Mariam Kashani

Improving Assessment of Cardiovascular Disease Risk by Using Family History An Integrative Literature Review

Background:Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the number one killer in the United States. Although the causes of CVD are multifactorial, including genetic and environmental influences, it is largely a preventable disease. The cornerstone of CVD prevention is accuracy in risk prediction to identify patients who will benefit from interventions aimed at reducing risk. Nurse practitioners commonly perform CVD risk assessments and are well positioned to impact preventive therapy. Cardiovascular disease risk scoring systems currently in use substantially underestimate risk in large part because these do not include family history of premature CVD as a high-risk factor. Purpose:We sought to examine the state of evidence for the use of family history as a predictor in CVD risk stratification. Conclusions:A comprehensive literature search using the Medical Subject Headings terms of family history of CVD, family history of premature CVD, risk assessment, and risk estimation displayed 416 articles; a review of the titles and subsequent evaluation of the articles eliminated 392 references, leaving 24 for review. By incorporating family history in risk assessment, categorization of CVD risk improves substantially. The evidence demonstrates that family history is an independent contributor to risk appraisal and unequivocally supports its incorporation to improve accuracy in global CVD risk estimation. Clinical Implications:Underestimation of CVD risk leaves patients and providers misinformed, promoting the ongoing epidemic of chronic disease. Translating this evidence into practice by establishing a clinical algorithm that incorporates family history into risk prediction will standardize CVD risk assessment, improve the identification of high-risk patients, and provide the indicated aggressive care to prevent CVD.

Early Empowerment Strategies Boost Self-Efficacy to Improve Cardiovascular Health Behaviors

Background: Self-efficacy, defined as confidence in the ability to carry out behavior to achieve a desired goal, is considered to be a prerequisite for behavior change. Self-efficacy correlates with cardiovascular health although optimal timing to incorporate self-efficacy strategies is not well established. We sought to study the effect of an empowerment approach implemented in the introductory phase of a multicomponent lifestyle intervention on cardiovascular health outcomes. Design: Prospective intervention cohort study. Methods: Patients in the Integrative Cardiac Health Project Registry, a prospective lifestyle change program for the prevention of cardiovascular disease were analyzed for behavioral changes by survey, at baseline and one year, in the domains of nutrition, exercise, stress management and sleep. Self-efficacy questionnaires were administered at baseline and after the empowerment intervention, at 8 weeks. Results: Of 119 consecutive registry completers, 60 comprised a high self-efficacy group (scoring at or above the median of 36 points) and 59 the low self-efficacy group (scoring below median). Self-efficacy scores increased irrespective of baseline self-efficacy but the largest gains in self-efficacy occurred in patients who ranked in the lower half for self-efficacy at baseline. This lower self-efficacy group demonstrated behavioral gains that erased differences between the high and low self-efficacy groups. Conclusions: A boost to self-efficacy early in a lifestyle intervention program produces significant improvements in behavioral outcomes. Employing empowerment in an early phase may be a critical strategy to improve self-efficacy and lower risk in individuals vulnerable to cardiovascular disease.

A systematic approach incorporating family history improves identification of cardiovascular disease risk.

Background:Although family history (FH) is an independent predictor of cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk, traditional risk scores do not incorporate FH. Nurse practitioners routinely solicit FH but have no mechanism to incorporate the information into risk estimation. Underestimation of risk leaves clinicians misinformed and patients vulnerable to the CVD epidemic. Objective:We examined a systematic approach incorporating FH in CVD risk assessment, validating risk reclassification using carotid intima-media thickness (CIMT), a surrogate measure of atherosclerosis. Methods:Of 413 consecutive patients prospectively enrolled in the Integrative Cardiac Health Project Registry, a subgroup of 239 was low or intermediate risk by the Framingham Risk Score. A systematic approach for the assessment of FH was applied to this subgroup of the registry. A positive FH for premature CVD, defined as a first-degree relative having a CVD event before the age of 55 years in men and 65 years in women, conferred reclassification to high risk. Reclassification was validated with CIMT results. Results:Chart audits revealed adherence to the systematic approach for FH assessment in 100% of cases. This systematic approach identified 115 of 239 (48%) patients as high risk because of positive FH. Of the reclassified patients, 75% had evidence of subclinical atherosclerosis by CIMT versus 55% in the patients not reclassified, P < 0.001. Logistic regression identified positive FH for premature CVD (odds ratio, 2.6; P = 0.001) among all variables, as the most significant predictor of abnormal CIMT, thus increasing risk for CVD. Conclusions:The Integrative Cardiac Health Project systematic approach incorporating FH into risk stratification enhances CVD risk assessment by identifying previously unrecognized high-risk patients, reduces variability in practice, and appropriately targets more stringent therapeutic goals for prevention.