Danish Cardiovascular Screening Trial II

Background

Although CVDs have decreased, they are still among the most predominant cause of morbidity and mortality in the western world, incl. Denmark, where about 420,000 people have recognized CVD symptoms. Due to an aging population, the decline has not reduced CVD admissions and healthcare costs. In Denmark, the CVD related hospital admission costs are DKK 4.6 billion and the pharmaceutical cost DKK 2.4 billion. The Danish National Board of Health has reported that CVD carries the second largest socioeconomic difference in burden of disease. Unfortunately, population-based health checks and screening for risk factors has proven not efficient. Consequently, screening of asymptomatic CVD is discussed intensively. In the investigators first unique CVD screening RCT (2008-11), the Viborg Vascular (VIVA) trial, more than 50.000 65-74 year old men were randomised for population-based ultrasound screening for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA), peripheral arterial disease (PAD) and hypertension. In case of positive finding, preventive medical actions were initiated. A significant reduction in overall mortality by 7% after 5 years was observed. Using a non-contrast computered tomography (CT) scan, instead of the ultrasound based screening approach, has the opportunity to identify aneurysms in the entire aortic, coronary artery calcification (CAC) and arterial fibrillation, so individualized risk assessment and initiation of preventive actions on those with sign of early asymptomatic CVD is possible. A second trial - The Danish Cardiovascular Screening (DANCAVAS) trial initiated was initiated in 2014 randomizing 45.000 65-74 year old men with the potential of a huge beneficial effect on health, quality of life (QoL) and survival. However, screening is impaired by lower social class, and adherence to initiated prevention could be impacted as well. Consequently, we want to conduct a third RCT (Fighting Social Inequality in Cardiovascular Health (FISICH) to test a number of add-ons to screening that potentially balance the benefits across socio economic groups. The perspective is to establish a clear decision foundation for public health care policy incl. benefits, cost effectiveness and impact on social inequality of alternative variants of population screening for CVD.

Hypotheses

The primary hypothesis is that an extensive circulatory screening and intervention programme reduces social inequality in cardiovascular health and fulfills the WHO criteria for screening. However, this reduction can be even more pronounced, if factors reducing the social selection to attend screening and adherence to preventive actions initiated are identified.

Aims