COMPARATIVE STUDY
ENGLISH ABSTRACT
JOURNAL ARTICLE
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

[Comparison of the REGICOR and SCORE function charts for classifying cardiovascular risk and for selecting patients for hypolipidemic or antihypertensive treatment].

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: In Spain, use of the Framingham-REGICOR (Registre Gironí del Cor) and SCORE (Systematic Coronary Risk Evaluation) risk charts is recommended for stratifying cardiovascular disease risk. The aims of the present study were to evaluate the degree of agreement between these charts when used to evaluate cardiovascular disease risk in nondiabetic individuals aged 40-65 years and to estimate the percentage of patients recommended for hypolipidemic or antihypertensive treatment.

METHODS: The study included 608 nondiabetic patients aged between 40-65 years (mean 52.8 years, 56.7% female) with no evidence of cardiovascular disease who were attending a primary healthcare center between 1990-1994. REGICOR and SCORE equations were used to calculate 10-year cardiovascular disease risks. Patients were classified as high-risk if their risk was > or =10% with REGICOR or > or =5% with SCORE.

RESULTS: Some 7.9% of the population was classified as high-risk with REGICOR and 9.2%, with SCORE (P=.41). Only 2.6% and 2.9% (P=.81) of women were classified as high-risk, compared with 14.8% and 17.5% of men, with REGICOR and SCORE, respectively (P=.40). The kappa coefficient was 0.45. According to European professional society guidelines, 23.8% of patients classified by SCORE and 23.0% classified by REGICOR (P=.73) would be recommended hypolipidemic treatment, while 31.2% and 31.7% (P=.85), respectively, would be recommended antihypertensive treatment.

CONCLUSIONS: There was moderately good agreement between REGICOR and SCORE charts when used to evaluate nondiabetic individuals aged 40-65 years. They identified similar percentages of patients who would be recommended for hypolipidemic or antihypertensive treatment.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app