Prevention of cardiovascular diseases: focus on modifiable cardiovascular risk.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the use of a 20% absolute risk threshold for cardiovascular disease as recommended in current guidelines leads to exclusion of patients with a substantial modifiable risk (> or = 5%). METHODS: Data collected within the framework of a randomised controlled trial in three primary health care centres located in deprived neighbourhoods were analysed. The 10 year absolute risk and the modifiable part of risk were calculated by using the Framingham risk equation. Among patients with a modifiable risk reduction of > or = 5% (number needed to treat < or = 20) the characteristics and risk factors of patients with an absolute risk > or = 20% and those with an absolute risk < 20% were compared. RESULTS: 293 patients aged 30-70 years at risk of developing cardiovascular disease were included, of whom 66% were women and 36% were of Dutch origin. Of all patients, 33% had an absolute risk > or = 20% and 61% had a modifiable risk > or = 5%. Of those at > or = 20% absolute risk, a vast majority (98%) had a modifiable risk > or = 5%. Among those with an absolute risk < 20%, 43% had a modifiable risk > or = 5%; this group, who were relatively young and predominantly women, constituted 29% of the entire study population. CONCLUSIONS: Targeting preventive strategies at a 10 year absolute risk > or = 20% leads to exclusion of a large group of relatively young, predominantly female patients. In total, about one quarter had an absolute risk < 20% but a modifiable risk > or = 5% and should therefore benefit from intervention.

Health care use by diabetic patients in the Netherlands: patterns and predicting factors.

AIMS: Diabetic patients require care from a variety of health care providers, but little is known about their actual use of health care. Aims of this study were to (1) obtain information on health care use by diabetic patients in the Netherlands, (2) distinguish patterns of health care utilisation among these patients, and (3) develop insight into the factors predicting these patterns. METHOD: Data on 388 diabetic patients were extracted from a nationally representative database of patients with chronic disease. Data on health care utilisation and background variables were collected in 1998 by means of a survey. Patients' GPs registered information about medical diagnosis, illness duration and co-morbidity. Analysis included descriptive statistics, as well as cluster and logistic analysis. RESULTS: Diabetic patients use a wide range of services, but large differences exist. Four patterns of health care utilisation could be distinguished: a pattern of low consumption, one of moderate consumption with a central role for internal medicine, one of more extensive diabetes care consumption, and one of high medical and home care consumption. Type 1 diabetes appeared to be an important determinant of the moderate, mainly internal medicine pattern and the more extensive diabetes care pattern. The pattern of high medical and home care was not predicted by diabetes type, but by the presence of co-morbidity and by poor self-rated health. CONCLUSION: Despite the fact that diabetic patients use a wide range of health care services, there seems to be a problem of under utilisation, especially among type 2 diabetic patients.