Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24742018›Full record

ArticleBMC family practice2014

Current utility of the ankle-brachial index (ABI) in general practice: implications for its use in cardiovascular disease screening.

Jane H Davies, Joyce Kenkre, E Mark Williams

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC family practice, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05584072 (Evaluation of a Single Claudication Question Combined With Symptom-limited Pedal Plantarflexion Test as a Novel Screening Tool for Detection of Peripheral Arterial Disease in an Outpatient Setting), which is not on this map. Cited by 33 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.7field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT05584072 unknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

Evaluation of a Single Claudication Question Combined With Symptom-limited Pedal Plantarflexion Test as a Novel Screening Tool for Detection of Peripheral Arterial Disease in an Outpatient Setting

Typeobservational_patient_registrySponsorChinese University of Hong KongRan2021 to 2023Enrolled500ConditionsPeripheral Arterial DiseaseArmsActive pedal plantarflexion (APP) test
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

33 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 73 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Screening of peripheral arterial disease in primary health care.Vascular health and risk management · 2019
    Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jane H DaviesFaculty of Life Sciences and Education, University of South Wales, Pontypridd CF37 1DL, UK. jane.davies@southwales.ac.uk.
Joyce Kenkre
E Mark Williams
University of South Wales · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPeripheral arterial disease (PAD) is a marker of systemic atherosclerosis and associated with a three to six fold increased risk of death from cardiovascular causes. Furthermore, it is typically asymptomatic and under-diagnosed; this has resulted in escalating calls for the instigation of Primary Care PAD screening via Ankle Brachial Index (ABI) measurement. However, there is limited evidence regarding the feasibility of this and if the requisite core skills and knowledge for such a task already exist within primary care. This study aimed to determine the current utility of ABI measurement in general practices across Wales, with consideration of the implications for its use as a cardiovascular risk screening tool.

methodA self-reporting questionnaire was distributed to all 478 General Practices within Wales, sent via their responsible Health Boards.

resultsThe survey response rate was 20%. ABI measurement is primarily performed by nurses (93%) for the purpose of wound management (90%). It is infrequently (73% < 4 times per month) and often incorrectly used (42% out of compliance with current ABI guidance). Only 52% of general practitioners and 16% of nurses reported that patients with an ABI of ≤ 0.9 require aggressive cardiovascular disease risk factor modification (as recommended by current national and international guidelines).

conclusionABI measurement is an under-utilised and often incorrectly performed procedure in the surveyed general practices. Prior to its potential adoption as a formalised screening tool for cardiovascular disease, there is a need for a robust training programme with standardised methodology in order to optimise accuracy and consistency of results. The significance of a diagnosis of PAD, in terms of associated increased cardiovascular risk and the necessary risk factor modification, needs to be highlighted.

Indexed as

General PractitionersAnkle Brachial IndexCardiovascular DiseasesGoverning BoardGuideline AdherenceHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansMass ScreeningPeripheral Vascular DiseasesPractice Patterns, Physicians'Risk FactorsSelf ReportSurveys and QuestionnairesUtilization ReviewWalesWounds and Injuries

Identifiers

PMID24742018
PMCPMC4021160
OpenAlexW1967792566

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.