Agreement between Framingham Risk Score and United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study Risk Engine in Identifying High Coronary Heart Disease Risk in North Indian Population.
10.4093/dmj.2015.39.4.321
- Author:
Dipika BANSAL
1
;
Ramya S R NAYAKALLU
;
Kapil GUDALA
;
Rajavikram VYAMASUNI
;
Anil BHANSALI
Author Information
1. Department of Pharmacy Practice, National Institute of Pharmaceutical Education and Research, Mohali, India. dipikabansal079@gmail.com
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Coronary heart disease;
Diabetes mellitus;
Predictive value of tests;
Risk assessment
- MeSH:
Aged;
Blood Pressure;
Cholesterol, HDL;
Coronary Disease*;
Cross-Sectional Studies;
Diabetes Mellitus;
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2;
Female;
Great Britain*;
Hemoglobin A, Glycosylated;
Humans;
Male;
Predictive Value of Tests;
Prospective Studies*;
Risk Assessment
- From:Diabetes & Metabolism Journal
2015;39(4):321-327
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
BACKGROUND: The aim of the study is to evaluate the concurrence between Framingham Risk score (FRS) and United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) risk engine in identifying coronary heart disease (CHD) risk in newly detected diabetes mellitus patients and to explore the characteristics associated with the discrepancy between them. METHODS: A cross-sectional study involving 489 subjects newly diagnosed with type 2 diabetes mellitus was conducted. Agreement between FRS and UKPDS in classifying patients as high risk was calculated using kappa statistic. Subjects with discrepant scores between two algorithms were identified and associated variables were determined. RESULTS: The FRS identified 20.9% subjects (range, 17.5 to 24.7) as high-risk while UKPDS identified 21.75% (range, 18.3 to 25.5) as high-risk. Discrepancy was observed in 17.9% (range, 14.7 to 21.7) subjects. About 9.4% had high risk by UKPDS but not FRS, and 8.6% had high risk by FRS but not UKPDS. The best agreement was observed at high-risk threshold of 20% for both (kappa=0.463). Analysis showed that subjects having high risk on FRS but not UKPDS were elderly females having raised systolic and diastolic blood pressure. Patients with high risk on UKPDS but not FRS were males and have high glycosylated hemoglobin. CONCLUSION: The FRS and UKPDS (threshold 20%) identified different populations as being at high risk, though the agreement between them was fairly good. The concurrence of a number of factors (e.g., male sex, low high density lipoprotein cholesterol, and smoking) in both algorithms should be regarded as increasing the CHD risk. However, longitudinal follow-up is required to form firm conclusions.
