ABSTRACT
OBJETIVO: Conocer el manejo de la dislipemia en atención primaria tras la publicación de la Guía de la American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) del año 2013 y el algoritmo de la Administración. MÉTODO: Estudio transversal descriptivo con encuesta a médicos de atención primaria de la Comunidad Valenciana entre enero y octubre de 2016. RESULTADOS: Participaron 199 facultativos con una media (desviación típica) de 48,9 (11) años de edad y 21,3 (11,1) años de experiencia. Las guías más seguidas eran las de la European Society of Cardiology (37,5%) y las de la Administración (23,4%). El 6,3% seguía la de la ACC/AHA 2013. El 88% establecía objetivos según colesterol LDL y riesgo cardiovascular. La elección del hipolipemiante estaba basada en su capacidad reductora de colesterol LDL (28,6%), algoritmo de la Administración (23,4%) y seguridad (20,4%). Estatinas, ezetimiba y fibratos eran los hipolipemiantes preferidos, y la combinación (51%) e incremento de dosis (35%) las estrategias en ausencia de control. Se determinaba perfil lipídico, transaminasas y creatincinasa cada 6 (59,5; 52,3 y 54,3%, respectivamente) o 12 meses (25,1; 29,2 y 30,3%, respectivamente). Un 41% era conocedor de la polémica con la Guía ACC/AHA 2013, y aunque un 60% reconocía su relevancia, solo un 21% modificó su quehacer diario por ella. CONCLUSIONES: El algoritmo de la Administración tuvo mayor impacto que la Guía ACC/AHA 2013 en atención primaria. Campos de mejora fueron el bajo uso de guías y tablas de riesgo validadas, y racionalización de la periodicidad de las analíticas
OBJECTIVE: To determine the management of dyslipidaemia in primary care after the publication of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) 2013 guidelines and Valencian government's algorithm. METHOD: We conducted a cross-sectional descriptive study that employed a survey of primary care physicians of the Community of Valencia between January and October 2016. RESULTS: A total of 199 physicians (mean age, 48.9±11.0 years; experience, 21.3±11.1 years) participated in the survey. The most followed guidelines were those of the European Society of Cardiology (37.5% of respondents) and Valencian government (23.4% of respondents). Some 6.3% of the respondents followed the 2013 ACC/AHA guidelines, and 88.0% established objectives based on LDL cholesterol and cardiovascular risk. The choice of lipid-lowering drug was based on its LDL cholesterol lowering capacity (28.6% of respondents), on the Valencian government's algorithm (23.4%) and on the drug's safety (20.4%). Statins, ezetimibe and fibrates were the preferred hypolipemiant agents, and their combination (51% of respondents) and dosage increases (35%) were the strategies employed for poor control. Lipid profile and transaminase and creatine kinase levels were measured every 6 (59.5%, 52.3% and 54.3% of respondents, respectively) or 12 months (25.1%, 29.2% and 30.3%, respectively). Forty-one percent of the respondents were aware of the controversy surrounding the 2013 ACC/AHA guidelines. Although 60% of the respondents acknowledged its relevance, only 21% changed their daily practices accordingly. CONCLUSIONS: The Valencian government's algorithm had a greater impact than the 2013 ACC/AHA guidelines in primary care in Valencia. Areas for improvement included the low use of validated guidelines and risk tables and the streamlining of laboratory test periodicity
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Adult , Middle Aged , Dyslipidemias/drug therapy , Practice Guidelines as Topic/standards , Clinical Protocols , Algorithms , Cross-Sectional Studies , Risk Factors , Primary Health Care , Physicians , Surveys and Questionnaires , American Heart Association , Societies, Medical , Practice Patterns, Physicians'ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To determine the management of dyslipidaemia in primary care after the publication of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) 2013 guidelines and Valencian government's algorithm. METHOD: We conducted a cross-sectional descriptive study that employed a survey of primary care physicians of the Community of Valencia between January and October 2016. RESULTS: A total of 199 physicians (mean age, 48.9±11.0 years; experience, 21.3±11.1 years) participated in the survey. The most followed guidelines were those of the European Society of Cardiology (37.5% of respondents) and Valencian government (23.4% of respondents). Some 6.3% of the respondents followed the 2013 ACC/AHA guidelines, and 88.0% established objectives based on LDL cholesterol and cardiovascular risk. The choice of lipid-lowering drug was based on its LDL cholesterol lowering capacity (28.6% of respondents), on the Valencian government's algorithm (23.4%) and on the drug's safety (20.4%). Statins, ezetimibe and fibrates were the preferred hypolipemiant agents, and their combination (51% of respondents) and dosage increases (35%) were the strategies employed for poor control. Lipid profile and transaminase and creatine kinase levels were measured every 6 (59.5%, 52.3% and 54.3% of respondents, respectively) or 12 months (25.1%, 29.2% and 30.3%, respectively). Forty-one percent of the respondents were aware of the controversy surrounding the 2013 ACC/AHA guidelines. Although 60% of the respondents acknowledged its relevance, only 21% changed their daily practices accordingly. CONCLUSIONS: The Valencian government's algorithm had a greater impact than the 2013 ACC/AHA guidelines in primary care in Valencia. Areas for improvement included the low use of validated guidelines and risk tables and the streamlining of laboratory test periodicity.
