Inadequate treatment with HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors by health care providers

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0002-9343(96)00011-3Get rights and content

Purpose

To determine if patients treated with HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors have their LDL cholesterol levels at or below the levels recommended by the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) and if patients on these medications are monitored for potential toxicity.

Patients and methods

Ninety patients from the VA Medical Center in San Francisco were randomly selected in this retrospective analysis. All patients were taking a HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor as monotherapy for treatment of high blood cholesterol for a minimum of 1 year. Medical charts and laboratory and pharmacy computer databases were utilized to gather information regarding the patients' medical history, treatment history, relevant laboratory tests, and medication refill profile.

Results

The majority of patients, 73%, were secondary prevention patients. Only 33% of the 90 subjects met the LDL cholesterol goal recommended by the NCEP. For the secondary prevention patients, only 24% met goal LDL. Even when the stringency of the NCEP guidelines was reduced by 20% (goal LDL < 120 mg/dL), 50% of the secondary prevention patients were still inadequately treated. Only 2 of the 90 patients were on maximal dosage regimens. Sixty-seven percent of patients had annual lipid panels and 49% had annual liver panels. Forty-five percent of patients followed by nonphysicians met goal LDL while only 29% and 31% of patients followed by attending physicians and residents/fellows met goal LDL, respectively. In addition, patients followed by nonphysicians were monitored more closely for efficacy and toxicity of the medications.

Conclusions

Based on the current NCEP recommendations, patients on monotherapy with HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors are often inadequately treated. Only 33% of the patients evaluated at our institution were at or below the NCEP recommended LDL cholesterol levels and less than half of the patients were adequately monitored for hepatotoxicity.

References (17)

  • CastelliWP et al.

    Incidence of coronary heart disease and lipoprotein cholesterol levels.The Framingham study

    JAMA

    (1986)
  • NeatonJD et al.

    Serum Cholesterol level and mortality findings for men screened in the multiple risk factor intervention trial

    Arch Intern Med

    (1992)
  • LevineGN et al.

    Cholesterol reduction in cardiovascular disease. Clinical benefits and possible mechanisms

    NEJM

    (1995)
  • SuperkoHR et al.

    Coronary artery disease regression. Convincing evidence for the benefit of aggressive lipoprotein management

    Circulation

    (1994)
  • Randomised trial of cholesterol lowering in 4444 patients with coronary heart disease: the Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study (4S)

    Lancet

    (1994)
  • Expert Panel on Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol in Adults. Summary of the Second Report of the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) Expert Panel on Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol in Adults (Adult Treatment Panel II)

    JAMA

    (1993)
  • GrundySM

    HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors for treatment of hypercholesteremia

    NEJM

    (1988)
  • BlumCB

    Comparison of properties of four inhibitors of 3-Hydroxy-3-Methyglutaryl-Coenzyme A reductase

    Am J Cardiol

    (1994)
There are more references available in the full text version of this article.

Cited by (176)

  • Active Lipid Management In Coronary Artery Disease (ALMICAD) Study

    2007, American Journal of Medicine
    Citation Excerpt :

    Despite robust data about secondary prevention and national guidelines, hyperlipidemia is not adequately treated in clinical practice.9 The highest risk patients with established coronary artery disease, who benefit the most from lipid-lowering therapy, historically achieve LDL cholesterol targets at low rates in practice.10,11 Treatment of these patients in some specialized clinics has demonstrated better lipid control, but clinical efficacy studies are lacking.13,14

  • Achieving low-density lipoprotein cholesterol goals in high-risk patients in managed care: Comparison of rosuvastatin, atorvastatin, and simvastatin in the SOLAR Trial

    2007, Mayo Clinic Proceedings
    Citation Excerpt :

    Use of more effective statins in the appropriate patient population could facilitate improved attainment of Health Plan Employer and Data Information Set performance goals by physicians and managed care organizations. Available data indicate that most patients continue treatment with initial statin doses in routine clinical practice and that LDL-C goals are achieved only infrequently in high-risk patients.1–4,7,22 Some reasons for inadequate titration in routine clinical practice may be the lack of resources at clinician offices to schedule more frequent visits, lack of adherence to or patient availability for recommended follow-up visits, and/or lack of standard programs, appropriately individualized, for patient management of dyslipidemia and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk.23

  • Effect of individualizing starting doses of a statin according to baseline LDL-cholesterol levels on achieving cholesterol targets: The Achieve Cholesterol Targets Fast with Atorvastatin Stratified Titration (ACTFAST) study

    2007, Atherosclerosis
    Citation Excerpt :

    It is a widespread medical practice to initiate statin treatment at the lowest dose. Unfortunately, it is also common that doses are not titrated up in order to reach the recommended LDL-C goal [12–14]. Tailoring the starting dose according to individual LDL-C reduction requirements may aid in the achievement of target LDL-C levels [12,15].

View all citing articles on Scopus
View full text