Informing patients about disease prognosis

@#Prognosis refers to the development of possible “outcome” of disease i.e., survival in patient with cancer. Prognostic factors are characteristics of a particular patient that can be used to predict that patient’s eventual outcome i.e., patients with advanced TNM cancer stage may have lower probability of survival than those with less advance TNM cancer stage. Thus, prognosis is a prediction of the probable outcome of a disease based on a individual’s condition and the usual course of the disease as seen in similar situations. Family physicians are often asked by patients about the probable course of their disease, they need skills on how to inform patients about this.

Diagnosis and management of Dyslipidemia in family practice

Background@#Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) is a top cause of mortality in the Philippines. A known modifiable risk factor for ASCVD is dyslipidemia. Thus, proper diagnosis and management of dyslipidemia in family practice clinic could significantly decrease the burden of cardiovascular disease in the country@*Objectives@#This clinical pathway was developed to guide family and community physicians on the diagnosis and management of dyslipidemia.@*Methods@#To develop evidence -based recommendations, the authors searched for the latest guidelines of reputable international and local societies. They also searched PubMed using the terms “dyslipidemia”, “diagnosis”, “therapeutics”, “family” and “community medicine”. The more rigorous meta-analysis of clinical trials and observational studies were prioritized over lowquality trials in the formulation of the recommendations.@*Recommendations@#Thorough ASCVD risk assessment for all adults should be done during initial visit in family practice. The physician should review patient’s present medication; probe regarding lifestyle habits; conduct complete physical examination; use family assessment tools; and assess risk for ASCVD using calculators or risk factor counting method. For patients ≥ 45 years old and all adult patients regardless of age at increase ASCVD risk the following should be requested: lipid profile, urinary albumin- creatinine ratio/ urinary dipstick test, alanine transaminase (ALT), 12-lead electrocardiography (12-L ECG) and fasting blood sugar (FBS). During subsequent visits, re-assessment of ASCVD risk; checking compliance to non-pharmacologic intervention; and review of medication adherence and adverse effects should be performed. Repeat measurement of lipid profile should be done 6-8 weeks after initiation of statin therapy; 8-12 weeks after dose adjustment; and biannually for patients with controlled lipid levels. For individuals on statin therapy who have already achieved their low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goal, compute for non- high density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL C). Repeat ALT 6-8 weeks after initiation of statin therapy for those at high risk of statin-induced liver injury. Request creatine kinase (CK) if with development of muscle symptoms while on statin therapy. For primary prevention, start low-moderate intensity statins for following: individuals with diabetes mellitus (DM) Type 2 without ASCVD; individuals with mild-moderate chronic kidney disease (CKD); and individuals without ASCVD aged ≥ 45 years old with LDL -C ≥ 130 mg/dl AND with ≥ 2 risk factors. Start high intensity statins for individuals diagnosed with Familial Hypercholesterolemia. Give high intensity statins as secondary prevention for individuals with established ASCVD. For individuals with ASCVD on maximally tolerated statin therapy not meeting target LDL-C, ezetimibe could be added to their regimen. Low saturated fat diet rich in fruits and vegetable; regular exercise; and smoking cessation should be advised for all adult patients. The physician should also engage other family members to adopt healthy lifestyle. Formation of a community-based lifestyle intervention program to reduce cardiovascular risk should also be supported by the family physician.@*Implementation@#Adherence to pathway recommendations that are graded as either A-I, A-II or B-I is strongly advised. However, the authors also recommend using sound clinical judgment and patient involvement in the decision making before applying the recommendations.