脂蛋白(a)检测的态度和障碍:宾夕法尼亚大学医疗系统医疗服务提供者调查

IF 3.6 3区 医学 Q2 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY Journal of clinical lipidology Pub Date : 2024-09-01 DOI:10.1016/j.jacl.2024.07.012
Jillian D'Souza BS, Daniel E. Soffer MD, Archna Bajaj MD, MSCE
{"title":"脂蛋白(a)检测的态度和障碍:宾夕法尼亚大学医疗系统医疗服务提供者调查","authors":"Jillian D'Souza BS,&nbsp;Daniel E. Soffer MD,&nbsp;Archna Bajaj MD, MSCE","doi":"10.1016/j.jacl.2024.07.012","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Guidelines recommend checking lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] levels in patients at high-risk for cardiovascular disease, with more recent recommendations advocating for universal screening in all adults. A brief electronic survey was distributed to select groups of University of Pennsylvania Health System (UPHS) providers, including Internal Medicine and Cardiology physicians and advance practice providers, to understand the current attitudes and barriers to testing for Lp(a). Of the 126 survey respondents, only 31% answered that they test for Lp(a) regularly in their practice. Presence of ASCVD and a family history of ASCVD were the most common reasons for testing. Most survey respondents (69%) replied that they do not currently check Lp(a) levels in patients. The most common reasons provided included lack of familiarity with Lp(a), insurance/ billing concerns, lack of clinical trial outcomes data, and lack of available pharmaceutical interventions. Results from ongoing clinical trials of novel Lp(a)-lowering therapies, if successful, may address provider hesitation toward Lp(a)-testing, but there remains a large gap to fill in awareness of Lp(a).</div></div>","PeriodicalId":15392,"journal":{"name":"Journal of clinical lipidology","volume":"18 5","pages":"Pages e873-e876"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Attitudes and barriers to lipoprotein(a) testing: A survey of providers at the University of Pennsylvania Health System\",\"authors\":\"Jillian D'Souza BS,&nbsp;Daniel E. Soffer MD,&nbsp;Archna Bajaj MD, MSCE\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jacl.2024.07.012\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Guidelines recommend checking lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] levels in patients at high-risk for cardiovascular disease, with more recent recommendations advocating for universal screening in all adults. A brief electronic survey was distributed to select groups of University of Pennsylvania Health System (UPHS) providers, including Internal Medicine and Cardiology physicians and advance practice providers, to understand the current attitudes and barriers to testing for Lp(a). Of the 126 survey respondents, only 31% answered that they test for Lp(a) regularly in their practice. Presence of ASCVD and a family history of ASCVD were the most common reasons for testing. Most survey respondents (69%) replied that they do not currently check Lp(a) levels in patients. The most common reasons provided included lack of familiarity with Lp(a), insurance/ billing concerns, lack of clinical trial outcomes data, and lack of available pharmaceutical interventions. Results from ongoing clinical trials of novel Lp(a)-lowering therapies, if successful, may address provider hesitation toward Lp(a)-testing, but there remains a large gap to fill in awareness of Lp(a).</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15392,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of clinical lipidology\",\"volume\":\"18 5\",\"pages\":\"Pages e873-e876\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of clinical lipidology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S193328742400223X\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of clinical lipidology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S193328742400223X","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

指南建议检查心血管疾病高危患者的脂蛋白(a)[Lp(a)]水平,最新的建议主张对所有成年人进行普遍筛查。我们向宾夕法尼亚大学医疗系统(UPHS)的部分医疗服务提供者(包括内科和心脏病科医生以及高级医疗服务提供者)发放了一份简短的电子调查问卷,以了解他们目前对脂蛋白(a)检测的态度和障碍。在126名调查对象中,只有31%的人回答说他们在诊疗过程中定期检测脂蛋白(a)。存在 ASCVD 和 ASCVD 家族史是最常见的检测原因。大多数调查对象(69%)回答说,他们目前没有检测患者的脂蛋白(a)水平。最常见的原因包括不熟悉脂蛋白(a)、保险/账单问题、缺乏临床试验结果数据以及缺乏可用的药物干预措施。正在进行的降低脂蛋白(a)的新型疗法临床试验的结果如果成功,可能会解决医疗服务提供者对脂蛋白(a)检测的犹豫不决,但在对脂蛋白(a)的认识方面仍有很大的差距需要填补。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Attitudes and barriers to lipoprotein(a) testing: A survey of providers at the University of Pennsylvania Health System
Guidelines recommend checking lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] levels in patients at high-risk for cardiovascular disease, with more recent recommendations advocating for universal screening in all adults. A brief electronic survey was distributed to select groups of University of Pennsylvania Health System (UPHS) providers, including Internal Medicine and Cardiology physicians and advance practice providers, to understand the current attitudes and barriers to testing for Lp(a). Of the 126 survey respondents, only 31% answered that they test for Lp(a) regularly in their practice. Presence of ASCVD and a family history of ASCVD were the most common reasons for testing. Most survey respondents (69%) replied that they do not currently check Lp(a) levels in patients. The most common reasons provided included lack of familiarity with Lp(a), insurance/ billing concerns, lack of clinical trial outcomes data, and lack of available pharmaceutical interventions. Results from ongoing clinical trials of novel Lp(a)-lowering therapies, if successful, may address provider hesitation toward Lp(a)-testing, but there remains a large gap to fill in awareness of Lp(a).
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.00
自引率
6.80%
发文量
209
审稿时长
49 days
期刊介绍: Because the scope of clinical lipidology is broad, the topics addressed by the Journal are equally diverse. Typical articles explore lipidology as it is practiced in the treatment setting, recent developments in pharmacological research, reports of treatment and trials, case studies, the impact of lifestyle modification, and similar academic material of interest to the practitioner. While preference is given to material of immediate practical concern, the science that underpins lipidology is forwarded by expert contributors so that evidence-based approaches to reducing cardiovascular and coronary heart disease can be made immediately available to our readers. Sections of the Journal will address pioneering studies and the clinicians who conduct them, case studies, ethical standards and conduct, professional guidance such as ATP and NCEP, editorial commentary, letters from readers, National Lipid Association (NLA) news and upcoming event information, as well as abstracts from the NLA annual scientific sessions and the scientific forums held by its chapters, when appropriate.
期刊最新文献
Burden of atherogenic lipids and association with cardiac allograft vasculopathy in heart transplant recipients. Development and validation of clinical criteria to identify familial chylomicronemia syndrome (FCS) in North America. Identification and functional analysis of novel homozygous LMF1 variants in severe hypertriglyceridemia. Falsely elevated triglyceride and lipase levels due to hyperglycerolemia in a burn patient treated with topical silver sulfadiazine. Complex dyslipidemia induced by Lorlatinib therapy: A case study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1