BackgroundOnline health information is particularly important for cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention, where lifestyle changes are recommended until risk becomes high enough to warrant pharmacological intervention. Online information is abundant, but the quality is often poor and many people do not have adequate health literacy to access, understand, and use it effectively.ObjectiveThis project aimed to review and evaluate the suitability of online CVD risk calculators for use by low health literate consumers in terms of clinical validity, understandability, and actionability.MethodsThis systematic review of public websites from August to November 2016 used evaluation of clinical validity based on a high-risk patient profile and assessment of understandability and actionability using Patient Education Material Evaluation Tool for Print Materials.ResultsA total of 67 unique webpages and 73 unique CVD risk calculators were identified. The same high-risk patient profile produced widely variable CVD risk estimates, ranging from as little as 3% to as high as a 43% risk of a CVD event over the next 10 years. One-quarter (25%) of risk calculators did not specify what model these estimates were based on. The most common clinical model was Framingham (44%), and most calculators (77%) provided a 10-year CVD risk estimate. The calculators scored moderately on understandability (mean score 64%) and poorly on actionability (mean score 19%). The absolute percentage risk was stated in most (but not all) calculators (79%), and only 18% included graphical formats consistent with recommended risk communication guidelines.ConclusionsThere is a plethora of online CVD risk calculators available, but they are not readily understandable and their actionability is poor. Entering the same clinical information produces widely varying results with little explanation. Developers need to address actionability as well as clinical validity and understandability to improve usefulness to consumers with low health literacy.

Almost a third of Lotus valve recipients require pacemaker implantation within 30 days. The presence of pre-existing RBBB and the depth of prosthesis implantation below the NCC were significant pacing predictors. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

No abstract

The routine use of intraoperative DUS mapping after regional anesthesia is recommended to determine the optimal access site for chronic hemodialysis access. Identifying additional access options not seen with physical examination and preoperative DUS mapping will provide end-stage renal disease patients with more fistula options and hence a longer access life span for a lifelong disease.