Validity for use in research on vascular diseases of the SIDIAP (Information System for the Development of Research in Primary Care): the EMMA study

Abstract

Introduction and objectives: Information in primary care databases can be useful in research, but the validity of these data needs to be evaluated. We sought to analyze the validity of the data used in the EMMA study based on data from the Information System for the Development of Research in Primary Care.

Methods: We compared the prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors observed in EMMA-hypertension, diabetes, hypercholesterolemia (and its treatments), obesity, and smoking-with equivalent data from the Registre Gironí del Cor (REGICOR), a population-based study that uses standardized methodology, in 2000. We also compared the incidence rates of vascular diseases and its association with these risk factors in a 5-year follow-up.

Results: We analyzed data from 34 823 participants included in EMMA and 2540 REGICOR2000 study participants aged 35 to 74. The prevalence of risk factors did not differ significantly between the 2 studies, except for the prevalence of former smokers in men, which was higher in REGICOR2000 (24.7% [95% confidence interval, 23.9%-25.5%] vs 30.1% [95% confidence interval, 27.1%-33.1%]), and the proportion of patients with lipid-lowering and antihypertensive therapy, which was higher in EMMA (46.9% vs 32.7% and 8.7% vs 6.3%, respectively). There were no differences between the 2 studies when comparing the incidence of vascular diseases (2.1% in both studies in men and 1.18% [95% confidence interval, 0.7%-1.7%] in REGICOR2000 vs 0.75% [95% confidence interval, 0.64%-0.87%] in EMMA in women) and its association with risk factors.

Conclusions: The prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors and their association with the incidence of vascular disease observed in the EMMA study are consistent with those observed in an epidemiological population-based study with a standardized methodology.