Cardiovascular risk assessment tools: A scoping review

ObjectivesThe objective of this review was to describe cardiovascular risk (CVR) assessment methods and to identify evidence-based practice recommendations when dealing with population at risk of developing cardiovascular diseases.Review methods and data sourcesA literature review following the Arksey and O'Malley scoping review methodology was conducted. By using appropriate key terms, literature searches were conducted in PubMed, SciELO, Cochrane Library, Dialnet, ENFISPO, Medigraphic, ScienceDirect, Cuiden, and Lilacs databases. A complementary search on websites related to the area of interest was conducted. Articles published in English or Spanish in peer-review journals between 2010 and 2017. Critical appraisal for methodological quality was conducted. Data was extracted using ad-hoc tables and qualitatively synthesized.ResultsAfter eliminating duplicates, 55 325 records remained, and 1432 records were selected for screening. Out of these, 88 full-text articles were selected for eligibility criteria, and finally, 67 studies were selected for this review, and 25 studies were selected for evidence synthesis. In total, 23 CVR assessment tools have been identified, pioneered by the Framingham study. Qualitative findings were grouped into four thematic areas: assessment tools and scores, CVR indicators, comparative models, and evidence-based recommendations.ConclusionsIt is necessary to adapt the instruments to the epidemiological reality of the population. The most appropriate way to estimate CVR is to choose the assessment tool that best suits individual conditions, accompanied by a comprehensive assessment of the patient. More research is required to determine a single, adequate, and reliable tool.     

Outcomes After Aortic Valve Replacement for Asymptomatic Severe Aortic Regurgitation and Normal Ejection Fraction

1. Download : Download high-res image (123KB)
2. Download : Download full-size image