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

We are overprescribing statin medications for high cholesterol. Here’s why.

Richard Young, MD
Meds
March 16, 2015
Share
Tweet
Share

The American Heart Association (AHA) recently proposed new guidelines for all doctors to screen and treat for high cholesterol. For doctors and patients to follow, this would result in a large increase in the number of Americans taking statins.

One of the things I like about the new proposal is that there is no more chasing a number. This was frustrating for doctors and patients to keep having lab draws and medication adjustments to try to get the LDL cholesterol level below 100 mg/dL. A lot of doctors would add additional medicines beyond the statins to reach the target. There is ample proof that none of the other cholesterol-lowering medicines actually impact mortality or overall quality of life, so all of that effort was and is a huge waste.

From the doctors’ perspective, there was a dark side to the numerical target. Simplistic regulators of American medicine essentially conclude that I am a bad doctor if my patient’s cholesterol was 101. It doesn’t meet the target. Never mind that the patient started at a LDL cholesterol level of 240 or couldn’t afford to take her medicines.

Not chasing numbers is a good thing. The AHA guidelines now sound much more like the British guidelines in the sense that they want doctors to declare a patient either high risk or low risk. The high-risk patients are put on a statin with no subsequent cholesterol number checking. The low risk don’t get statins.

Now for the rub. The British have been using the number of a 20 percent risk of developing symptomatic coronary disease in the next ten years as their definition of high risk. NICE wants to lower that to 10 percent, but that number has created a lot of controversy in Britain. Many GPs and other feel this would result in too many British patients being pushed to take a drug of marginal value. In fact, about 2/3 of GPS are just not using this new threshold. (This article also talks about the side effects of statins that were largely ignored in some of the risk-benefit calculations.)

The AHA wants the high-risk definition to be 7.5 percent, and it even includes a risk calculator on its website. When the guidelines first were published, many criticized the risk calculator for exaggerating risk. Now there is more proof that this is the case.

A study in Annals of Internal Medicine compared 5 risk scores to data they gathered in a longitudinal study of the progression of cardiovascular disease in 50 to 74 year olds: the prime population most likely to benefit from statins. The authors calculated that the AHA score exaggerated the risk by 25 percent to 115 percent. Some of the other predictors overshot the mark by up to 154 percent. This means that potentially over twice the number of patients would be cajoled into taking statins who really aren’t high-risk patients.

We should adopt a similar approach as the British and use the high-risk/low-risk approach with no number chasing after the medicine is started. The Medicare meaningless use criteria should be updated to reflect this approach. We should use a CVD risk of 10 to 20 percent as the definition of high risk. (There are differing opinions by reasonable people on both sides of the pond as to the best number.) The cardiologists’ efforts to scare millions of people into taking marginally effective statins because of a faulty risk calculator should be ignored.

Richard Young is a family physician who blogs at American Health Scare.

Prev

The paradox of physician communication

March 16, 2015 Kevin 3
…
Next

The gun violence epidemic is a traumatic injury epidemic

March 16, 2015 Kevin 45
…

Tagged as: Cardiology

Post navigation

< Previous Post
The paradox of physician communication
Next Post >
The gun violence epidemic is a traumatic injury epidemic

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

More by Richard Young, MD

  • When medical protocol meets family concerns

    Richard Young, MD
  • Patients in Sweden received fewer post-op opioids. Why is that?

    Richard Young, MD
  • Medicine is too complex for computers to keep up with or understand

    Richard Young, MD

More in Meds

  • Why retail pharmacies are the future of diverse clinical trials

    Shelli Pavone
  • 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
  • Most Popular

  • Past Week

    • Why tracking cognitive load could save doctors and patients

      Hiba Fatima Hamid | Education
    • What the world must learn from the life and death of Hind Rajab

      Saba Qaiser, RN | Conditions
    • How medical culture hides burnout in plain sight

      Marco Benítez | Conditions
    • Why flashy AI tools won’t fix health care without real infrastructure

      David Carmouche, MD | Tech
    • How the 10th Apple Effect is stealing your joy in medicine

      Neil Baum, MD | Physician
    • Why Medicaid cuts should alarm every doctor

      Ilan Shapiro, MD | Policy
  • Past 6 Months

    • Why tracking cognitive load could save doctors and patients

      Hiba Fatima Hamid | Education
    • Make cognitive testing as routine as a blood pressure check

      Joshua Baker and James Jackson, PsyD | Conditions
    • The silent toll of ICE raids on U.S. patient care

      Carlin Lockwood | Policy
    • The broken health care system doesn’t have to break you

      Jessie Mahoney, MD | Physician
    • How dismantling DEI endangers the future of medical care

      Shashank Madhu and Christian Tallo | Education
    • How scales of justice saved a doctor-patient relationship

      Neil Baum, MD | Physician
  • Recent Posts

    • Why local cardiac CT scans could save your life

      Benjamin Cohen, MD | Conditions
    • Reassessing the impact of CDC’s opioid guidelines on chronic pain care [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast
    • Key strategies for smooth EHR transitions in health care

      Sandra Johnson | Tech
    • How proposed NIH budget cuts could derail Alzheimer’s research

      Tamer Hage, Tejas Sekhar, and Swapna Vaja | Conditions
    • Removing vaccine advisers could jeopardize lives

      J. Leonard Lichtenfeld, MD | Physician
    • Why Medicaid cuts should alarm every doctor

      Ilan Shapiro, MD | Policy

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 11 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

    • Why tracking cognitive load could save doctors and patients

      Hiba Fatima Hamid | Education
    • What the world must learn from the life and death of Hind Rajab

      Saba Qaiser, RN | Conditions
    • How medical culture hides burnout in plain sight

      Marco Benítez | Conditions
    • Why flashy AI tools won’t fix health care without real infrastructure

      David Carmouche, MD | Tech
    • How the 10th Apple Effect is stealing your joy in medicine

      Neil Baum, MD | Physician
    • Why Medicaid cuts should alarm every doctor

      Ilan Shapiro, MD | Policy
  • Past 6 Months

    • Why tracking cognitive load could save doctors and patients

      Hiba Fatima Hamid | Education
    • Make cognitive testing as routine as a blood pressure check

      Joshua Baker and James Jackson, PsyD | Conditions
    • The silent toll of ICE raids on U.S. patient care

      Carlin Lockwood | Policy
    • The broken health care system doesn’t have to break you

      Jessie Mahoney, MD | Physician
    • How dismantling DEI endangers the future of medical care

      Shashank Madhu and Christian Tallo | Education
    • How scales of justice saved a doctor-patient relationship

      Neil Baum, MD | Physician
  • Recent Posts

    • Why local cardiac CT scans could save your life

      Benjamin Cohen, MD | Conditions
    • Reassessing the impact of CDC’s opioid guidelines on chronic pain care [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast
    • Key strategies for smooth EHR transitions in health care

      Sandra Johnson | Tech
    • How proposed NIH budget cuts could derail Alzheimer’s research

      Tamer Hage, Tejas Sekhar, and Swapna Vaja | Conditions
    • Removing vaccine advisers could jeopardize lives

      J. Leonard Lichtenfeld, MD | Physician
    • Why Medicaid cuts should alarm every doctor

      Ilan Shapiro, MD | Policy

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

We are overprescribing statin medications for high cholesterol. Here’s why.
11 comments

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

Loading Comments...