[Effectiveness of different screening strategies for primary prevention of cardiovascular diseases in a rural northern Chinese population]

Abstract

Objective: To estimate the potential health benefit of screening strategies for cardiovascular diseases primary prevention in a rural northern Chinese population.

Methods: A total of 6 221 adults aged 40-74 years old, from rural Beijing, China and free from cardiovascular diseases at baseline were included. The following screening strategies were compared: Strategy 1, the strategy based on numbers of risk factors recommended by the Chinese Guideline for Prevention of Cardiovascular Diseases in people aged 40-74; Strategy 2, screening people aged 40-74 based on the Prediction for Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease Risk in China (China-PAR) risk prediction model; Strategy 3, screening people aged 50-74 using the China-PAR risk prediction model. Participates who were classified into medium- or high-risk by the corresponding strategies would be introduced to lifestyle intervention, while high risk population would take medication in addition. Markov model was used to compare the potential health benefits within 10 years in each scenario, which applied the parameters from this rural northern Chinese cohort, published literatures, meta-analyses and systematic reviews, clinical trials and other cohort studies of Chinese population. Quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained, cardiovascular diseases (CVD) events/deaths could be prevented and number needed to be screened (NNS) per QALY gained/per CVD event prevented/per CVD death prevented were calculated to compare the effectiveness. One-way sensitivity analysis concerning uncertainty of cardiovascular disease incidence rate and probabilistic sensitivity analysis about the uncertainty of hazard ratios were conducted.

Results: Compared with non-screening strategy, the potential health benefits of each strategy were: Strategy 1 would gain QALY of 498 (95%CI: 103-894) and prevent 298 (95%CI: 155-441) CVD events; Strategy 2 would gain QALY of 691 (95%CI: 233-1 149) and prevent CVD events of 374 (95%CI: 181-567); Strategy 3 would gain QALY of 654 (95%CI: 199-1 108) and prevent CVD events of 346 (95%CI: 154-538). Screening strategy based on ChinaPAR risk prediction model (strategy 2 or 3) would be generally better in terms of QALY gained, CVD events/deaths prevented and NNS than the strategy based on numbers of CVD risk factors (all P<0.05 except NNS per QALY gained and NNS per CVD event prevented in 40-74 years). Similar benefits were obtained for the strategy 2 and 3. The results were consistent in the sensitivity analyses on the parameters of incidence rates and hazard ratios.

Conclusion: Screening people to target increased risks of cardiovascular diseases in this rural northern Chinese population is necessary. Screening strategy based on China-PAR risk prediction model could gain more health benefits than that based on numbers of CVD risk factors.