Agreement between physician- and patient-reported Canadian cardiovascular society scores among patients undergoing elective coronary angiography–The CATS study

Abstract

The primary aim of revascularization in stable coronary artery disease (CAD) is symptom relief. The severity of symptoms is usually evaluated by the physician, not by the patient. We examined the agreement between physician- and patient-reported Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) scores among patients scheduled for elective coronary angiography in a cross-sectional study. Patients (n = 650) and cardiologists evaluated the severity of angina symptoms by filling the CCS questionnaire before coronary angiography. Patients were divided into those without CAD (stenosis diameter <50%, n = 445) and those with CAD (stenosis diameter >50%, n = 205). CAD patients were further divided into three groups according to disease severity (single-, double- or triple-vessel disease). The mean age of the patients was 67.6 (9.9) years and 50.6% were women. In 51.8% (95% CI 44.5%–59.0%) of patients with CAD and 51.9% (95% CI 47.0%–56.8%) of those without, physician- and patient reported CCS scores agreed. The physician reported better CCS scores in 33.9% (95% CI 27.6%–40.7%) of patients with CAD and 36.2% (95% CI 31.8%–41.0%) of patients without CAD. The proportions of full or partial agreement between physician- and patient reported CCS scores were similar across the CAD severity groups. To summarize, we observed a significant discrepancy between the physician- and patient-reported symptom severity in patients with or without CAD scheduled for angiography. The physician underestimated the symptoms in third of the cases. Thus, patient-reported symptom severity, rather than physician’s evaluation, should be the cornerstone of treatment decisions.