Archived Clinical Summary
Coronary Heart Disease: Screening Using Non-Traditional Risk Factors
Originally published on: January 17, 2014
This recommendation statement is currently archived and inactive. It should be used for historical purposes only. Click here for copyright and source information .
Disclaimer:Recommendations made by the USPSTF are independent of the U.S. government. They should not be construed as an official position of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality or the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
Archived: Clinical Summary of U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation
This document is a summary of the 2009 recommendation of the U.S. Preventive Services Task force on using nontraditional risk factors in coronary heart disease risk assessment. It is intended for use by primary care clinicians. This summary was first published in Annals of Internal Medicine on October 6, 2009. (Annals of Internal Medicine 2009;151:481.)
|Population||Asymptomatic men and women with no history of coronary heart disease (CHD), diabetes, or any CHD risk equivalent|
|No recommendation because of insufficient evidence|
This recommendation applies to adult men and women classified at intermediate 10-year risk for CHD (10% to 20%) by traditional risk factors.
Coronary heart disease (CHD) is the most common cause of death in adults in the United States. Treatment to prevent CHD events by modifying risk factors is currently based on the Framingham risk model. If the classification of individuals at intermediate risk could be improved by using additional risk factors, treatment to prevent CHD might be targeted more effectively.
|Rationale for No Recommendation||
There is insufficient evidence to determine the percentage of intermediate-risk individuals who would be reclassified by screening with nontraditional risk factors, other than hs-CRP and ABI. For individuals reclassified as high-risk on the basis of hs-CRP or ABI scores, data are not available to determine whether they benefit from additional treatments.
Little evidence is available to determine the harms of using nontraditional risk factors in screening. Potential harms include lifelong use of medications without proven benefit and psychological and other harms from being misclassified in a higher risk category.
|Considerations for Practice||
Clinicians should continue to use the Framingham model to assess CHD risk and guide risk-based preventive therapy.
Adding nontraditional risk factors to CHD assessment would require additional patient and clinical staff time and effort. Routinely screening with nontraditional risk factors could result in lost opportunities to provide other important health services of proven benefit.
|Relevant USPSTF Recommendations||
USPSTF recommendations on risk assessment for CHD, the use of aspirin to prevent cardiovascular disease, and screening for high blood pressure can be accessed at http://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org.
For a summary of the evidence systematically reviewed in making these recommendations, the full recommendation statement, and supporting documents please go to http://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org.
Disclaimer: Recommendations made by the USPSTF are independent of the U.S. government. They should not be construed as an official position of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality or the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
Internet Citation: Clinical Summary: Coronary Heart Disease: Screening Using Non-Traditional Risk Factors. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. February 2014.