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 .
Translating Cholesterol Guidelines Into Primary Care Practice: A Multimodal Cluster Randomized Trial
PURPOSE We wanted to determine whether an intervention based on patient activation and a physician decision support tool was more effective than usual care for improving adherence to National Cholesterol Education Program guidelines . METHODS A 1-year cluster r and omized controlled trial was performed using 30 primary care practice s ( 4,105 patients ) in southeastern New Engl and . The main outcome was the percentage of patients screened for hyperlipidemia and treated to their low-density lipoprotein ( LDL ) and non – high-density lipoprotein ( HDL ) cholesterol goals . RESULTS After 1 year of intervention , both r and omized practice groups improved screening ( 89 % screened ) , and 74 % of patients in both groups were at their LDL and non-HDL cholesterol goals ( P < .001 ) . Using intent-to-treat analysis , we found no statistically significant differences between practice groups in screening or percentage of patients who achieved LDL and non-HDL cholesterol goals . Post hoc analysis showed practice s who made high use of the patient activation kiosk were more likely to have patients screened ( odds ratio [ OR ] = 2.54 ; 95 % confidence interval [ CI ] , 1.97–3.27 ) compared with those who made infrequent or no use . Additionally , physicians who made high use of decision support tools were more likely to have their patients at their LDL cholesterol goals ( OR = 1.27 ; 95 % CI , 1.07–1.50 ) and non-HDL goals ( OR = 1.23 ; 95 % CI , 1.04–1.46 ) than low-use or no-use physicians . CONCLUSION This study showed null results with the intent-to-treat analysis regarding the benefits of a patient activation and a decision support tool in improving cholesterol management in primary care practice s. Post hoc analysis showed a potential benefit in practice s that used the e-health tools more frequently in screening and management of dyslipidemia . Further research on how to incorporate and increase adoption of user-friendly , patient-centered e-health tools to improve screening and management of chronic diseases and their risk factors is warranted
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 .