Open AccessDoes management of lipid lowering differ between specialists and primary care: Insights from GOAL Canada
Author(s) -
Langer Anatoly,
Tan Mary,
Goodman Shaun G.,
Grégoire Jean,
Lin Peter J.,
Mancini G. B. John,
Stone James A.,
Leiter Lawrence A.
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
international journal of clinical practice
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.756
H-Index - 98
eISSN - 1742-1241
pISSN - 1368-5031
DOI - 10.1111/ijcp.13861
Subject(s) - medicine , ezetimibe , statin , family history , kidney disease , diabetes mellitus , coronary artery disease , primary care , physical therapy , endocrinology , family medicine
Background We studied whether significant differences in care gaps exist between specialists and primary care physicians (PCPs). Methods GOAL Canada enrolled patients with CVD or familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) and LDL‐C > 2.0 mmol/L despite maximally tolerated statin therapy. During follow‐up, physicians received online reminders of treatment recommendations based on Canadian Guidelines. Results A total of 177 physicians (58% PCPs) enrolled 2009 patients; approximately half of the patients were enrolled by each physician group. Patients enrolled by specialists were slightly older (mean age 63 years vs 62), female (45% vs 40%), Caucasian (77% vs 65%), and had a slightly higher systolic pressure and lower heart rate. Patients enrolled by specialists had less frequent history of FH, diabetes, hypertension, chronic kidney disease and liver disease but more frequent history of coronary artery disease, atrial fibrillation and premature family history of CVD. There was no significant baseline difference in LDL‐C, HDL‐C or non‐HDL‐C, although total cholesterol and triglycerides were slightly higher in patients managed by PCPs. At baseline, PCPs were more likely to use statins (80% vs 73%, P = .0002) and other therapies such as niacin or fibrate (10% vs 6%, P = .0006) but similar use of ezetimibe (24% vs 27%, P = .15). At the end of follow‐up, specialists used less statins (70% vs 77%, P = .0005) and other therapies (6% vs 10%, P = .007) but more ezetimibe (45% vs 38%, P = .01) and the same frequency of PCSK9i (28% vs 27%, P = .65). The proportion of patients achieving the recommended LDL‐C level of 2.0 mmol/L or below (primary endpoint) was similar at last available visit between specialists and PCPs (44% vs 42%, P = .32). Conclusion Despite minor differences in the clinical profile of their patients, both PCPs and specialists actively participate in the management of lipid‐lowering therapy in high‐risk CVD patients and experience similar challenges and care gaps.