Self-Reported Stroke Risk Stratification: Reasons for Geographic and Racial Differences in Stroke Study
AbstractBackground and Purpose—
The standard for stroke risk stratification is the Framingham Stroke Risk Function (FSRF), an equation requiring an examination for blood pressure assessment, venipuncture for glucose assessment, and ECG to determine atrial fibrillation and heart disease. We assess a self-reported stroke risk function (SRSRF) to stratify stroke risk in comparison to the FSRF.Methods—
Participants from the REGARDS study (Reasons for Geographic and Racial Differences in Stroke) were evaluated at baseline and followed for incident stroke. The FSRF was calculated using directly assessed stroke risk factors. The SRSRF was calculated from 13 self-reported questions to exclude those with prevalent stroke and assess stroke risk. Proportional hazards analysis was used to assess incident stroke risk using the FSRF and SRSRF.Results—
Over an average 8.2-year follow-up, 939 of 23 983 participants had a stroke. The FSRF and SRSRF produced highly correlated risk scores (rSpearman=0.852; 95% confidence interval, 0.849–0.856); however, the SRSRF had higher discrimination of stroke risk than the FSRF (cSRSRF=0.7266; 95% confidence interval, 0.7076–0.7457; cFSRF=0.7075; 95% confidence interval, 0.6877–0.7273; P=0.0038). The 10-year stroke risk in the highest decile of predicted risk was 11.1% for the FSRF and 13.4% for the SRSRF.Conclusions—
A simple self-reported questionnaire can be used to identify those at high risk for stroke better than the gold standard FSRF. This instrument can be used clinically to easily identify individuals at high risk for stroke and also scientifically to identify a subpopulation enriched for stroke risk.