Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
Four papers in this week's BMJ address the
issue of preventing heart disease, and in particular using lipid
lowering drugs, in primary care. Several major guidelines have been
developed for the screening and management of patients with
hypercholesterolaemia and other lipid disorders, but the advice
incorporated in them often differs considerably. Unwin et al (p 1125)
examined the implications of four widely available guidelines by
applying them to data from a population based survey of adults and
found marked differences between the guidelines in the numbers who
would be screened and treated. Even when the proportions who would be
treated were similar the individuals were often different. These
findings highlight the pressing need to develop and agree a consistent approach across Britain to the management of hyperlipidaemia. Strategies such as guideline development and critical
appraisal are intended to facilitate everyday practice based on trial
evidence. But these strategies may be based on unrealistic models of
how evidence is assessed and used. Fairhurst and Huby report that prescribing of statin drugs general practitioners have not
conventionally critically appraised trials but have evaluated their
social and economic implications. Recognition of a consensus among
trusted sources about these implications is important in facilitating integration of trial evidence in practice. On p 1120
Pringle describes how one practice attempted to integrate data from
clinical audit, trials, guidelines, and cost effectiveness analyses to
improve its care of patients with heart disease. Prompted by the case of a 52 year old man who died of an acute myocardial infarction the
practice assessed how well it was recording risk factors, reviewed the
literature on hyperlipidaemia, and revised its protocol for
managing hyperlipidaemia. The new protocol involved extra consultations, cholesterol tests, and drug costs. As a result they
showed a 30-fold rise in the number of patients diagnosed as having
hyperlipidaemia (from 13 to 389): 46% were receiving lipid lowering
drugs. Stories such as Pringle's may help to explain the
finding of Baxter et al (p 1134) that prescribing of lipid lowering
drugs in one English region showed a 98-fold variation between
practices. Even so, prescribing of lipid lowering drugs had increased
exponentially since 1994 in the four health authorities studied.