Current and Future Cardiovascular Disease Risk Assessment in the European Union

An International Comparative Study

Published in: European Journal of Public Health [Epub January 2018], ckx216. doi: 10.1093/eurpub/ckx216

Posted on RAND.org on March 15, 2018

by Teresa J. Mossakowska, Catherine L. Saunders, Jennie Corbett, Calum MacLure, Eleanor Winpenny, Elma Dujso, Rupert A. Payne

Read More

Access further information on this document at European Journal of Public Health [Epub January 2018]

This article was published outside of RAND. The full text of the article can be found at the link above.

Background

Risk assessment is central to primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD), but there remains a need to better understand the use of evidence-based interventions in practice. This study examines: (i) the policies and guidelines for risk assessment in Europe, (ii) the use of risk assessment tools in clinical practice and (iii) the barriers to, and facilitators of, risk assessment.

Methods

Data were collected from academics, clinicians and policymakers in an online questionnaire targeted at experts from all European Union member states, and in 8 in-depth country case studies that were developed from a targeted literature review and 36 interviews.

Results

The European Society of Cardiology (ESC) produces European guidelines for CVD risk assessment and recommends the Systematic COronary Risk Evaluation tool, which is the most widely used risk assessment tool in Europe. The use of risk assessment tools is variable. Lack of time and resources are important barriers. Integrating risk assessment tools into clinical systems and providing financial incentives to carry out risk assessments could increase implementation. Novel biomarkers would need to be supported by evidence of their clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness to be introduced in clinical practice. These findings were consistent across Europe.

Conclusions

Efforts to improve the assessment of CVD risk in clinical practice should be carried out by or in collaboration with, the ESC. Increasing the use of existing risk assessment tools is likely to offer greater gains in primary prevention than the development of novel biomarkers.

Research conducted by

This report is part of the RAND Corporation external publication series. Many RAND studies are published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals, as chapters in commercial books, or as documents published by other organizations.

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.