0

The full content of Annals is available to subscribers

Subscribe/Learn More  >
Articles |

Comparison of an Aggressive (U.S.) and a Less Aggressive (Canadian) Policy for Cholesterol Screening and Treatment

Murray Krahn, MD; C. David Naylor, MD, DPhil; Antoni S. Basinski, MD, PhD; and Allan S. Detsky, MD, PhD
[+] Article and Author Information

Grant Support: Dr. Naylor is supported by an Ontario Ministry of Health Career Scientist Award 02377. Dr. Basinski is a Research Scholar, Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto. Dr. Detsky is supported by National Health Research Scholar award 6606-2849-48 from Health and Welfare Canada.

Requests for Reprints: Murray Krahn, MD, Toronto Hospital, Western Division, WW1-810, 399 Bathurst Street, Toronto, Ontario M5T 2S8, Canada.

Current Author Addresses: Dr. Krahn: Toronto Western Hospital, WW1-810, 399 Bathurst Street, Toronto, Ontario M5T 2S8, Canada.

Drs. Naylor and Basinski: Sunny brook Health Science Centre, 2075 Bayview Avenue, A433, Toronto, Ontario M4N 3M5, Canada.

Dr. Detsky: Toronto General Hospital, 200 Elizabeth Street, ENG 246, Toronto, Ontario M5G 2C4, Canada.


© 1991 American College of PhysiciansAmerican College of Physicians


Ann Intern Med. 1991;115(4):248-255. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-115-4-248
Text Size: A A A

Objective: To determine the point at which adverse quality-of-life effects engendered by an aggressive cholesterol-lowering strategy dictate the use of a less aggressive approach.

Design: Decision analysis was used to compare the effects of the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) guidelines, an aggressive program, with those of the Canadian Task Force on the Periodic Health Examination (CTF) guidelines, a more conservative program. Quality-adjusted life expectancy was calculated for a theoretical cohort of middle-aged men treated according to each program using Markov cohort analysis.

Measurements: Guidelines were applied to the population of the Lipid Research Clinics Coronary Primary Prevention Trial (LRC-CPPT), under the assumption that cholesterol levels had the distribution of the ageand sex-matched general population. Outcomes were calculated using a three-state (health, coronary heart disease, and death) Markov model. State transition probabilities were calculated using bivariate (age and cholesterol) proportional hazards and logistic regression functions.

Main Results: The result was a "toss-up"; the number of expected quality-adjusted life years was similar for both programs at all time intervals, although the conservative program was consistently slightly favored. The result was very sensitive to the disutility of dietary therapy (threshold value, 0.0014 compared with the baseline estimate of 0.02) but was also affected by the time frame of the analysis and the rate at which adverse effects of treatment decline.

Conclusions: Even small disutilities associated with treatment may outweigh the benefits of aggressive cholesterol-lowering strategies. Research should be directed toward measuring these disutilities and finding ways to reduce their size. Incorporation of the disutility of treatment into policy formulation may result in less interventionist and less costly policies.

Figures

Tables

References

Letters

NOTE:
Citing articles are presented as examples only. In non-demo SCM6 implementation, integration with CrossRef’s "Cited By" API will populate this tab (http://www.crossref.org/citedby.html).

Comments

Submit a Comment
Submit a Comment

Summary for Patients

Clinical Slide Sets

Terms of Use

The In the Clinic® slide sets are owned and copyrighted by the American College of Physicians (ACP). All text, graphics, trademarks, and other intellectual property incorporated into the slide sets remain the sole and exclusive property of the ACP. The slide sets may be used only by the person who downloads or purchases them and only for the purpose of presenting them during not-for-profit educational activities. Users may incorporate the entire slide set or selected individual slides into their own teaching presentations but may not alter the content of the slides in any way or remove the ACP copyright notice. Users may make print copies for use as hand-outs for the audience the user is personally addressing but may not otherwise reproduce or distribute the slides by any means or media, including but not limited to sending them as e-mail attachments, posting them on Internet or Intranet sites, publishing them in meeting proceedings, or making them available for sale or distribution in any unauthorized form, without the express written permission of the ACP. Unauthorized use of the In the Clinic slide sets will constitute copyright infringement.

Toolkit

Buy Now

to gain full access to the content and tools.

Want to Subscribe?

Learn more about subscription options

Advertisement
Related Articles
Topic Collections
PubMed Articles

Buy Now

to gain full access to the content and tools.

Want to Subscribe?

Learn more about subscription options

Forgot your password?
Enter your username and email address. We'll send you a reminder to the email address on record.
(Required)
(Required)