{"title":"Evaluating Cardiovascular Risk Factors Among Healthcare Professionals in Iran.","authors":"Maryam Moshkani Farahani, Seyyed Mohammad Saeed Ghiasi, Maziar Karamali, Reza Golchin Vafa","doi":"10.12659/MSM.947409","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>BACKGROUND Cardiovascular disease is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide, necessitating accurate risk prediction models for effective prevention strategies. This study compares the predictive capabilities of 3 widely used 10-year cardiovascular risk assessment tools - Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease (ASCVD) risk score, Framingham Risk Score (FRS), and Systematic Coronary Risk Evaluation 2 (SCORE2) - in healthcare professionals in Iran. MATERIAL AND METHODS This cross-sectional study analyzed data from 222 healthcare professionals at Jamaran Hospital in Tehran, assessing cardiovascular risk profiles using the ASCVD, FRS, and SCORE2 tools. Risk factors included age, sex, dyslipidemia, hypertension, diabetes, obesity, and smoking status. Risk scores were compared to evaluate concordance and classification accuracy across different risk levels. RESULTS The prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors was notable: hypertension (30.1%), dyslipidemia (65.7%), diabetes (7.2%), and obesity (24.3%). SCORE2 showed varied distributions of fatal and nonfatal cardiovascular events. ASCVD categorized most participants as low risk (85.6%), with smaller percentages in borderline (6.8%), intermediate (7.2%), and high-risk (0.5%) groups. FRS classified 97.7% as low risk and 2.3% as intermediate risk. Moderate agreement was observed between SCORE2 and ASCVD in moderate-risk (P<0.001, kappa=0.43) and high-risk (P=0.007, kappa=0.45) regions, with fair agreement between FRS and ASCVD (P<0.001, kappa=0.435). CONCLUSIONS This study highlights the significant prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors among healthcare professionals in Iran. It emphasizes the need for recalibrating cardiovascular risk models to better reflect Iran's unique population characteristics, ultimately improving risk prediction accuracy and preventive strategies.</p>","PeriodicalId":48888,"journal":{"name":"Medical Science Monitor","volume":"31 ","pages":"e947409"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Science Monitor","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12659/MSM.947409","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
BACKGROUND Cardiovascular disease is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide, necessitating accurate risk prediction models for effective prevention strategies. This study compares the predictive capabilities of 3 widely used 10-year cardiovascular risk assessment tools - Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease (ASCVD) risk score, Framingham Risk Score (FRS), and Systematic Coronary Risk Evaluation 2 (SCORE2) - in healthcare professionals in Iran. MATERIAL AND METHODS This cross-sectional study analyzed data from 222 healthcare professionals at Jamaran Hospital in Tehran, assessing cardiovascular risk profiles using the ASCVD, FRS, and SCORE2 tools. Risk factors included age, sex, dyslipidemia, hypertension, diabetes, obesity, and smoking status. Risk scores were compared to evaluate concordance and classification accuracy across different risk levels. RESULTS The prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors was notable: hypertension (30.1%), dyslipidemia (65.7%), diabetes (7.2%), and obesity (24.3%). SCORE2 showed varied distributions of fatal and nonfatal cardiovascular events. ASCVD categorized most participants as low risk (85.6%), with smaller percentages in borderline (6.8%), intermediate (7.2%), and high-risk (0.5%) groups. FRS classified 97.7% as low risk and 2.3% as intermediate risk. Moderate agreement was observed between SCORE2 and ASCVD in moderate-risk (P<0.001, kappa=0.43) and high-risk (P=0.007, kappa=0.45) regions, with fair agreement between FRS and ASCVD (P<0.001, kappa=0.435). CONCLUSIONS This study highlights the significant prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors among healthcare professionals in Iran. It emphasizes the need for recalibrating cardiovascular risk models to better reflect Iran's unique population characteristics, ultimately improving risk prediction accuracy and preventive strategies.
期刊介绍:
Medical Science Monitor (MSM) established in 1995 is an international, peer-reviewed scientific journal which publishes original articles in Clinical Medicine and related disciplines such as Epidemiology and Population Studies, Product Investigations, Development of Laboratory Techniques :: Diagnostics and Medical Technology which enable presentation of research or review works in overlapping areas of medicine and technology such us (but not limited to): medical diagnostics, medical imaging systems, computer simulation of health and disease processes, new medical devices, etc. Reviews and Special Reports - papers may be accepted on the basis that they provide a systematic, critical and up-to-date overview of literature pertaining to research or clinical topics. Meta-analyses are considered as reviews. A special attention will be paid to a teaching value of a review paper.
Medical Science Monitor is internationally indexed in Thomson-Reuters Web of Science, Journals Citation Report (JCR), Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI), Index Medicus MEDLINE, PubMed, PMC, EMBASE/Excerpta Medica, Chemical Abstracts CAS and Index Copernicus.