Abstract

BackgroundCurrent international guidelines on dyslipidemia are not concordant on various aspects of management. Also, there are no uniformly accepted Indian guidelines. We, therefore, performed a physician survey to understand lipid management practices in India.MethodsAn anonymous survey questionnaire was administered to gauge physicians’ self-reported behavior regarding lipid management aspects. Results were expressed in terms of percentages based on the number of responses obtained.ResultsA total of 404 physicians participated in the survey. Eighty-eight percent respondents ordered a lipid profile before starting statin therapy, and 80% preferred to set lipid targets, though the tools used for calculating cardiovascular risk varied. Atorvastatin was preferred over rosuvastatin in primary prevention (72.9 vs. 32.4%), secondary prevention (54.6 vs. 46.7%), diabetic patients (56.3 vs. 40.3%) and post-ACS (78.3 vs. 34%). High-intensity statins were preferred by 73.7% of respondents in post-ACS cases. Fifty percent doctors chose not to use a statin in diabetic patients, irrespective of their LDL-C levels. The most preferred drug option for managing atherogenic dyslipidemia and moderate hypertriglyceridemia was statin-fibrate combination (55.1%) and fibrates (35.4%), respectively. Sixty-three percent doctors preferred to prescribe statins in patients with moderately high LDL-C and normal triglycerides, without CHD or CHD risk equivalents. Around 28% of doctors preferred not to use pharmacotherapy for managing isolated low HDL. Of the participants, 73% used fibrates in ≤20% of their dyslipidemic patients, with fenofibrate being the most preferred (90.5%). Ezetimibe was mainly used in patients with uncontrolled LDL-C despite statin therapy (52.4% respondents). Most preferred approaches to manage statin intolerance included reducing statin dose (39%) and stopping and restarting statins at a lower dose (34.5%). Fifty-two percent of doctors chose not to alter pre-existing therapy in patients who had LDL-C levels at goal but elevated non-HDL-C levels.ConclusionThis is the first survey in India that provides useful insights into Indian physicians’ self-reported perspectives on managing dyslipidemia in routine clinical practice. Despite concordance with the currently available guidelines in certain aspects, there is incongruence in managing specific dyslipidemia problems. Further continuing medical education and the development of evidence-based, India-specific lipid guidelines can help reduce some of these differences.

Highlights

  • Current international guidelines on dyslipidemia are not concordant on various aspects of management

  • In 2013, the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI), U.S.A., in collaboration with the American College of Cardiology (ACC) and the American Heart Association (AHA), released guidelines that focused primarily on the risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) [4]. These guidelines abolished lipid targets recommended by the previous U.S National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP)–Adult Treatment Panel III (ATP III) guidelines [5], but identified four patient groups that would benefit from statin therapy

  • The 11 questions were practice-related, and gathered information regarding lipid profile testing ordered by the physicians, their opinions pertaining to target low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goals, method used for CV risk stratification, and the statin preference in different practice settings

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Current international guidelines on dyslipidemia are not concordant on various aspects of management. In 2013, the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI), U.S.A., in collaboration with the American College of Cardiology (ACC) and the American Heart Association (AHA), released guidelines that focused primarily on the risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) [4]. These guidelines abolished lipid targets recommended by the previous U.S National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP)–Adult Treatment Panel III (ATP III) guidelines [5], but identified four patient groups that would benefit from statin therapy. Besides disagreement on the utility of lipid targets, these guidelines are not concordant on various other aspects of lipid management

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call