Ángel A. García-Peña, Programa de Epidemiología Clínica, Departamento de Epidemiología Clínica y Bioestadística, Facultad de Medicina, Pontificia Universidad Javeriana; Unidad de Cardiología, Hospital Universitario San Ignacio; Bogotá, Colombia
Esther de Vries, Departamento de Epidemiología Clínica y Bioestadística, Pontificia Universidad Javeriana, Bogotá, Colombia
Giancarlo Buitrago, Instituto de Investigación Clínica, Facultad de Medicina, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Bogotá, Colombia
Introduction: Cardiovascular risk assessment is essential in the care of people living with HIV, as it requires accurate interpretation of risk prediction tools and effective communication with patients. Despite the availability of multiple cardiovascular risk models, uncertainty remains regarding whether physicians have the necessary knowledge and skills to use these tools appropriately, which may negatively affect the quality of clinical care and therapeutic decision-making. Objective: To evaluate attitudes, barriers, and both subjective and objective knowledge regarding cardiovascular risk assessment tools among Colombian physicians caring for people living with HIV, and to explore potential differences according to level of training and clinical experience. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted using an online survey administered to 104 physicians from different specialties, including internal medicine, cardiology, infectious diseases, and related fields, all with experience in the care of people living with HIV. The questionnaire covered four domains: general information, experience and knowledge of cardiovascular risk assessment methods, attitudes and barriers to their use, and interpretation and communication of risk results. Responses were collected using 5- to 7-point Likert scales and multiple-choice questions. Results: Although 90% of participants reported being familiar with cardiovascular risk scores and more than 90% recognized their clinical importance, 15% felt uncomfortable using them and 13% reported difficulties understanding the results. One-third of respondents misinterpreted cardiovascular risk scores, particularly regarding absolute risk and the communication of event probabilities. Additionally, 82% supported the development of an HIV-specific cardiovascular risk assessment tool. No significant differences were observed according to specialty or clinical experience. Conclusions: Despite recognizing the importance of cardiovascular risk assessment, physicians caring for people living with HIV exhibit relevant gaps in knowledge, interpretation, and risk communication. Addressing these deficiencies is essential to improve clinical decision-making and comprehensive care.
Keywords: HIV. Cardiovascular risk. Barriers. Knowledge.
