnosed CAD. Continued targeted efforts are needed to increase the receipt of effective cardiac medications among all US adults with CAD, especially those aged 45 to 64 years, women, and racial/ethnic minorities.

Use of Evidence-Based Therapy for Cardiovascular Risk Factors in Canadian Outpatients With Atrial Fibrillation: From the Facilitating Review and Education to Optimize Stroke Prevention in Atrial Fibrillation (FREEDOM AF) and Co-ordinated National Network to Engage Physicians in the Care and Treatment of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation (CONNECT AF)

Using data collected from 2 national atrial fibrillation (AF) primary care physician chart audits (Facilitating Review and Education to Optimize Stroke Prevention in Atrial Fibrillation [FREEDOM AF] and Co-ordinated National Network to Engage Physicians in the Care and Treatment of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation [CONNECT AF]), we evaluated the frequency of, and factors associated with, the use of cardiovascular (CV) evidence-based therapies in Canadian AF outpatients with at least 1 CV risk factor or co-morbidity. Of the 11,264 patients enrolled, 9,495 (84.3%) were eligible for one or more CV evidence-based therapies. The proportions of patients with AF receiving all eligible guideline-recommended therapies were 40.8% of patients with coronary artery disease, 48.9% of patients with diabetes mellitus, 40.2% of patients with heart failure, 96.7% of patients with hypertension, and 55.1% of patients with peripheral arterial disease. Factors that were independently associated with nonreceipt of all indicated evidence-based therapies included sinus rhythm rather than AF at baseline and liver disease. In conclusion, although most Canadian outpatients with AF have CV risk factors or co-morbidities, a substantial portion of these patients did not receive all guideline-recommended therapies. These findings suggest that there is an opportunity to improve the quality of care for patients with AF in Canada.

Evaluation of the quality of care of a multi-disciplinary Risk Factor Assessment and Management Programme for Hypertension (RAMP-HT)

BACKGROUND

There is some evidence to support a risk-stratified, multi-disciplinary approach to manage patients with hypertension in primary care. The aim of this study is to evaluate the quality of care (QOC) of a multi-disciplinary Risk Assessment and Management Programme for Hypertension (RAMP-HT) for hypertensive patients in busy government-funded primary care clinics in Hong Kong. The objectives are to develop an evidence-based, structured and comprehensive evaluation framework on quality of care, to enhance the QOC of the RAMP-HT through an audit spiral of two evaluation cycles and to determine the effectiveness of the programme in reducing cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk.

METHOD/DESIGN

A longitudinal study is conducted using the Action Learning and Audit Spiral methodologies to measure whether pre-set target standards of care intended by the RAMP-HT are achieved. A structured evaluation framework on the quality of structure, process and outcomes of care has been developed based on the programme objectives and literature review in collaboration with the programme workgroup and health service providers. Each participating clinic is invited to complete a structure of care evaluation questionnaire in each evaluation cycle. The data of all patients who have enrolled into the RAMP-HT in the pre-defined evaluation periods are used for the evaluation of the process and outcomes of care in each evaluation cycle. For evaluation of the effectiveness of RAMP-HT, the primary outcomes including blood pressure (both systolic and diastolic), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and estimated 10-year CVD risk of RAMP-HT participants are compared to those of hypertensive patients in usual care without RAMP-HT.

DISCUSSION

The QOC and effectiveness of the RAMP-HT in improving clinical and patient-reported outcomes for patients with hypertension in normal primary care will be determined. Possible areas for quality enhancement and standards of good practice will be established to inform service planning and policy decision making.

Primary prevention of cardiovascular disease: global cardiovascular risk assessment and management in clinical practice

Aims

For the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease, the Framingham Risk Score (FRS) is the most well-known risk prediction method. However, there are limited data regarding physicians' method of risk assessment and guideline adherence in clinical practice.

Methods and results

In the PARADIGM (Primary cARe AuDIt of Global risk Management) study (March 2009-10), 105 primary care physicians across Canada prospectively collected data for 3015 patients (mean age 56 years, 59% men) without known cardiovascular disease, diabetes, or lipid-lowering medications at baseline. For each patient, the treating physician determined their cardiovascular risk, and reported the risk stratification method and subsequent treatment decisions. Kappa statistics assessed the agreement between the study-calculated FRS and the treating physician's reported risk assessment. The FRS was the most commonly reported risk assessment method, but was used in only 34.0% of patients. Regardless of the method used (even if the FRS was reportedly used), there was only fair agreement between the risk stratification as reported by the physician and the study-calculated FRS. Moreover, physicians recommended statin initiation in 92% of all patients that they identified as high risk; however, according to the study-calculated FRS, only 56% of the truly high-risk patients were recommended statin therapy.

Conclusion

For the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease, these findings indicate a need to improve risk assessment and stratification, as misclassification directly contributes to suboptimal risk factor management in real-world clinical practice. Future studies should establish the optimal risk stratification method with quality improvement strategies for its subsequent implementation.

Clinical Trial Registration

http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00950703; NCT00950703.

Development of an interprofessional program for cardiovascular prevention in primary care: A participatory research approach

BACKGROUND

The chronic care model provides a framework for improving the management of chronic diseases. Participatory research could be useful in developing a chronic care model-based program of interventions, but no one has as yet offered a description of precisely how to apply the approach.

OBJECTIVES

An innovative, structured, multi-step participatory process was applied to select and develop (1) chronic care model-based interventions program to improve cardiovascular disease prevention that can be adapted to a particular regional context and (2) a set of indicators to monitor its implementation.

METHODS

Primary care clinicians (n = 16), administrative staff (n = 2), patients and family members (n = 4), decision makers (n = 5), researchers, and a research coordinator (n = 7) took part in the process. Additional primary care actors (n = 26) validated the program.

RESULTS

The program targets multimorbid patients at high or moderate risk of cardiovascular disease with uncontrolled hypertension, dyslipidemia or diabetes. It comprises interprofessional follow-up coordinated by case-management nurses, in which motivated patients are referred in a timely fashion to appropriate clinical and community resources. The program is supported by clinical tools and includes training in motivational interviewing. A set of 89 process and clinical indicators were defined.

CONCLUSION

Through a participatory process, a contextualized interventions program to optimize cardiovascular disease prevention and a set of quality indicators to monitor its implementation were developed. Similar approach might be used to develop other health programs in primary care if program developers are open to building on community strengths and priorities.

IMProving Adherence using Combination Therapy (IMPACT): design and protocol of a randomised controlled trial in primary care

BACKGROUND

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of death, and principal reason for the large difference in life expectancy between indigenous Māori and the non-indigenous population in New Zealand. CVD guidelines recommend that people who are at high risk or who have had previous CVD should be offered aspirin, blood pressure lowering and lipid lowering therapies. However, prescribing and adherence rates are low and CVD events remain high.

AIM

To assess whether a medication strategy using a fixed dose combination pill ('polypill') could improve prescribing and adherence to recommended medications, lower blood pressure and improve lipids compared with current care over 12 months.

METHODS

IMProving Adherence using Combination Therapy (IMPACT) is an open-label randomised controlled trial comparing a once-daily polypill containing four preventive medications with usual care. Six hundred participants who have had previous CVD events or are at high risk of CVD will be enrolled, including 300 Māori. Participants are identified, enrolled and prescribed either the polypill or current medications at their usual primary health care practice, with medications (including the polypill) dispensed through local community pharmacies. The polypill contains 75 mg aspirin, 40 mg simvastatin, 10mg lisinopril and either 12.5mg hydrochlorothiazide or 50mg atenolol. Primary outcomes are adherence to guidelines-recommended medications and changes in systolic blood pressure and low density lipoprotein at 12 months. Secondary outcomes include other lipids, medication dispensing, barriers to adherence, CVD and other serious adverse events, quality of life and prescriber acceptability. The trial is registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry (ACTRN12606000067572).

Polypill: the evidence and the promise

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

In spite of great scientific advances, cardiovascular disease is the commonest cause of death worldwide and current cardiovascular prevention strategies fail to achieve the full potential of risk modification. A large amount of evidence supports the use of pharmacological treatments both in primary and secondary prevention and it was hypothesized that a fixed-dose combination of such drugs, a 'polypill', may greatly simplify and improve current prevention strategies.

RECENT FINDINGS

Several polypill formulations have been developed and a recent trial demonstrated the short-term feasibility, safety and efficacy (in reducing risk factor levels) of a polypill in individuals at moderate risk. Many challenges remain and studies are underway, which will address questions related to formulation of polypill(s), the long-term safety and tolerability, the efficacy in reducing risk factor levels and cardiovascular events, physician, patient and societal acceptability, adherence, regulatory requirements, cost and impact on lifestyle habits.

SUMMARY

Theoretical models suggest that a polypill containing low-dose aspirin, three blood pressure-lowering drugs at half dose and a potent statin, administered to a large proportion of the population at risk for cardiovascular events, could reduce ischemic heart disease and strokes by over 80%. The feasibility of this approach has recently been shown in a clinical trial and ongoing studies will define whether the postulated benefits of the polypill will be observed.

Usefulness of statin-ezetimibe combination to reduce the care gap in dyslipidemia management in patients with a high risk of atherosclerotic disease

Lowering of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol is a fundamental step in the comprehensive management of patients at high risk for cardiovascular events. The combination of a statin with ezetimibe usually provides additional LDL cholesterol lowering compared to statin monotherapy. This open-label observational study evaluated the impact of a 26-week treatment program with uptitration of statin dosages and incorporation of ezetimibe 10 mg therapy in 2,577 men and women (median age 64 years) with hypercholesterolemia and an LDL cholesterol level >2.5 mmol/L (97 mg/dl). Attainment of an LDL cholesterol target of 2.5 mmol/L (97 mg/dl) increased with consecutive visits (63%, 67%, and 71% at the second, third, and final visits, respectively). Current guideline-recommended LDL cholesterol value <2.0 mmol/L (77 mg/dl) was achieved by 36%, 40%, and 41% of the group at the same consecutive follow-up sessions. Median LDL cholesterol decreased from 3.0 mmol/L (116 mg/dl) at baseline to 2.1 mmol/L (81 mg/dl) at the end of the 26-week monitoring period. Favorable changes were concomitantly observed for median total cholesterol (5.1 to 4.1 mmol/L [197 to 159 mg/dl]), total cholesterol/high-density lipoprotein cholesterol ratio (4.2 to 3.3), and triglyceride (1.6 to 1.4 mmol/L [142 to 124 mg/dl]). Of those who attended visit 4, 48% exhibited LDL cholesterol lowering of > or =1 mmol/L (39 mg/dl) compared to baseline levels. In conclusion, an algorithm-based statin uptitration/ezetimibe combination regimen is useful to increase LDL cholesterol lowering where statin monotherapy has not achieved target lipid values.

Management of atherothrombotic risk factors in high-risk Canadian outpatients

BACKGROUND

The REduction of Atherothrombosis for Continued Health (REACH) Registry is an international, prospective cohort of 68,236 patients with established coronary artery, cerebrovascular or peripheral arterial disease, or three or more atherothrombotic risk factors. Baseline data from the 1976 Canadian patients in the REACH Registry provide opportunities to assess atherothrombotic risk and treatment in a real-world Canadian setting.

OBJECTIVES

To present baseline characteristics of Canadian REACH Registry patients, and to compare cardiovascular risk and treatment among Canadian, United States (USA) and global patients.

METHODS

Patients 45 years of age or older with established atherosclerotic vascular disease or three or more cardiovascular risk factors were enrolled during 2004. Baseline data were used in analyses of risk factor prevalence and control and medication use. Comparisons between the Canadian and USA populations, Canadian and global populations, and the Canadian regions were conducted.

RESULTS

Of the 1976 Canadian REACH patients, 82.5% had documented vascular disease, 12.6% of whom had manifestations in more than one vascular bed (polyvascular disease). A high prevalence of hypercholesterolemia (84.4%), hypertension (76.6%) and diabetes mellitus (43.7%) were noted, and 75.1% of patients were overweight or obese. Of the 1976 Canadian REACH patients, 75.1% were at target cholesterol levels, 67.4% were at target fasting blood glucose levels and 60.6% were at target blood pressure levels. Significant differences existed in the prevalence of risk factors and their management among Canadian, USA and global REACH populations, as well as within Canada.

CONCLUSIONS

Canada compared favourably with USA and global REACH populations in the use of proven risk-reducing medications.

Discordance between physicians' estimation of patient cardiovascular risk and use of evidence-based medical therapy

Despite clinical trial evidence supporting the use of antiplatelets, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, and statins for cardiovascular risk reduction in high-risk patients, use of such therapies in real-world outpatients in the prospective Vascular Protection Registry and the Guidelines Oriented Approach to Lipid Lowering Registry was suboptimal (78%, 55%, and 75%, respectively). The most frequent reason physicians cited for nonprescription of statins (33%) was that patients were not high risk enough and/or current guidelines did not support statin use. In conclusion, outpatients at high cardiovascular risk continue to be undertreated as a result of a combination of physician underestimation of cardiovascular risk (knowledge gap) and barriers to implementation of evidence-based therapy (practice gap).