Background: Vascular age (VA) is independent and chronological age for assessing cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. However, tools for the implementation of VA are currently lacking. We aimed to develop a questionnaire to assess the current knowledge gaps related to VA and barriers to its implementation in routine practice. Methods: Using a stepwise mixed-method approach, a quantitative questionnaire was constructed in four phases: (1) basic item generation and the development of a semi-qualitative questionnaire (SQQ); (2) dissemination to the VascAgeNet extended network and an analysis of the semi-qualitative questionnaire responses; (3) the development of a quantitative questionnaire (QQ); and (4) an assessment of the content and face validity and internal reliability in an additional sample. Results: Based on six main topics initially identified through an expert panel, a SQQ was developed and disseminated. Finally, a 22-item QQ was developed, with questions grouped around three main themes: knowledge of VA and its risk factors; perceptions and beliefs regarding the importance and contribution of VA to risk classification; and the application of VA measurements in clinical and research practice and its potential limitations (Cronbach’s alpha between 0.920 and 0.982 for all three categories). Conclusion: We report the development of a QQ on VA addressed to both clinicians and non-clinicians aiming to assess their knowledge, perceptions and application of VA measurements.
Objective:Despite current evidence demonstrating the important role of Vascular ageing (VA) in cardiovascular risk assessment, its awareness and mostly implementation in everyday practice still lags significantly. To effectively assess the need for future target strategies for health providers, a qualitative questionnaire was developed. The aim of this analysis was to identify perceptions and factors associated with omitting VA assessment in a group of clinicians and researchers.Design and method:An online qualitative questionnaire based on intentionally left open-ended key questions identified by a Network for Research in Vascular Ageing (VascAgeNet) COST Action(CA18216) expert working group was developed and distributed to participants working in the field of VA, in order to globally assess knowledge and perceptions. Importance of VA was evaluated on a scale 0(least important)-5(very important).Results:Out of the 127 responses, 104 questionnaires were complete. The mean age of participants was 42.5 ± 10.5 years, 60.6% male. 43.3% were clinicians (mostly cardiologists, internists, and endocrinologists) and 56.7% were other scientists (mostly computer scientists and physiologists). Although participants were aware of the role of VA and scored median 5/5 (very important) on the evaluation scale, only 53.8% measured it in the research setting and only 16.3% in everyday clinical practice. Amongst the most frequently identified limiting factors regarding clinical setting were time(31.5%), lack of reimbursement of tests(22.3%), cost of equipment(16.7%), guidelines(13%),validation data(5.6%) and devices(9.4%). 15.6% considered that there was no clinical benefit. Participants who measured VA in clinical practice considered VA significantly more important than those who didn’t measure it (0% vs.3.3%(1–2), 17.6% vs.39.3%(3–4), 82.4% vs.57.4%(5), respectively, p = 0.029). Similar were the results in research setting (1.8% vs.4.5%(1–2), 28.6% vs. 50.0%(3–4), 69.6% vs. 45.5%(5), respectively, p = 0.053). Table 1 presents the main results, according to the participants’ status.Conclusions:Although aware of the importance of VA in cardiovascular risk assessment, participants are still unable to implement it in their clinical practice. Our results identify for the first time some important factors, which informed the construction of a quantitative questionnaire for confirmation in larger populations, and could constitute a small startup for future experts’ recommendations.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.