Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28673294›Full record

ArticleLipids in health and disease2017

Lipid management in India: a nationwide, cross-sectional physician survey.

Gurpreet S Wander, Uday M Jadhav, Amruta Chemburkar, Meena Lopez, Jaideep Gogtay

Open access · goldFull text read
In one paragraph

Article in Lipids in health and disease, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Gurpreet S WanderDepartment of Cardiology, Hero DMC Heart Institute, Dayanand Medical College and Hospital, Ludhiana, Punjab, India.
Uday M JadhavDepartment of Cardiology, MGM New Bombay Hospital, New Mumbai, 400703, India.
Amruta ChemburkarCipla Ltd, Lower Parel, Mumbai, 400013, India.
Meena LopezCipla Ltd, Lower Parel, Mumbai, 400013, India. meena@cipla.com.
Jaideep GogtayCipla Ltd, Lower Parel, Mumbai, 400013, India.
Cipla (India) · INBombay Hospital · INDayanand Medical College & Hospital · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCurrent international guidelines on dyslipidemia are not concordant on various aspects of management. Also, there are no uniformly accepted Indian guidelines. We, therefore, performed a physician survey to understand lipid management practices in India.

methodsAn anonymous survey questionnaire was administered to gauge physicians' self-reported behavior regarding lipid management aspects. Results were expressed in terms of percentages based on the number of responses obtained.

resultsA total of 404 physicians participated in the survey. Eighty-eight percent respondents ordered a lipid profile before starting statin therapy, and 80% preferred to set lipid targets, though the tools used for calculating cardiovascular risk varied. Atorvastatin was preferred over rosuvastatin in primary prevention (72.9 vs. 32.4%), secondary prevention (54.6 vs. 46.7%), diabetic patients (56.3 vs. 40.3%) and post-ACS (78.3 vs. 34%). High-intensity statins were preferred by 73.7% of respondents in post-ACS cases. Fifty percent doctors chose not to use a statin in diabetic patients, irrespective of their LDL-C levels. The most preferred drug option for managing atherogenic dyslipidemia and moderate hypertriglyceridemia was statin-fibrate combination (55.1%) and fibrates (35.4%), respectively. Sixty-three percent doctors preferred to prescribe statins in patients with moderately high LDL-C and normal triglycerides, without CHD or CHD risk equivalents. Around 28% of doctors preferred not to use pharmacotherapy for managing isolated low HDL. Of the participants, 73% used fibrates in ≤20% of their dyslipidemic patients, with fenofibrate being the most preferred (90.5%). Ezetimibe was mainly used in patients with uncontrolled LDL-C despite statin therapy (52.4% respondents). Most preferred approaches to manage statin intolerance included reducing statin dose (39%) and stopping and restarting statins at a lower dose (34.5%). Fifty-two percent of doctors chose not to alter pre-existing therapy in patients who had LDL-C levels at goal but elevated non-HDL-C levels.

conclusionThis is the first survey in India that provides useful insights into Indian physicians' self-reported perspectives on managing dyslipidemia in routine clinical practice. Despite concordance with the currently available guidelines in certain aspects, there is incongruence in managing specific dyslipidemia problems. Further continuing medical education and the development of evidence-based, India-specific lipid guidelines can help reduce some of these differences.

Indexed as

Cross-Sectional StudiesDyslipidemiasEzetimibeFibric AcidsHumansHydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase InhibitorsLipid MetabolismRisk FactorsSurveys and QuestionnairesEzetimibeFibric AcidsHydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase InhibitorsDyslipidemiaIndiaLipidsPhysician surveySurvey

Identifiers

PMID28673294
PMCPMC5496264
OpenAlexW2731104189

What OpenQuestion holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.