Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Review of evidence and explanations for suboptimal screening and treatment of dyslipidemia in women

A conceptual model

  • Review
  • Published:
Journal of General Internal Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Screening and treatment rates for dyslipidemia in populations at high risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD) are inappropriately low and rates among women may be lower than among men. We conducted a review of the literature for possible explanations of these observed gender differences and categorized the evidence in terms of a conceptual model that we describe. Factors related to physicians’ attitudes and knowledge, the patient’s priorities and characteristics, and the health care systems in which they interact are all likely to play important roles in determining screening rates, but are not well understood. Research and interventions that simultaneously consider the influence of patient, clinician, and health system factors, and particularly research that focuses on modifiable mechanisms, will help us understand the causes of the observed gender differences and lead to improvements in cholesterol screening and management in high-risk women. For example, patient and physician preferences for lipid and other CVD risk factor management have not been well studied, particularly in relation to other gender-specific screening issues, costs of therapy, and by degree of CVD risk; better understanding of how available health plan benefits interact with these preferences could lead to structural changes in benefits that might improve screening and treatment.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. American Heart Association. American Heart Association 2002 Heart and Stroke Statistical Update. Dallas, TX: American Heart Association; 2001:1–38.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Miettinen T, Pyorala K, Olsson A, et al. Cholesterol-lowering therapy in women and elderly patients with myocardial infarction or angina pectoris. Circulation. 1997;96:4211–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. McPherson R, Genest J, Angus C, Murray P. The Women’s Atorvastatin Trial on Cholesterol (WATCH): frequency of achieving NCEP-II target LDL-C levels in women with and without established CVD. Am Heart J. 2001;141:949–56.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. LIPID Study Group. Prevention of cardiovascular events and death with pravastatin in patients with coronary heart disease and a broad range of initial cholesterol levels. N Engl J Med. 1998;339:1349–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Lewis S, Sacks F, Mitchell J, et al. Effect of pravastatin on cardiovascular events in women after myocardial infarction. The Cholesterol and Recurrent Events (CARE) trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1998;32:140–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Waters D, Higginson L, Gladstone P, Boccuzzi S, Cook T, Lesperance J. Effects of cholesterol lowering on the progression of coronary atherosclerosis in women: a Canadian Coronary Atherosclerosis Intervention Trial (CCAIT) substudy. Circulation. 1995;92:2404–10.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Meigs J, Stafford R. Cardiovascular disease prevention practices by U.S. physicians for patients with diabetes. J Gen Intern Med. 2000;15:220–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Qureshi A, Suri M, Guterman L, Hopkins L. Ineffective secondary prevention in survivors of cardiovascular events in the U.S. population. Report from the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Arch Intern Med. 2001;161:1621–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Saadine J, Engelgau M, Beckles G, Gregg E, Thompson T, Venkat-Narayan K. A diabetes report card for the United States: quality of care in the 1990s. Ann Intern Med. 2002;136:565–74.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Brown D, Giles W, Greenlund K, Croft J. Disparities in cholesterol screening: falling short of a national health objective. Prev Med. 2001;33:517–22.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Davis K, Cogswell M, Lee S, Rothenberg R, Koplan J. Lipid screening in a managed care population. Public Health Rep. 1998;113:346–51.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Pearson T. The undertreatment of LDL-cholesterol: addressing the challenge. Int J Cardiol. 2000:S23-28.

  13. Pearson T, Laurora I, Chu H, Kafonek S. The Lipid Treatment Assessment Project (L-TAP). Arch Intern Med. 2000;160:459–67.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Gardner C, Winkleby M, Fortmann S. Population frequency distribution of non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 1988–94). Am J Cardiol. 2000;86:299–304.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Expert Panel on Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol in Adults. Executive summary of the third report of the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) Expert Panel on Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol in Adults (Adult Treatment Panel III). JAMA. 2001;285:2486–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Ayanian J, Epstein A. Differences in the use of procedures between women and men hospitalized for coronary heart disease. N Engl J Med. 1991;325:221.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Weintraub W, Kosinski A, Wenger N. Is there a bias against performing coronary revascularization in women? Am J Cardiol. 1996;78:1154–60.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Schulman K, Berlin J, Harless W, et al. The effect of race and sex on physicians’ recommendations for cardiac catheterization. N Engl J Med. 1999;340:618–26.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Roger V, Farkouh M, Weston S, et al. Sex differences in evaluation and outcome of unstable angina. JAMA. 2000;283:646–52.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Rathore S, Chen J, Wang Y, Radford M, Vaccarino V, Krumholz H. Sex differences in cardiac catheterization: the role of physician gender. JAMA. 2001;286:2849–56.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Alter D, Naylor C, Austin P, Tu J. Biology or bias. practice patterns and long-term outcomes for men and women with acute myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2002;39:1909–16.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Ghali W, Faris P, Galbraith P, et al. Sex differences in access to coronary revascularization after cardiac catheterization: importance of detailed clinical data. Ann Intern Med., 2002;136:723–32.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Shaw L, Miller D, Romeis J, et al. Gender differences in the non-invasive evaluation and management of patients with suspected coronary artery disease. Ann Intern Med. 1991;120:559.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Janz N, Becker M. The Health Belief Model: a decade later. Health Educ Q. 1984;11:1–47.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Landon B, Wilson I, Cleary P. A conceptual model of the effects of health care organizations on the quality of medical care. JAMA. 1998;279:1377–82.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Jaen C, Stange K, Nutting P. Competing demands of primary care: a model for the delivery of clinical preventive services. J Fam Pract. 1994;38:166–71.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Janes G, Blackman D, Bolen J, et al. Surveillance for use of preventive health-care services by older adults, 1995–97. Morb Mortal Wkly Rep CDC Surveill Summ. 1999;48:51–88.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Ayanian J, Weissman J, Schneider E, Ginsburg J, Zaslavsky A. Unmet health needs of uninsured adults in the United States. JAMA. 1998;284:2061–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Bindman A, Grumbach K, Osmond D, Vranizan K, Stewart A. Primary care and receipt of preventive services. J Gen Intern Med. 1996;11:269–76.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Corbie-Smith G, Flagg E, Doyle J, O’Brien M. Influence of usual source of care on differences by race/ethnicity in receipt of preventive services. J Gen Intern Med. 2002;17:458–64.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Mainous A, Hueston W, Love M, Griffith C. Access to care for the uninsured: is access to a physician enough? Am J Public Health. 1999;89:910–2.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Lurie N, Manning W, Peterson C, Goldberg G, Phelps C, Lillard L. Preventive care: do we practice what we preach? Am J Public Health. 1987;77:801–4.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Ayanian J, Landon B, Landrum M, Grana J, McNeil B. Use of cholesterol-lowering therapy and related beliefs among middle-aged adults after myocardial infarction. J Gen Intern Med. 2002;17:95–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Hueston W, Spencer E, Kuehn R. Differences in the frequency of cholesterol screening in patients with Medicaid compared with private insurance. Arch Fam Med. 1995;4:331–4.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Luepker R, Rosamond W, Murphy R, et al. Socioeconomic status and coronary heart disease risk factor trends. The Minnesota Heart Survey Circulation. 1993;88:2172–9.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Cooper G, Goodwin M, Stange K. The delivery of preventive services for patient symptoms. Am J Prev Med. 2001;21:177–81.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Stange K, Flocke S, Goodwin M, Kelly R, Zyzanski S. Direct observation of rates of preventive service delivery in community family practice. Prev Med. 2000;31:167–76.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Mosca L, Jones W, King K, Ouyang P, Redberg R, Hill M. Awareness, perception, and knowledge of heart disease risk and prevention among women in the United States. American Heart Association Women’s Heart Disease and Stroke Campaign Task Force. Arch Fam Med. 2000;9:506–15.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Marvel M, Epstein R, Flowers K, Beckman H. Soliciting the patient’s agenda: have we improved? JAMA. 1999;281:283–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Kaplan C, Siegel B, Madill J, Epstein A. Communication and the medical interview: strategies for learning and teaching. J Gen Intern Med. 1997: S49–55.

  41. Hall J, Roter D. Patient gender and communication with physicians: results of a community-based study. Womens Health. 1995;1:77–95.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Elderkin-Thompson V, Waitzkin H. Differences in clinical communication by gender. J Gen Intern Med. 1999;14:112–21.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Roter D, Hall J, Aoki Y. Physician gender effects in medical communication: a meta-analytic review. JAMA; 288:756–64.

  44. Kaplan S, Gandek B, Greenfield S, Rogers W, Ware J. Patient and visit characteristics related to physicians’ participatory decision-making style. Med Care. 1995;33:1176–87.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Ayanian J, Landrum M, McNeil B. Use of cholesterol-lowering therapy by elderly adults after myocardial infarction. Arch Intern Med. 2002;162:1013–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Lemaitre R, Furberg C, Newman A, et al. Time trends in the use of cholesterol-lowering agents in older adults: the Cardiovascular Health Study. Arch Intern Med. 1998;158:1761–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Aronow W. Underutilization of lipid-lowering drugs in older persons with prior myocardial infarction and a serum low-density lipoprotein cholesterol >125 mg/dl. Am J Cardiol. 1998;82:668–9,A6,A8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Di Cecco R, Patel U, Upshur R. Is there a clinically significant gender bias in post-myocardial pharmacological management in the older (>60) population of a primary care practice? BMC Fam Pract. 2002;3:8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Laubach E, Otto C, Schwandt P. Toward better therapy of hypercholesterolemia. Arch Intern Med. 2000;160:2685–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Harris M. Racial and ethnic differences in health care access and health outcomes for adults with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2001;24:454–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Nelson K, Norris K, Mangione C. Disparities in the diagnosis and pharmacologic treatment of high serum cholesterol by race and ethnicity. Arch Intern Med. 2002;162:929–35.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Wisdom K, Fryzek J, Havstad S, Anderson R, Dreiling M, Tilley B. Comparison of laboratory test frequency and test results between African-Americans and Caucasians with diabetes: opportunity for improvement: findings from a large urban health maintenance organization. Diabetes Care. 1997;20:971–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Cook C, Erdman D, Ryan G, et al. The pattern of dyslipidemia among urban African-Americans with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2000;23:319–24.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. Maviglia S, Teich J, Fiskio J, Bates D. Using an electronic medical record to identify opportunities to improve compliance with cholesterol guidelines. J Gen Intern Med. 2001;16:531–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. Winkleby M, Cubbin C, Ahn D, Kraemer H. Pathways by which SES and ethnicity influence cardiovascular risk factors. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1999;896:191–209.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Miller M, Byington R, Hunninghake D, Pitt B, Furberg C. Sex bias and underutilization of lipid-lowering therapy in patients with coronary artery disease at academic medical centers in the United States and Canada. Arch Intern Med. 2000;160:343–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  57. Majumdar S, Gurwitz J, Soumerai S. Undertreatment of hyperlipidemia in the secondary prevention of coronary artery disease. J Gen Intern Med. 1999;14:711–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. McBride P, Schrott H, Plane M, Underbakke G, Brown R. Primary care practice adherence to National Cholesterol Program guidelines for patients with coronary heart disease. Arch Intern Med. 1998;158:1238–44.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  59. Sloan K, Sales A, Willems J, et al. Frequency of serum low-density lipoprotein cholesterol measurement and frequency of results < 100 mg/dl among patients who had coronary events (Northwest VA Network Study). Am J Cardiol. 2001;88:1143–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  60. Vanuzzo D, Pilotto L, Ambrosio G, et al. Potential for cholesterol lowering in secondary prevention of coronary heart disease in Europe: findings from EUROASPIRE study. Atherosclerosis. 2000;153:505–17.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  61. The Writing Group for the PEPI Trial. Effects of estrogen or estrogen/progestin regimens on heart disease risk factors in postmenopausal women. JAMA. 1995;273:199–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Hulley S, Grady D, Bush T, et al. Randomized trial of estrogen plus progestin for secondary prevention of coronary heart disease in postmenopausal women. Heart Estrogen/Progestin Replacement Study (HERS) Res Group. JAMA. 1998;280:605–13.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  63. Womens Health Initiative. Primary prevention with estrogen/progestin. JAMA. 2002.

  64. Iezzoni L, McCarthy E, Davis R, Siebens H. Mobility difficulties are not only a problem of old age. J Gen Intern Med. 2001;16:235–43.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  65. McTigue K, Garrett J, Popkin B. The natural history of the development of obesity in a cohort of young U.S. adults between 1981 and 1998. Ann Intern Med. 2002;136:857–64.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Kessler R, McGonagle K, Zhao S, et al. Lifetime and 12-month prevalence of DSM-III-R psychiatric disorders in the United States. Results from the National Comorbidity Survey. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1994;51:8–19.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  67. Iezzoni L, McCarthy E, Davis R, Siebens H. Mobility impairments and use of screening and preventive services. Am J Public Health. 2000;90:955–61.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  68. Wee C, McCarthy E, Davis R, Phillips R. Screening for cervical and breast cancer: is obesity an unrecognized barrier to preventive care? Ann Intern Med. 2000;132:697–704.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  69. Garber M, Bergus G, Dawson J, Wood G, Levy B, Levin I. Effect of a patient’s psychiatric history on physicians’ estimation of probability of disease. J Gen Intern Med. 2000;15:204–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Phillips L, Branch W, Cook C, et al. Clinical inertia. Ann Intern Med. 2001;135:824–34.

    Google Scholar 

  71. Greenfield S, Kaplan S, Kahn R, Ninomiya J, Griffith J. Profiling care by different groups of physicians. effects of patient case-mix (bias) and physician-level clustering on quality assessment results. Ann Intern Med. 2002;136:111–21.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Orav E, Wright E, Palmer R, Hargraves J. Issues of variability and bias affecting multisite measurement of quality of care. Med Care. 1996:S87–101.

  73. Sixma H, Spreeuwenberg P, van der Pasch M. Patient satisfaction with the general practitioner: a two-level analysis. Med Care. 1998;36:212–29.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  74. Hofer T, Hayward R, Greenfield S, Wagner E, Kaplan S, Manning W. The unreliability of individual physician “report cards” for assessing the costs and quality of care of a chronic disease. JAMA. 1999;281:2098–105.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  75. Krein S, Hofer T, Kerr E, Hayward R. Whom should we profile? Examining diabetes care practice variation among primary care providers, provider groups and healthcare facilities. Health Serv Res. 2002;27:1159–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Grover S, Lowensteyn I, Esrey K, et al. Do doctors accurately assess coronary risk in their patients? Preliminary results of the coronary health assessment study. BMJ. 1995;310:975–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  77. Birdwell B, Herbers J, Kroenke K. Evaluating chest pain. Arch Intern Med. 1993;153:1991–5.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  78. Roger V, Jacobsen S, Weston S, et al. Sex differences in evaluation and outcome after stress testing. Mayo Clin Proc. 2002;77:638–45.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Ayanian J, Landrum M, Guadagnoli E, Gaccione P. Specialty of ambulatory care physicians and mortality among elderly patients after myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 2002;347:1678–86.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Stafford R, Blumenthal D. Specialty differences in cardiovascular disease prevention practices. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1998;32:1238–43.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  81. Hyman D, Maibach W, Flora J, Fortmann S. Cholesterol treatment practices of primary care physicians. Public Health Rep. 1992;107:441–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  82. Marcelino J, Feingold K. Inadequate treatment with HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors by health care providers. Am J Med. 1996;100:605–10.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  83. Wyn R, Brown E, Yu H. Women’s Use of Preventive Services: The Commonwealth Fund Survey. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press; 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  84. Henderson J, Weisman C, Grason H. Are two doctors better than one? Women’s physician use and appropriate care. Womens Health Issues. 2002;12:138–49.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Giles W, Anda R, Jones D, Serdula M, Merritt R, DeStefano F. Recent trends in the identification and treatment of high blood cholesterol by physicians. Progress and missed opportunities. JAMA. 1993;269:1133–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  86. Stange K, Fedirko T, Zyzanski S, Jaen C. How do family physicians prioritize delivery of multiple preventive services? J Fam Pract. 1994;38:231–7.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  87. Osuch J, Bonham V, Morris L. Primary care guide to managing a breast mass: step-by-step work-up. Medscape Womens Health. 1998;3:4.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  88. Barratt A, Cockburn J, Furnival C, McBride A, Mallon L. Perceived sensitivity of mammographic screening: women’s views on test accuracy and financial compensation for missed cancers. J Epidemiol Community Health. 1999;53:716–20.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  89. Henderson J, Weisman C. Physician gender effects on preventive screening and counseling: an analysis of male and female patients’ health care experiences. Med Care. 2001;39:1281–92.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  90. Cassard S, Weisman C, Plichta S, Johnson T. Physician gender and women’s preventive services. J Womens Health., 1997;6:199–207.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  91. Franks P, Clancy C. Physician gender bias in clinical decision making: screening for cancer in primary care. Med Care. 1993;31:213–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  92. Schwartz J, Lewis C, Clancy C, Kinosian M, Radany M, Koplan J. Internists’ practices in health promotion and disease prevention. A Survey. Ann Intern Med. 1991;114:46–53.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  93. Dresselhaus T, Peabody J, Lee M, Wang M, Luck J. Measuring compliance with preventive care guidelines. J Gen Intern Med. 2000;15:782–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  94. Harnick D, Cohen J, Schechter C, Fuster V, Smith D. Effects of practice setting on quality of lipid-lowering management in patients with coronary artery disease. Am J Cardiol. 1998;81:1416–20.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  95. DeBusk R, Miller N, Superko H, et al. Case-management system for coronary risk factor modification after acute myocardial infarction. Ann Intern Med. 1994;120:721–9.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  96. Bramlet D, King H, Young L, Witt J, Stoukides C, Kaul A. Management of hypercholesterolemia: practice patterns for primary care providers and cardiologists. Am J Cardiol. 1997: 39H–44H.

  97. McAlister F, Lawson F, Teo K, Armstrong P. Randomised trials of secondary prevention programs in coronary heart disease: systematic review. BMJ. 2001;323:957–62.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  98. LaBresh K, Owen P, Alteri C, et al. Secondary prevention in a cardiology group practice and hospital setting after a heart-care initiative. Am J Cardiol 2000;85:23A-29A.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  99. Evenson K, Rosamond W, Luepker R. Predictors of outpatient cardiac rehabilitation utilization: the Minnesota Heart Surgery Registry. J Cardiopulm Rehabil. 1998;18:192–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  100. Blackburn G, Foody J, Sprecher D, Park E, Apperson-Hansen C, Pashkow F. Cardiac rehabilitation participation patterns in a large, tertiary care center: evidence for selection bias. J Cardiopulm Rehabil. 2000;20:189–95.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  101. Mosca L, Han R, Filip J. Barriers for physicians to refer to cardiac rehabilitation and impact of a critical care pathway on rates of participation. Circulation 1998:I-811. Abstract.

  102. Stange K, Zyzanski S, Smith T, et al. How valid are medical records and patient questionnaires for physician profiling and health services research? A comparison with direct observation of patients visits. Med Care. 1998;36:851–67.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  103. Kerr E, Krein S, Vijan S, Hofer T, Hayward R. Avoiding pitfalls in chronic disease quality management: a case for the next generation of technical quality measures. Am J Manag Care. 2001;7:1033–43.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  104. Luck J, Peabody J, Dresselhaus T, Lee M, Glassman P. How well does chart abstraction measure quality? A prospective comparison of standardized patients with the medical record. Am J Med. 2000;108:642–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  105. Bloom S, Harris J, Thompson B, Ahmed F, Thompson J. Tracking clinical preventive service use: a comparison of the Health Plan Employer Data and Information Set with the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. Med Care. 2000;38:187–94.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  106. Peabody J, Luck J, Glassman P, Dresselhaus T, Lee M. Comparison of vignettes, standardized patients, and chart abstraction: a prospective validation study of 3 methods for measuring quality. JAMA. 2000;283:1715–22.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  107. Headrick L, Speroff T, Pelecanos H, Cebul R. Efforts to improve compliance with the National Cholesterol Education Program guidelines. Results of a randomized controlled trial. Arch Intern Med. 1992;152:2490–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  108. Schechtman J, Kanwal N, Schroth W, Elinsky E. The effect of an education and feedback intervention on group-model and network-model health maintenance organization physician prescribing behavior. Med Care. 1995;33:139–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  109. Mainous A, Hueston W, Love M, Evans M, Finger R. An evaluation of statewide strategies to reduce antibiotic overuse. Fam Med. 2000;32:22–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  110. Balas E, Boren S, Brown G, Ewigman B, Mitchell J, Perkoff G. Effect of physician profiling on utilization: meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. J Gen Intern Med. 1996;11:584–90.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  111. Renders C, Valk G, Franse L, Schellveis F, Van Eijk J, van der Wal G. Long-term effectiveness of a quality improvement program for patients with type 2 diabetes in general practice. Diabetes Care. 2001;24:1365–70.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  112. Baker A, Lafata J, Ward R, Whitehouse F, Divine G. A web-based diabetes care management support system. Jt Comm J Qual Improv. 2001;27:179–90.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  113. Peters A, Davidson M. Application of a diabetes managed care program. The feasibility of using nurses and a computer system to provide effective care. Diabetes Care. 1998;21:1037–43.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  114. Rubin R, Kietrich K, Hawk A. Clinical and economic impact of implementing a comprehensive diabetes management program in managed care. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 1998;83:2635–42.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  115. Domurat E. Diabetes managed care and clinical outcomes: the Harbor City, California Kaiser Permanente Diabetes Care System. Am J Manag Care. 1999;5:1299–307.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  116. Renders C, Valk G, Griffin S, Wagner E, Eijk van J, Assendelft W. Interventions to improve the management of diabetes in primary care, outpatient, and community settings: a systematic review. Diabetes Care. 2001;24:1821–33.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  117. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Health. Heart Disease and Stroke. Healthy People 2010-Conference Edition 1999. Bethesda, MD: United States Public Health Service; 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  118. National Heart Lung and Blood Institute. Strategic Plan FY 2002–06. Rockville, MD: National Institutes of Health; 2002. http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/resources/docs/plan/index.htm/; accessed on April 1, 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  119. Mangione C, Reynolds E. Disparities in health and health care. J Gen Intern Med. 2001;16:276–80.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  120. Weisse C, Sorum P, Sanders K, Syat B. Do gender and race affect decisions about pain management? J Gen Intern Med. 2001;16:211–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  121. Chapman K, Tashkin D, Pye D. Gender bias in the diagnosis of COPD. Chest. 2001;119:1691–5.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  122. Watson R, Stein A, Dwamena F, et al. Do race and gender influence the use of invasive procedures? J Gen Intern Med. 2001;16:227–34.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  123. Raine R. Does gender bias exist in the use of specialist health care? J Health Serv Res Policy. 2000;5:237–49.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  124. Johnson M, Lin M, Mangalik S, Murphy D, Kramer A. Patients’ perceptions of physicians’ recommendations for comfort care differ by patient age and gender. J Gen Intern Med. 2000;15:248–55.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  125. Majeed Z, Moser K, Maxwell R. Age, sex, and practice variations in the use of statins in general practice in England and Wales. J Public Health Med. 2000;22:275–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  126. Savoie I, Kazanjian A. Utilization of lipid-lowering drugs in men and women: a reflection of the research evidence? J Clin Epidemiol. 2002;55:95–101.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  127. Hippisley-Cox J, Pringle M, Crown N, Meal A, Wynn A. Sex inequalities in ischaemic heart disease in general practice: cross-sectional survey. BMJ. 2001;322:832.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  128. Bowker T, Clayton T, Ingham J, et al. British Cardiac Society survey of the potential for the secondary prevention of coronary disease: ASPIRE (Action on Secondary Prevention through Intervention to Reduce Events). Heart. 1996;75:334–42.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  129. Bannerman A, Hamilton K, Isles C, et al. Myocardial infarction in men and women under 65 years of age: no evidence of gender bias. Scott Med J. 2001;46:73–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  130. Wei L, Wang J, Thompson P, Wong S, Struthers A, Macdonald T. Adherence to statin treatment and readmission of patients after myocardial infarction: a six year follow-up study. Heart. 2002;88:229–33.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  131. Sgadari A, Incalzi R, Onder G, Pedone C, Cambassi G. Lipid-lowering therapy in patients with coronary artery disease: sex or age bias? Arch Intern Med. 2000;160:2684–5.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  132. Pilote L, Beck C, Richard H, Eisenberg M. The effects of cost-sharing on essential drug prescriptions, utilization of medical care and outcomes after acute myocardial infarction in elderly patients. CMAJ. 2002;167:246–52.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  133. Evenson K, Fleury J. Barriers to outpatient cardiac rehabilitation participation and adherence. J Cardiopulm Rehabil. 2000;20:241–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Catherine Kim MD, MPH.

Additional information

Dr. Kim is supported by an American Diabetes Association Junior Faculty Award. Dr. Kerr is supported by an Advanced Research Career Development Award from the Department of Veterans Affairs Health Services Research and Development Service. Dr. Hofer is supported by grant 1P20HS011540-01 from the Agency for Health Research and Quality.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kim, C., Hofer, T.P. & Kerr, E.A. Review of evidence and explanations for suboptimal screening and treatment of dyslipidemia in women. J GEN INTERN MED 18, 854–863 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1525-1497.2003.20910.x

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1525-1497.2003.20910.x

Key words

Navigation