The relative merits of population-based and targeted prevention strategies.

Donna M. Zulman, S. Vijan, G. Omenn, R. Hayward
{"title":"The relative merits of population-based and targeted prevention strategies.","authors":"Donna M. Zulman, S. Vijan, G. Omenn, R. Hayward","doi":"10.1111/j.1468-0009.2008.00534.x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"CONTEXT\nPreventive medicine has historically favored reducing a risk factor by a small amount in the entire population rather than by a large amount in high-risk individuals. The use of multivariable risk prediction tools, however, may affect the relative merits of this strategy.\n\n\nMETHODS\nThis study uses risk factor data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey III to simulate a population of more than 100 million Americans aged thirty or older with no history of CV disease. Three strategies that could affect CV events, CV mortality, and quality-adjusted life years were examined: (1) a population-based strategy that treats all individuals with a low- or moderate-intensity intervention (in which the low-intensity intervention represents a public health campaign with no demonstrable adverse effects), (2) a targeted strategy that treats individuals in the top 25 percent based on a single risk factor (LDL), and (3) a risk-targeted strategy that treats individuals in the top 25 percent based on overall CV risk (as predicted by a multivariable prediction tool). The efficiency of each strategy was compared while varying the intervention's intensity and associated adverse effects, and the accuracy of the risk prediction tool.\n\n\nFINDINGS\nThe LDL-targeted strategy and the low-intensity population-based strategy were comparable for CV events prevented over five years (0.79 million and 0.75 million, respectively), as were the risk-targeted strategy and moderate-intensity population-based strategy (1.56 million and 1.87 million, respectively). The risk-targeted strategy, however, was more efficient than the moderate-intensity population-based strategy (number needed to treat [NNT] 19 vs. 62). Incorporating a small degree of treatment-related adverse effects greatly magnified the relative advantages of the risk-targeted approach over other strategies. Reducing the accuracy of the prediction tool only modestly decreased this greater efficiency.\n\n\nCONCLUSIONS\nA population-based prevention strategy can be an excellent option if an intervention has almost no adverse effects. But if the intervention has even a small degree of disutility, a targeted approach using multivariable risk prediction can prevent more morbidity and mortality while treating many fewer people.","PeriodicalId":78777,"journal":{"name":"The Milbank Memorial Fund quarterly","volume":"10 1","pages":"557-80"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2008-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"92","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Milbank Memorial Fund quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0009.2008.00534.x","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 92

Abstract

CONTEXT Preventive medicine has historically favored reducing a risk factor by a small amount in the entire population rather than by a large amount in high-risk individuals. The use of multivariable risk prediction tools, however, may affect the relative merits of this strategy. METHODS This study uses risk factor data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey III to simulate a population of more than 100 million Americans aged thirty or older with no history of CV disease. Three strategies that could affect CV events, CV mortality, and quality-adjusted life years were examined: (1) a population-based strategy that treats all individuals with a low- or moderate-intensity intervention (in which the low-intensity intervention represents a public health campaign with no demonstrable adverse effects), (2) a targeted strategy that treats individuals in the top 25 percent based on a single risk factor (LDL), and (3) a risk-targeted strategy that treats individuals in the top 25 percent based on overall CV risk (as predicted by a multivariable prediction tool). The efficiency of each strategy was compared while varying the intervention's intensity and associated adverse effects, and the accuracy of the risk prediction tool. FINDINGS The LDL-targeted strategy and the low-intensity population-based strategy were comparable for CV events prevented over five years (0.79 million and 0.75 million, respectively), as were the risk-targeted strategy and moderate-intensity population-based strategy (1.56 million and 1.87 million, respectively). The risk-targeted strategy, however, was more efficient than the moderate-intensity population-based strategy (number needed to treat [NNT] 19 vs. 62). Incorporating a small degree of treatment-related adverse effects greatly magnified the relative advantages of the risk-targeted approach over other strategies. Reducing the accuracy of the prediction tool only modestly decreased this greater efficiency. CONCLUSIONS A population-based prevention strategy can be an excellent option if an intervention has almost no adverse effects. But if the intervention has even a small degree of disutility, a targeted approach using multivariable risk prediction can prevent more morbidity and mortality while treating many fewer people.
以人群为基础和有针对性的预防战略的相对优点。
历史上,预防医学倾向于在整个人群中少量减少风险因素,而不是在高危人群中大量减少风险因素。然而,多变量风险预测工具的使用可能会影响该策略的相对优点。方法:本研究使用来自美国国家健康与营养调查III的风险因素数据,模拟1亿多30岁及以上无心血管疾病史的美国人。研究了可能影响心血管事件、心血管死亡率和质量调整生命年的三种策略:(1)以人群为基础的策略,通过低强度或中等强度的干预(其中低强度干预代表没有明显不良反应的公共卫生运动)治疗所有个体,(2)基于单一风险因素(LDL)治疗前25%个体的目标策略,以及(3)基于总体CV风险(通过多变量预测工具预测)治疗前25%个体的风险目标策略。在改变干预强度和相关不良反应的同时,比较了每种策略的效率,以及风险预测工具的准确性。结果:低密度脂蛋白靶向策略和低强度人群为基础的策略在5年内预防心血管事件方面具有可比性(分别为79万和75万),风险靶向策略和中等强度人群为基础的策略也是如此(分别为156万和187万)。然而,以风险为目标的策略比中等强度的基于人群的策略更有效(需要治疗的人数[NNT] 19对62)。与其他策略相比,纳入少量与治疗相关的不良反应大大放大了以风险为目标的方法的相对优势。降低预测工具的准确性只是适度地降低了这种更高的效率。结论如果干预几乎没有不良反应,以人群为基础的预防策略是一个很好的选择。但是,如果干预措施有很小程度的负效用,使用多变量风险预测的有针对性的方法可以预防更多的发病率和死亡率,同时治疗更少的人。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信