Importance of a patient's personal health history on assessments of future risk of coronary heart disease.

Pubmed ID: 18772295

Journal: Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFM

Publication Date: Sept. 1, 2008

Affiliation: Department of Family Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina, 295 Calhoun Street, Charleston, SC 29425, USA. mainouag@musc.edu

MeSH Terms: Humans, Male, Female, Risk Factors, United States, Middle Aged, Coronary Disease, ROC Curve, Risk Assessment, Follow-Up Studies, Morbidity, Retrospective Studies, Time Factors, Sex Distribution, Medical Records, Primary Health Care

Grants: 1D14 HP 00161, 1P30 AG 021677, R01 HL 076271

Authors: Mainous AG, Diaz VA, Everett CJ, King DE, Player MS

Cite As: Mainous AG 3rd, Everett CJ, Player MS, King DE, Diaz VA. Importance of a patient's personal health history on assessments of future risk of coronary heart disease. J Am Board Fam Med 2008 Sep-Oct;21(5):408-13.

Studies:

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Although many coronary heart disease (CHD) risk factors are known, the role of an individual's changing personal health history is unclear. We implemented this study to evaluate whether accounting for previous Framingham Risk Scores (FRSs) improves the predictive ability of a current FRS for future CHD in middle-aged adults. METHODS: We analyzed data from the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities Study (ARIC), a longitudinal cohort of people 45 to 64 years old at entry (1986 to 1989 through 2001). FRSs were calculated for participants in the ARIC cohort (3901 men, 5406 women) at baseline (visit 3) and 3 and 6 years before. Using Cox regressions we evaluated the risk of CHD development for the FRS 6 years from baseline and then evaluated whether the addition of the change in FRS assessments from 3 and 6 years before the baseline improved the predictive ability of the FRS. Areas under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curves were compared. RESULTS: The addition of the difference between the baseline FRS (eg, in 1995) and the FRS from 6 years earlier (eg, in 1989) to predict CHD development by 2001 for the entire cohort yielded an AUROC of 0.730, which was a significant improvement over just using the baseline FRS (P < .05). The effect was located primarily among women, with the AUROC curve improving from 0.667 to 0.709 (P < .05). There was no improvement for CHD risk prediction in men when the earlier FRS assessments were taken into account. Men seem to have less change in some risk factors over time. CONCLUSIONS: Accounting for an individual's history improves risk assessments based on current measures.