Influence of family history of cardiovascular disease on clinicians' preventive recommendations and subsequent adherence of patients without cardiovascular disease.
ABSTRACT Family history of cardiovascular disease (CVD) is an independent risk factor for CVD. Therefore, efforts to prevent CVD among asymptomatic persons with a family history are warranted. Little is known about preventive recommendations clinicians offer their patients with a family history of CVD, and adherence to preventive recommendations by patients at risk for CVD has not been well described.
We used the 2007 Oregon Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System to evaluate among 2,566 adults without CVD associations between family history of CVD and (a) clinician recommendations; (b) perceived risk of developing CVD; (c) adoption of preventive and screening behaviors; and (d) risk factors of CVD.
Compared with adults with no family history of CVD, those with a family history reported that their clinician was more likely to ask about their family history information (OR = 2.6; 95% CI, 1.9-3.4), discuss the risk of developing CVD (OR = 2.0; 95% CI, 1.6-2.5), and make recommendations to prevent CVD (OR = 2.1; 95% CI, 1.7-2.7). Family history and clinician recommendations were associated with a higher likelihood of reported changes in diet or physical activity to prevent CVD (OR = 2.7; 95% CI, 2.3-3.2). Persons with a family history of CVD were more likely to report having high cholesterol, having high blood pressure, taking aspirin, and having had their cholesterol checked.
The presence of a family history of CVD appears to prompt clinicians to recommend preventive changes and may motivate patients without CVD to adopt these recommendations.
- SourceAvailable from: Arn Eliasson[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: 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.The Journal of cardiovascular nursing 06/2013; · 1.47 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:: More than 82 million Americans have 1 or more forms of cardiovascular disease (CVD), accounting for 32.8% of all deaths in the United States. Although the evidence for the familial aggregation of CVD is strong, the relationship between family history (FH) of CVD, perceived risk for CVD, and health-related behavior is poorly understood. OBJECTIVE:: The objective of this article was to review and summarize the published research on the relationship between an FH of CVD, an individual's perceived risk, and health-related behavior to make recommendations for clinical practice and future research. METHODS:: A literature search was conducted using PubMed, CINAHL Plus, and PsycINFO to identify articles that examined the relationship between an FH of CVD, perceived CVD risk, and health-promoting behaviors. A total of 263 unique articles were reviewed. A total of 238 were excluded, resulting in a total of 25 articles included in the review. RESULTS:: There was a positive relationship between a reported FH of CVD and perceived risk. However, the relationship between an FH of CVD and health-related behavior change and perceived risk and behavior change was inconsistent. CONCLUSIONS:: A person's awareness of his or her FH of CVD or his or her own risk for CVD is not a sufficient predictor of changes in his or her health-related behavior. Future studies are needed to better explain the processes by which perceived CVD risk or FH of CVD can be used to affect health-related behavior changes. It appears that both FH and perceived personal risk for CVD are necessary but not sufficient conditions to change health-related behavior in high-risk populations. Future studies should also test interventions that help individuals with an FH of CVD attribute increased personal risk to themselves for developing CVD, while providing lifestyle management options to minimize their risk.The Journal of cardiovascular nursing 01/2013; · 1.47 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: State health departments in Michigan, Minnesota, Oregon, and Utah explored the use of genomic information, including family health history, in chronic disease prevention programs. To support these explorations, the Office of Public Health Genomics at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention provided cooperative agreement funds from 2003 through 2008. The 4 states' chronic disease programs identified advocates, formed partnerships, and assessed public data; they integrated genomics into existing state plans for genetics and chronic disease prevention; they developed projects focused on prevention of asthma, cancer, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and other chronic conditions; and they created educational curricula and materials for health workers, policymakers, and the public. Each state's program was different because of the need to adapt to existing culture, infrastructure, and resources, yet all were able to enhance their chronic disease prevention programs with the use of family health history, a low-tech "genomic tool." Additional states are drawing on the experience of these 4 states to develop their own approaches.Preventing chronic disease 01/2014; 11:E97. · 1.82 Impact Factor