There is uncertainty whether current strategies for providing CVD risk scores  affect CVD events .
Providing CVD risk scores may slightly reduce CVD risk factor levels and may increase preventive medication prescribing in higher-risk people without evidence of harm .
BACKGROUND The current paradigm for cardiovascular disease ( CVD ) emphasises absolute risk assessment to guide treatment decisions in primary prevention .
Although the derivation and validation of multivariable risk assessment tools , or CVD risk scores , have attracted considerable attention , their effect on clinical outcomes is uncertain .
OBJECTIVES To assess the effects of evaluating and providing CVD risk scores in adults without prevalent CVD on cardiovascular outcomes , risk factor levels , preventive medication prescribing , and health behaviours .
Discussing Coronary Risk with Patients to Improve Blood Pressure Treatment: Secondary Results from the CHECK-UP Study
Objectives Hypertension is common among patients with dyslipidemia but is often poorly treated . The objective of this analysis was to evaluate how a decision aid , used by primary care physicians to improve lipid therapy , impacted on the treatment of hypertension . Study Design Data were analyzed from patients enrolled in a r and omized trial focusing primarily on the treatment of dyslipidemia . Patients received usual care or a coronary risk profile every three months to monitor the risk reduction following lifestyle changes and /or pharmacotherapy to treat dyslipidemia . Hypertension management was assessed based on a post hoc analysis of individuals whose blood pressure exceeded current national hypertension guidelines . Results There were 2,631 subjects who completed the study . Among 1,352 patients without diagnosed hypertension , 30 % were above target on at least three consecutive visits . Among 1,279 individuals with known hypertension , 69 % were above target on at least two consecutive visits . Overall , patients receiving risk profiles were more likely to receive appropriate antihypertensive therapy  ( OR = 1.40 , 95 % CI 1.11 – 1.78 ) compared to those receiving usual care . After adjustment for inter-physician variability and potential confounders , the use of the risk profile was associated with an increased likelihood of starting therapy ( OR = 1.78 , 95 % CI 1.06 – 3.00 ) or modifying therapy ( OR = 1.40 , 95 % CI 1.03 – 1.91 ) . Conclusions In this clinical trial of dyslipidemia management , inadequately controlled hypertension was common , occurring in nearly 50 % of individuals . Ongoing coronary risk assessment was associated with more appropriate blood pressure management . Cardiovascular risk assessment decision aids should be further evaluated in a r and omized trial of hypertension therapy
There is uncertainty whether current strategies for providing CVD risk scores  affect CVD events .
Providing CVD risk scores may slightly reduce CVD risk factor levels and may increase preventive medication prescribing in higher-risk people without evidence of harm .
BACKGROUND The current paradigm for cardiovascular disease ( CVD ) emphasises absolute risk assessment to guide treatment decisions in primary prevention .
Although the derivation and validation of multivariable risk assessment tools , or CVD risk scores , have attracted considerable attention , their effect on clinical outcomes is uncertain .
OBJECTIVES To assess the effects of evaluating and providing CVD risk scores in adults without prevalent CVD on cardiovascular outcomes , risk factor levels , preventive medication prescribing , and health behaviours .