评估对降低低密度脂蛋白胆固醇的看法以及新型降脂治疗方案的作用。

IF 3.5 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH PUBLIC HEALTH REVIEWS Pub Date : 2023-05-02 eCollection Date: 2023-01-01 DOI:10.5837/bjc.2023.014
Derek L Connolly, Azfar Zaman, Nigel E Capps, Steve C Bain, Kevin Fernando
{"title":"评估对降低低密度脂蛋白胆固醇的看法以及新型降脂治疗方案的作用。","authors":"Derek L Connolly, Azfar Zaman, Nigel E Capps, Steve C Bain, Kevin Fernando","doi":"10.5837/bjc.2023.014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>While statins are the gold standard for lipid-lowering therapies, newer therapies, such as PCSK9 inhibitors, have also demonstrated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) reduction, but with a similar or better safety profile. Conflicting guidance has contributed to a low uptake. More up-to-date, evidence-led guidance supports greater use of newer therapies, particularly in combination with statins, to reduce LDL-C to levels shown to be effective in trials. The aim of this study was to determine how such guidance can be implemented more effectively in the UK. Using a modified Delphi approach, a panel of healthcare professionals with an interest in the management of dyslipidaemia developed 27 statements across four key themes. These were used to form an online survey that was distributed to healthcare professionals working in cardiovascular care across the UK. Stopping criteria included 100 responses received, a seven-month window for response (September 2021 to March 2022), and 90% of statements passing the predefined consensus threshold of 75%. A total of 109 responses were analysed with 23 statements achieving consensus (four statements <75%). Variance was observed across respondent role, and by UK region. From the high degree of consensus, seven recommendations were established as to how evidence-based guidance can be delivered, including a call for personalised therapy strategies and simplification of LDL-C goals, which should be achieved within as short a time as possible.</p>","PeriodicalId":35944,"journal":{"name":"PUBLIC HEALTH REVIEWS","volume":"37 1","pages":"14"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11189157/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessing opinion on lower LDL-cholesterol lowering, and the role of newer lipid-reducing treatment options.\",\"authors\":\"Derek L Connolly, Azfar Zaman, Nigel E Capps, Steve C Bain, Kevin Fernando\",\"doi\":\"10.5837/bjc.2023.014\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>While statins are the gold standard for lipid-lowering therapies, newer therapies, such as PCSK9 inhibitors, have also demonstrated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) reduction, but with a similar or better safety profile. Conflicting guidance has contributed to a low uptake. More up-to-date, evidence-led guidance supports greater use of newer therapies, particularly in combination with statins, to reduce LDL-C to levels shown to be effective in trials. The aim of this study was to determine how such guidance can be implemented more effectively in the UK. Using a modified Delphi approach, a panel of healthcare professionals with an interest in the management of dyslipidaemia developed 27 statements across four key themes. These were used to form an online survey that was distributed to healthcare professionals working in cardiovascular care across the UK. Stopping criteria included 100 responses received, a seven-month window for response (September 2021 to March 2022), and 90% of statements passing the predefined consensus threshold of 75%. A total of 109 responses were analysed with 23 statements achieving consensus (four statements <75%). Variance was observed across respondent role, and by UK region. From the high degree of consensus, seven recommendations were established as to how evidence-based guidance can be delivered, including a call for personalised therapy strategies and simplification of LDL-C goals, which should be achieved within as short a time as possible.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":35944,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"PUBLIC HEALTH REVIEWS\",\"volume\":\"37 1\",\"pages\":\"14\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11189157/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"PUBLIC HEALTH REVIEWS\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5837/bjc.2023.014\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PUBLIC HEALTH REVIEWS","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5837/bjc.2023.014","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

虽然他汀类药物是降脂疗法的黄金标准,但 PCSK9 抑制剂等新疗法也能降低低密度脂蛋白胆固醇(LDL-C),而且安全性相似或更好。相互矛盾的指导意见导致了低吸收率。以证据为导向的最新指导意见支持更多地使用新疗法,尤其是与他汀类药物联合使用,将低密度脂蛋白胆固醇降低到试验证明有效的水平。本研究旨在确定如何在英国更有效地实施此类指南。一个由对血脂异常管理感兴趣的医疗保健专业人士组成的小组采用改良德尔菲法,针对四个关键主题制定了 27 项声明。这些陈述被用来组成一份在线调查,分发给英国各地从事心血管护理的医护人员。终止标准包括收到 100 份回复、7 个月的回复窗口期(2021 年 9 月至 2022 年 3 月)以及 90% 的声明通过 75% 的预定共识阈值。共对 109 份回复进行了分析,其中 23 份声明达成了共识(4 份声明
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
Assessing opinion on lower LDL-cholesterol lowering, and the role of newer lipid-reducing treatment options.

While statins are the gold standard for lipid-lowering therapies, newer therapies, such as PCSK9 inhibitors, have also demonstrated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) reduction, but with a similar or better safety profile. Conflicting guidance has contributed to a low uptake. More up-to-date, evidence-led guidance supports greater use of newer therapies, particularly in combination with statins, to reduce LDL-C to levels shown to be effective in trials. The aim of this study was to determine how such guidance can be implemented more effectively in the UK. Using a modified Delphi approach, a panel of healthcare professionals with an interest in the management of dyslipidaemia developed 27 statements across four key themes. These were used to form an online survey that was distributed to healthcare professionals working in cardiovascular care across the UK. Stopping criteria included 100 responses received, a seven-month window for response (September 2021 to March 2022), and 90% of statements passing the predefined consensus threshold of 75%. A total of 109 responses were analysed with 23 statements achieving consensus (four statements <75%). Variance was observed across respondent role, and by UK region. From the high degree of consensus, seven recommendations were established as to how evidence-based guidance can be delivered, including a call for personalised therapy strategies and simplification of LDL-C goals, which should be achieved within as short a time as possible.

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
PUBLIC HEALTH REVIEWS
PUBLIC HEALTH REVIEWS Nursing-Community and Home Care
CiteScore
8.30
自引率
1.80%
发文量
47
审稿时长
5 weeks
期刊最新文献
Promoting Awareness of Data Confidentiality and Security During the COVID-19 Pandemic in a Low-Income Country-Sierra Leone. Understanding the Risk Factors, Burden, and Interventions for Chronic Respiratory Diseases in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Scoping Review. Do COVID-19 Infectious Disease Models Incorporate the Social Determinants of Health? A Systematic Review. The European Researchers' Network Working on Second Victim (ERNST) Policy Statement on the Second Victim Phenomenon for Increasing Patient Safety. Let's Be Clear-Health Impact Assessments or Assessing Health Impacts?
×
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