Skip to content
  • About
  • Contact
  • Contribute
  • Book
  • Careers
  • Podcast
  • Recommended
  • Speaking
  • All
  • Physician
  • Practice
  • Policy
  • Finance
  • Conditions
  • .edu
  • Patient
  • Meds
  • Tech
  • Social
  • Video
    • All
    • Physician
    • Practice
    • Policy
    • Finance
    • Conditions
    • .edu
    • Patient
    • Meds
    • Tech
    • Social
    • Video
    • About
    • Contact
    • Contribute
    • Book
    • Careers
    • Podcast
    • Recommended
    • Speaking

Cholesterol management with patients requires shared decisions

Michael J. Barry, MD and John B. Wong, MD
Meds
December 14, 2013
Share
Tweet
Share

New guidelines from the American College of Cardiology and the American Heart Association on the assessment of cardiovascular risk and the manipulation of cholesterol levels to mitigate that risk have certainly been in the news. The guidelines appropriately use high quality evidence to abandon old untested or unproven paradigms such as treatment to LDL targets and manipulation of non-HDL cholesterol as a secondary goal. In many ways, the new guidelines should simplify lipid management.

But it doesn’t feel simple right now. The guidelines’ recommendations for statin treatment for particularly high-risk people with known atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), very high LDL levels, and diabetes haven’t engendered much controversy.

Recommendations for primary prevention in people at lower risk have been the main topic of debate. The updated guidelines point out that the older Adult Treatment Panel III leads to treatment of about 32% of Americans between the ages of 40 and 79 who have diabetes or a 10% risk of experiencing a first myocardial infarction or coronary death in the next 10 years.

By contrast, the new guidelines estimate that about 33% of Americans meet the threshold for taking a statin — based on a 10-year ASCVD risk of at least 7.5%. Still, many observers have worried about the numbers of Americans who would be treated with statins under the new guidelines, around 45 million by one estimate; and the potential for overtreatment of people with less favorable ratios of benefits to risks. Much of the debate has focused on whether the new risk calculator in the guidelines overestimates the 10-year risk of ASCVD in the modern era. As important to determining the number of Americans who might be treated, however, are the risk thresholds at which the guidelines encourage treatment.

The cholesterol guideline recommends statins for primary prevention in 40-75 year-olds for a calculated 10-year ASCVD risk ≥ 7.5% and offering treatment to people with a risk of 5% to <7.5%. What is easily missed in the fuss over the risk calculator and these thresholds is that the guideline recommends that clinicians and patients “engage in a discussion” of the benefits and risks before initiating therapy in primary prevention for these two low-risk groups and that little guidance is provided about the content of those conversations.

As with most guidelines, the cholesterol guideline relies on value judgments regarding tradeoffs between benefits and risks. The expert panel felt that a major ASCVD event such as heart attack or stroke would be far worse than an increase in glucose levels that might lead to diabetes.

Based on those values, the panel felt that benefit far outweighed risk for those with a calculated 10-year ASCVD risk ≥ 7.5%, but acknowledged that the “tradeoffs between ASCVD risk reduction benefit and adverse effects are less clear” for those with a 5% to <7.5% estimated 10-year ASCVD risk.

Shared decision making between patients and physicians recognizes that such tradeoffs are in the eye of the beholder when considering whether to take the statin every day. For example, it is likely that informed people with a 4% versus a 6% risk, or a 7% versus an 8% risk, though on either side of the cutpoints, might well have quite similar treatment preferences. Thus, the guideline recommendation for patient-physician discussions provides an opportunity for patients and clinicians to assess risk and clarify the patient’s health goals and the tradeoffs involved with possible statin therapy.

In his seminal work on “practice policies,” Dr. David Eddy recommended involvement of potential patients in guideline development. These people would be shown “balance sheets” presenting the tradeoffs between benefits and risks, and the distributions of their treatment preferences could be used in guideline formation. Similarly, these balance sheets, the forerunners of modern decision aids, could then be used in practice to tailor guideline recommendations to individual patients for groups in the clinical “grey zones” where not everyone wants or doesn’t want treatment.

The new guidelines would benefit from these balance sheets so that patients can weigh their own preferences and values with the harms and benefits for various risk thresholds; in fact, it is hard to derive the needed information from the texts. One must go to, for example, the Cochrane meta-analysis of trials of statins for primary prevention to learn that risks for all events are reduced about 25% across most conditions raising ASCVD risk and over the spectrum of absolute risk. So a person with an 8% 10-year ASCVD risk might expect to lower that risk to about 6% with statin therapy. Armed as well with the risks of side effects over the same time frame (rather than rates per year as provided in the guideline), and perhaps costs as well, people who would have to take the pills could more effectively participate in these treatment decisions with their clinicians.

As already indicated, the new cholesterol guidelines represent a step forward, particularly in terms of eschewing non-evidence-based LDL treatment targets and consequently avoiding over or under treatment engendered by these targets. It also promotes shared decision making with communication of individualized risk information to patients and acknowledges the need for future research on the “optimal communication of ASCVD risk information.” Hopefully future versions will include new evidence on the preferences of informed patients to better guide the initiation of treatment.

Michael J. Barry is president, and John B. Wong is medical editor, both at the Informed Medical Decisions Foundation.

Prev

It's scary when our loved ones have surgery

December 14, 2013 Kevin 15
…
Next

Will fee for service ever go away?

December 14, 2013 Kevin 8
…

ADVERTISEMENT

Tagged as: Cardiology, Medications

Post navigation

< Previous Post
It's scary when our loved ones have surgery
Next Post >
Will fee for service ever go away?

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

More in Meds

  • Why does rifaximin cost 95 percent more in the U.S. than in Asia?

    Jai Kumar, MD, Brian Nohomovich, DO, PhD and Leonid Shamban, DO
  • A world without antidepressants: What could possibly go wrong?

    Tomi Mitchell, MD
  • The truth about GLP-1 medications for weight loss: What every patient should know

    Nisha Kuruvadi, DO
  • The hidden bias in how we treat chronic pain

    Richard A. Lawhern, PhD
  • Biologics are not small molecules: the case for pre-allergy testing in an era of immune-based therapies

    Robert Trent
  • The anesthesia spectrum: Guiding patients through comfort options in oral surgery

    Dexter Mattox, MD, DMD
  • Most Popular

  • Past Week

    • Physician patriots: the forgotten founders who lit the torch of liberty

      Muhamad Aly Rifai, MD | Physician
    • Why medical students are trading empathy for publications

      Vijay Rajput, MD | Education
    • The hidden cost of becoming a doctor: a South Asian perspective

      Momeina Aslam | Education
    • Why fixing health care’s data quality is crucial for AI success [PODCAST]

      Jay Anders, MD | Podcast
    • Why innovation in health care starts with bold thinking

      Miguel Villagra, MD | Tech
    • When errors of nature are treated as medical negligence

      Howard Smith, MD | Physician
  • Past 6 Months

    • What’s driving medical students away from primary care?

      ​​Vineeth Amba, MPH, Archita Goyal, and Wayne Altman, MD | Education
    • A faster path to becoming a doctor is possible—here’s how

      Ankit Jain | Education
    • How dismantling DEI endangers the future of medical care

      Shashank Madhu and Christian Tallo | Education
    • Make cognitive testing as routine as a blood pressure check

      Joshua Baker and James Jackson, PsyD | Conditions
    • How scales of justice saved a doctor-patient relationship

      Neil Baum, MD | Physician
    • The broken health care system doesn’t have to break you

      Jessie Mahoney, MD | Physician
  • Recent Posts

    • Why innovation in health care starts with bold thinking

      Miguel Villagra, MD | Tech
    • Navigating fair market value as an independent or locum tenens physician [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast
    • Gaslighting and professional licensing: a call for reform

      Donald J. Murphy, MD | Physician
    • How self-improving AI systems are redefining intelligence and what it means for health care

      Harvey Castro, MD, MBA | Tech
    • How blockchain could rescue nursing home patients from deadly miscommunication

      Adwait Chafale | Tech
    • When service doesn’t mean another certification

      Maureen Gibbons, MD | Physician

Subscribe to KevinMD and never miss a story!

Get free updates delivered free to your inbox.


Find jobs at
Careers by KevinMD.com

Search thousands of physician, PA, NP, and CRNA jobs now.

Learn more

View 2 Comments >

Founded in 2004 by Kevin Pho, MD, KevinMD.com is the web’s leading platform where physicians, advanced practitioners, nurses, medical students, and patients share their insight and tell their stories.

Social

  • Like on Facebook
  • Follow on Twitter
  • Connect on Linkedin
  • Subscribe on Youtube
  • Instagram

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Most Popular

  • Past Week

    • Physician patriots: the forgotten founders who lit the torch of liberty

      Muhamad Aly Rifai, MD | Physician
    • Why medical students are trading empathy for publications

      Vijay Rajput, MD | Education
    • The hidden cost of becoming a doctor: a South Asian perspective

      Momeina Aslam | Education
    • Why fixing health care’s data quality is crucial for AI success [PODCAST]

      Jay Anders, MD | Podcast
    • Why innovation in health care starts with bold thinking

      Miguel Villagra, MD | Tech
    • When errors of nature are treated as medical negligence

      Howard Smith, MD | Physician
  • Past 6 Months

    • What’s driving medical students away from primary care?

      ​​Vineeth Amba, MPH, Archita Goyal, and Wayne Altman, MD | Education
    • A faster path to becoming a doctor is possible—here’s how

      Ankit Jain | Education
    • How dismantling DEI endangers the future of medical care

      Shashank Madhu and Christian Tallo | Education
    • Make cognitive testing as routine as a blood pressure check

      Joshua Baker and James Jackson, PsyD | Conditions
    • How scales of justice saved a doctor-patient relationship

      Neil Baum, MD | Physician
    • The broken health care system doesn’t have to break you

      Jessie Mahoney, MD | Physician
  • Recent Posts

    • Why innovation in health care starts with bold thinking

      Miguel Villagra, MD | Tech
    • Navigating fair market value as an independent or locum tenens physician [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast
    • Gaslighting and professional licensing: a call for reform

      Donald J. Murphy, MD | Physician
    • How self-improving AI systems are redefining intelligence and what it means for health care

      Harvey Castro, MD, MBA | Tech
    • How blockchain could rescue nursing home patients from deadly miscommunication

      Adwait Chafale | Tech
    • When service doesn’t mean another certification

      Maureen Gibbons, MD | Physician

MedPage Today Professional

An Everyday Health Property Medpage Today
  • Terms of Use | Disclaimer
  • Privacy Policy
  • DMCA Policy
All Content © KevinMD, LLC
Site by Outthink Group

Cholesterol management with patients requires shared decisions
2 comments

Comments are moderated before they are published. Please read the comment policy.

Loading Comments...