TY - JOUR
T1 - Does clinician-reported lipid guideline adoption translate to guideline-adherent care? An evaluation of the Patient and Provider Assessment of Lipid Management (PALM) registry
AU - Lowenstern, Angela
AU - Li, Shuang
AU - Navar, Ann Marie
AU - Virani, Salim
AU - Lee, L. Veronica
AU - Louie, Michael J.
AU - Peterson, Eric D.
AU - Wang, Tracy Y.
N1 - Funding Information:
We thank Erin Campbell, MS, for her editorial contributions to this article. Ms. Campbell did not receive compensation for her assistance, apart from her employment at the institution where this study was conducted. This study was funded by Sanofi and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals.
Funding Information:
The authors report the following disclosures: Dr. Lowenstern received funding through NIH T-32 training grant #5 T32 HL069749-14. Ms. Li reports no relevant disclosures. Dr. Navar reports research support from Amgen, Sanofi, and Regeneron; consulting fees from Amgen and Sanofi. Dr. Virani reports research support from ADA/AHA/ VA; honorarium from ACC as the Associate Editor for Innovations, ACC.org. Dr. Lee reports employment with Sanofi. Dr. Louie reports employment with Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; ownership interest in Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
Funding Information:
The authors report the following disclosures: Dr. Lowenstern received funding through NIH T-32 training grant # 5 T32 HL069749-14 . Ms. Li reports no relevant disclosures. Dr. Navar reports research support from Amgen, Sanofi, and Regeneron; consulting fees from Amgen and Sanofi. Dr. Virani reports research support from ADA/AHA/ VA; honorarium from ACC as the Associate Editor for Innovations, ACC.org. Dr. Lee reports employment with Sanofi. Dr. Louie reports employment with Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; ownership interest in Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Dr. Peterson reports research support from Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck, Consulting from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Genentech, Janssen, Merck, and Sanofi Aventis. Dr. Wang reports research support from AstraZeneca, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Glaxo SmithKline, Regeneron, Sanofi; consultant/advisory/education from Bristol Myers Squibb, Astra Zeneca, Eli Lilly, Premier, Inc.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2018 Elsevier Inc.
PY - 2018/6
Y1 - 2018/6
N2 - Background: The 2013 American College of Cardiology (ACC)/American Heart Association (AHA) cholesterol guideline recommends statin treatment based on patients' predicted atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk. Whether clinician-reported guideline adoption translates to implementation into practice is unknown. Objectives: We aimed to compare clinician lipid management in hypothetical scenarios versus observed practice. Methods: The PALM Registry asked 774 clinicians how they would treat 4 hypothetical scenarios of primary prevention patients with: (1) diabetes; (2) high 10-year ASCVD risk (≥7.5%) with high low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C; ≥130 mg/dL); (3) low 10-year ASCVD risk (<7.5%) with high LDL-C (130–189 mg/dL); or (4) primary and secondary prevention patients with persistently elevated LDL-C (≥130 mg/dL) despite high-intensity statin use. We assessed agreement between clinician survey responses and observed practice. Results: In primary prevention scenarios, 85% of clinicians reported they would prescribe a statin to a diabetic patient and 93% to a high-risk/high LDL-C patient (both indicated by guidelines), while 40% would prescribe statins to a low-risk/high LDL-C patient. In clinical practice, statin prescription rates were 68% for diabetic patients, 40% for high-risk/high LDL-C patients, and 50% for low-risk/high LDL-C patients. Agreement between hypothetical and observed practice was 64%, 39%, and 52% for patients with diabetes, high-risk/high LDL-C, and low-risk/high LDL-C, respectively. Among patients with persistently high LDL-C despite high-intensity statin treatment, 55% of providers reported they would add a non-statin lipid-lowering medication, while only 22% of patients were so treated. Conclusions: While the majority of clinicians report adoption of the 2013 ACC/AHA guideline recommendations, observed lipid management decisions in practice are frequently discordant.
AB - Background: The 2013 American College of Cardiology (ACC)/American Heart Association (AHA) cholesterol guideline recommends statin treatment based on patients' predicted atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk. Whether clinician-reported guideline adoption translates to implementation into practice is unknown. Objectives: We aimed to compare clinician lipid management in hypothetical scenarios versus observed practice. Methods: The PALM Registry asked 774 clinicians how they would treat 4 hypothetical scenarios of primary prevention patients with: (1) diabetes; (2) high 10-year ASCVD risk (≥7.5%) with high low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C; ≥130 mg/dL); (3) low 10-year ASCVD risk (<7.5%) with high LDL-C (130–189 mg/dL); or (4) primary and secondary prevention patients with persistently elevated LDL-C (≥130 mg/dL) despite high-intensity statin use. We assessed agreement between clinician survey responses and observed practice. Results: In primary prevention scenarios, 85% of clinicians reported they would prescribe a statin to a diabetic patient and 93% to a high-risk/high LDL-C patient (both indicated by guidelines), while 40% would prescribe statins to a low-risk/high LDL-C patient. In clinical practice, statin prescription rates were 68% for diabetic patients, 40% for high-risk/high LDL-C patients, and 50% for low-risk/high LDL-C patients. Agreement between hypothetical and observed practice was 64%, 39%, and 52% for patients with diabetes, high-risk/high LDL-C, and low-risk/high LDL-C, respectively. Among patients with persistently high LDL-C despite high-intensity statin treatment, 55% of providers reported they would add a non-statin lipid-lowering medication, while only 22% of patients were so treated. Conclusions: While the majority of clinicians report adoption of the 2013 ACC/AHA guideline recommendations, observed lipid management decisions in practice are frequently discordant.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85046335937&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85046335937&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.ahj.2018.03.011
DO - 10.1016/j.ahj.2018.03.011
M3 - Article
C2 - 29898839
AN - SCOPUS:85046335937
SN - 0002-8703
VL - 200
SP - 118
EP - 124
JO - American Heart Journal
JF - American Heart Journal
ER -