A Comparison of Four Cardiovascular Risk Assessment Instruments in Saudi Patients

Introduction Several cardiovascular risk calculators are available online to measure the probability of developing cardiovascular disease (CVD) without defining the appropriate population. In the current study, four risk assessment instruments were investigated with Saudi Arabian patients with CVD to identify the instrument with the best predictability. The chosen instruments were the Framingham Risk Score (FRS), Systematic Coronary Risk Evaluation (SCORE), American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease Risk Estimator, and the United Kingdom score which is called QRISK^®. Methods Saudi patients, 40 years and older, with acute coronary syndrome, were recruited. Data related to age, gender, ethnicity, height, weight, systolic blood pressure, total cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein (HDL), smoking status, diabetes mellitus, rheumatoid arthritis, chronic kidney disease, atrial fibrillation, heart attack in a first-degree relative, and use of antihypertensive treatment were recorded. Results Out of 129 patients, the ACC/AHA had higher predictability with low risk (26.3%) and high risk (66.7%) groups. The QRISK^® was highly applicable (95.3%); however, the SCORE was not considered applicable (22.5%). Conclusion The QRISK^® is easy to implement and applicable in a population-based study, but the ACC/AHA is superior in predicting individuals with a high risk of CVD.