Professional Documents
Culture Documents
As Regards Treatment Goal Attainment Compared With Courage: The Perfect Should Not Be The Enemy of The Good
As Regards Treatment Goal Attainment Compared With Courage: The Perfect Should Not Be The Enemy of The Good
As Regards Treatment Goal Attainment Compared With Courage: The Perfect Should Not Be The Enemy of The Good
16, 2014
2014 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation ISSN 0735-1097/$36.00
Published by Elsevier Inc. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2014.01.047
of patients met all targeted risk factors devalues the success REFERENCES
observed in the REGARDS study. For example, a secondary 1. Fihn SD, Gardin JM, Abrams J, et al. 2012 ACCF/AHA/ACP/
analysis that focused on attainment of 3 Class I recom- AATS/PCNA/SCAI/STS Guideline for the diagnosis and manage-
mendations (aspirin use, systolic and diastolic blood pressure ment of patients with stable ischemic heart disease: a report of the
American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Asso-
control, and LDL-C control) revealed that 91% of partici- ciation Task Force on Practice Guidelines, and the American College
pants met at least 1 of these 4 goals. The free-living of Physicians, American Association for Thoracic Surgery, Preventive
American adults with SIHD who were surveyed for the Cardiovascular Nurses Association, Society for Cardiovascular Angi-
ography and Interventions, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons. J Am
REGARDS study were not dissimilar from the patients who Coll Cardiol 2012;60:e44164.
volunteered to participate in the COURAGE trial. In the 2. Brown TM, Voeks JH, Bittner V, et al. Achievement of optimal
REGARDS study, 38% had an LDL-C <85 mg/dl at the medical therapy goals for U.S. adults with coronary artery disease: re-
sults from the REGARDS study (REasons for Geographic And Racial
time of enrollment compared with 28% in the COURAGE Differences in Stroke). J Am Coll Cardiol 2014;63:162633.
trial at the time of randomization, yet that proportion of 3. Smith SC Jr., Allen J, Blair SN, et al. AHA/ACC guidelines for
patients in the COURAGE trial increased to 70% after 5 secondary prevention for patients with coronary and other athero-
sclerotic vascular disease: 2006 update endorsed by the National
years (10), indicating reason for optimism. Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006;47:
Although skepticism persists that the treatment targets 21309.
achieved in the COURAGE trial can be replicated in the 4. Smith SC Jr., Benjamin EJ, Bonow RO, et al. AHA/ACCF secondary
prevention and risk reduction therapy for patients with coronary and
real world, we need to also recognize that it may be unre- other atherosclerotic vascular disease: 2011 update: a guideline from the
alistic to achieve each and every goal and that success in American Heart Association and American College of Cardiology
secondary prevention need not be measured in binary terms Foundation endorsed by the World Heart Federation and the Pre-
ventive Cardiovascular Nurses Association. J Am Coll Cardiol 2011;58:
(all or nothing). As such, we should not fall prey to the 243246.
aphorism that the perfect is the enemy of the good. We 5. Newby LK, LaPointe NM, Chen AY, et al. Long-term adherence to
should recognize the value of achievement of individual evidence-based secondary prevention therapies in coronary artery dis-
ease. Circulation 2006;113:20312.
Class I recommendations for secondary prevention. The 6. Cacoub PP, Zeymer U, Limbourg T, et al. Effects of adherence to
more ambitious, broad-based success that we all seek can guidelines for the control of major cardiovascular risk factors on out-
only be achieved by designing and implementing better comes in the REduction of Atherothrombosis for Continued Health
(REACH) Registry Europe. Heart 2011;97:6607.
strategies to improve guideline adherence at the patient, 7. Teo K, Lear S, Islam S, et al. Prevalence of a healthy lifestyle among
provider, and system levels (11). New models of team-based individuals with cardiovascular disease in high-, middle- and low-
healthcare delivery are needed to achieve enhanced adher- income countries: the Prospective Urban Rural Epidemiology
(PURE) study. JAMA 2013;309:161321.
ence to multiple treatment goals, ultimately in the context of 8. Muntner P, Levitan EB, Brown TM, et al. Trends in the prevalence,
a more enlightened healthcare system that rewards quality awareness, treatment and control of high low density lipoprotein-
and outcomes for both patients and physicians. Clearly, this cholesterol among United States adults from 1999-2000 through
2009-2010. Am J Cardiol 2013;112:66470.
will require a multidisciplinary effort among multiple con- 9. Farkouh ME, Boden WE, Bittner V, et al. Risk factor control for
stituents, including clinicians, healthcare researchers, poli- coronary artery disease secondary prevention in large randomized trials.
cymakers, and population scientists, to bridge the remaining J Am Coll Cardiol 2013;61:160715.
10. Maron DJ, Boden WE, ORourke RA, et al. Intensive multifactorial
gaps between evidence-based medicine and clinical practice. intervention for stable coronary artery disease: optimal medical therapy
With REGARDS to these noteworthy challenges, let us in the COURAGE (Clinical Outcomes Utilizing Revascularization
not lose the COURAGE and conviction that we need to and Aggressive Drug Evaluation) Trial. J Am Coll Cardiol 2010;55:
134858.
identify new ways of doing better. 11. Miller NH, Hill M, Kottke T, Ockene IS. The multilevel compliance
challenge: recommendations for a call to action. A statement for
healthcare professionals. Circulation 1997;95:108590.
Reprint requests and correspondence: Dr. David J. Maron, Falk
Cardiovascular Research Center 289, 300 Pasteur Drive, Stanford,
California 94305. E-mail: david.maron@stanford.edu.
Key Words: coronary artery disease - prevention - risk factors.