Primary prevention of cardiovascular disease in Greece: Greek results of the EURIKA study.

INTRODUCTION The EURIKA study was designed to describe the control of cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors in a real-world primary prevention setting in Europe, to estimate residual CVD risk, and to assess physicians' attitudes to and perceptions of risk factor management. The present manuscript reports the EURIKA results from Greece. METHODS EURIKA was a multinational, cross-sectional study conducted in 12 European countries. Randomly selected physicians completed a questionnaire regarding their demographics and CVD prevention beliefs and practices. Consenting patients who were free of CVD, aged 50 years, and with 1 CVD risk factor, were recruited. Risk factor definition and treatment goals were based on the 2007 European guidelines on CVD prevention. Global CVD risk was estimated using the SCORE equation. In addition, each patient provided a fasting blood sample for measurement of serum lipids, and HbA1c. RESULTS Overall, 620 evaluable patients (male/female 46%/54%) were enrolled by 63 physicians (13 hospital-based, 50 office-based) across Greece. Almost one-third of the patients (27.3%) were classified as highrisk (SCORE5%). Blood pressure, dyslipidaemia and diabetes were controlled in 47.5%, 37.4% and 43.8% of the population who were treated for the respective risk factors, with more than one-fourth of the controlled patients remaining at high risk. The ESC 2007 and ESC/ESH 2007 guidelines were the most popular (44.4% and 38.1% respectively), while the ESC/ESH tool was most frequently reported to be used by physicians for global CVD risk calculation (42%), followed by SCORE (36%), and Framingham (36%). The major barriers to the use of guidelines and risk calculation tools were the plethora of guidelines and time constraints (87.5% and 69.2% respectively). CONCLUSIONS Control of key CVD risk factors appears to be suboptimal in primary prevention patients in Greece, with a remarkable proportion of controlled patients remaining at high risk. Although guidelines and global risk calculation tools are reported to be adopted by the majority of physicians, the plethora of available guidelines and time constraints are the major barriers to their utilisation.