An integrated general practice and pharmacy-based intervention to promote the use of appropriate preventive medications among individuals at high cardiovascular disease risk: protocol for a cluster randomized controlled trial

Background: Cardiovascular diseases (CVD) are responsible for significant morbidity, premature mortality, and economic burden. Despite established evidence that supports the use of preventive medications among patients at high CVD risk, treatment gaps remain. Building on prior evidence and a theoretical framework, a complex intervention has been designed to address these gaps among high-risk, under-treated patients in the Australian primary care setting. This intervention comprises a general practice quality improvement tool incorporating clinical decision support and audit/feedback capabilities; availability of a range of CVD polypills (fixed-dose combinations of two blood pressure lowering agents, a statin ± aspirin) for prescription when appropriate; and access to a pharmacy-based program to support long-term medication adherence and lifestyle modification. Methods: Following a systematic development process, the intervention will be evaluated in a pragmatic cluster randomized controlled trial including 70 general practices for a median period of 18 months. The 35 general practices in the intervention group will work with a nominated partner pharmacy, whereas those in the control group will provide usual care without access to the intervention tools. The primary outcome is the proportion of patients at high CVD risk who were inadequately treated at baseline who achieve target blood pressure (BP) and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels at the study end. The outcomes will be analyzed using data from electronic medical records, utilizing a validated extraction tool. Detailed process and economic evaluations will also be performed. Discussion: The study intends to establish evidence about an intervention that combines technological innovation with team collaboration between patients, pharmacists, and general practitioners (GPs) for CVD prevention. Trial registration: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN1261600023342

Aspirin for Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Events in People With Diabetes: A position statement of the American Diabetes Association, a scientific statement of the American Heart Association, and an expert consensus document of the American College of Cardiology Foundation

The burden of cardiovascular disease (CVD) among patients with diabetes is substantial. Individuals with diabetes are at two- to fourfold increased risk of cardiovascular events compared with age- and sex-matched individuals without diabetes. In diabetic patients over the age of 65 years, 68% of deaths are from coronary heart disease (CHD) and 16% are from stroke (1). A number of mechanisms for the increased cardiovascular risk with diabetes have been proposed, including increased tendency toward intracoronary thrombus formation (2), increased platelet reactivity (3), and worsened endothelial dysfunction (4). The increased risk for cardiovascular events and mortality in patients with diabetes has led to considerable interest in identifying effective means for cardiovascular risk reduction. Aspirin has been shown to be effective in reducing cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in high-risk patients with myocardial infarction (MI) or stroke (secondary prevention) (5). The Food and Drug Administration has not approved aspirin for use in primary prevention, and its net benefit among patients with no previous cardiovascular events is more controversial, for both patients with and without a history of diabetes (5). The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recently updated its recommendation about aspirin use for primary prevention. The Task Force recommended encouraging aspirin use in men age 45–79 years and women age 55–79 years and not encouraging aspirin use in younger adults. They did not differentiate their recommendations based on the presence or absence of diabetes (6,7). In 2007, the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the American Heart Association (AHA) jointly recommended that aspirin therapy (75–162 mg/day) be used as a primary prevention strategy in those with diabetes at increased cardiovascular risk, including those who are over 40 years of age or who have additional risk factors (family history of CVD, hypertension, smoking, dyslipidemia, or albuminuria) (8). These recommendations were

Different distribution of cardiovascular risk factors according to ethnicity: A study in a high risk population

This study compares the distribution of cardiovascular risk factors in different ethnic groups at high risk of developing cardiovascular diseases within general practices. A total of 430 patients (179 Dutch, 126 Turks, 50 Surinamese, 23 Moroccans, 23 Antilleans and 29 from other ethnic groups) were included in the study. Data collection consisted of questionnaires and physical and clinical examinations. 54% was female. The mean age was 53.1 (sd 9.9) years. There were important ethnic differences in the distribution of cardiovascular risk factors. Compared to the Dutch, ethnic minorities had significantly greater odds of being diabetic (OR = 3.2-19.4); but were less likely to smoke (OR = 0.10-0.53). Turkish individuals had a lower prevalence of hypercholesterolemia but were 2.4 times more likely to be obese than the Dutch. Hypertension was very common in all ethnic groups and no significant ethnic differences were found. These findings provide additional evidence of the need for tailored interventions for different ethnic groups in general practices

Individualised therapy of angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors in stable coronary artery disease: overview of the primary results of the PERindopril GENEtic association (PERGENE) study

In patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD) without overt heart failure, ACE inhibitors are among the most commonly used drugs as these agents have been proven effective in reducing the risk of cardiovascular events. Considerable individual variations in the blood pressure response to ACE inhibitors are observed and as such heterogeneity in clinical treatment effect would be likely as well. Assessing the consistency of treatment benefit is essential for the rational and cost-effective prescription of ACE inhibitors. Information on heterogeneities in treatment effect between subgroups of patients could be used to develop an evidence-based guidance for the installation of ACE-inhibitor therapy. Obviously, therapy should only be applied in those patients who most likely will benefit. Attempts to develop such treatment guidance by using clinical characteristics have been unsuccessful. No heterogeneity in risk reduction by ACE inhibitors has been observed in relation to relevant clinical characteristics. A new approach to such ‘guided-therapy’ could be to integrate more patient-specific characteristics such as the patients’ genetic information. If proven feasible, pharmacogenetic profiling could optimise patients’ benefit of treatment and reduce unnecessary treatment of patients. Cardiovascular pharmacogenetic research of ACE inhibitors in coronary artery disease patients is in a formative stage and studies are limited. The PERGENE study is a large pharmacogenetic substudy of the EUROPA trial, aimed to assess the achievability of pharmacogenetic profiling. We provide an overview of the main results of the PERGENE study in terms of the genetic determinants of treatment benefit and blood pressure response. The main results of the PERGENE study show a pharmacogenetic profile related to the treatment benefit of perindopril identifying responders and non-responders to treatment

The Rise and Fall of Hypertension: Lessons Learned from Eastern Europe

Hypertension is a progressive cardiovascular syndrome that arises from many differing, but interrelated, etiologies. Hypertension is the most prevalent cardiovascular disorder, affecting 20% to 50% of the adult population in developed countries. Arterial hypertension is a major risk factor for cardiovascular diseases and death. Epidemiologic data have shown that control of hypertension is achieved in only a small percentage of hypertensive patients. Findings from the World Health Organization project Monitoring Trends and Determinants in Cardiovascular Diseases (MONICA) showed a remarkably high prevalence (about 65%) of hypertension in Eastern Europeans. There is virtually no difference however, between the success rate in controlling hypertension when comparing Eastern and Western European populations. Diagnosing hypertension depends on both population awareness of the dangers of hypertension and medical interventions aimed at the detecting elevated blood pressure, even in asymptomatic patients. Medical compliance with guidelines for the treatment of hypertension is variable throughout Eastern Europe. Prevalence of hypertension increases with age, and the management of hypertension in elderly is a significant problem. The treatment of hypertension demands a comprehensive approach to the patient with regard to cardiovascular risk and individualization of hypertensive therapy

NeOProM: Neonatal Oxygenation Prospective Meta-analysis Collaboration study protocol

Background: The appropriate level of oxygenation for extremely preterm neonates ( 90%) have been reported to have greater rates of morbidity including retinopathy of prematurity and chronic lung disease. In order to answer this clinical dilemma reliably, large scale trial evidence is needed.Methods/Design: To detect a small but important 4% increase in death or severe disability in survivors, over 5000 neonates would need to be recruited. As extreme prematurity affects 1% of births, such a project undertaken by one trial group would be prohibitively lengthy and expensive. Hence, the Neonatal Oxygenation Prospective Meta-analysis (NeOProM) Collaboration has been formed. A prospective meta-analysis (PMA) is one where studies are identified, evaluated, and determined to be eligible before the results of any included studies are known or published, thereby avoiding some of the potential biases inherent in standard, retrospective meta-analyses. This methodology provides the same strengths as a single large-scale multicentre randomised study whilst allowing greater pragmatic flexibility. The NeOProM Collaboration protocol (NCT01124331) has been agreed prior to the results of individual trials being available. This includes pre-specifying the hypotheses, inclusion criteria and outcome measures to be used. Each trial will first publish their respective results as they become available and the combined meta-analytic results, using individual patient data, will be published when all trials are complete. The primary outcome to be assessed is a composite outcome of death or major disability at 18 months - 2 years corrected age. Secondary outcomes include several measures of neonatal morbidity. The size of the combined dataset will allow the effect of the interventions to be explored more reliably with respect to pre-specified patient- and intervention-level characteristics.Discussion: Results should be available by 2014

Effects of blood pressure lowering on cardiovascular events, in the context of regression to the mean: a systematic review of randomized trials

OBJECTIVE: To assess the clinical relevance of regression to the mean for clinical trials and clinical practice. METHODS: MEDLINE was searched until February 2018 for randomized trials of BP lowering with over 1000 patient-years follow-up per group. We estimated baseline mean BP, follow-up mean (usual) BP amongst patients grouped by 10 mmHg strata of baseline BP, and assessed effects of BP lowering on coronary heart disease (CHD) and stroke according to these BP levels. RESULTS: Eighty-six trials (349 488 participants), with mean follow-up of 3.7 years, were included. Most mean BP change was because of regression to the mean rather than treatment. At high baseline BP levels, even after rigorous hypertension diagnosis, downwards regression to the mean caused much of the fall in BP. At low baseline BP levels, upwards regression to the mean increased BP levels, even in treatment groups. Overall, a BP reduction of 6/3 mmHg lowered CHD by 14% (95% CI 11-17%) and stroke by 18% (15-22%), and these treatment effects occurred at follow-up BP levels much closer to the mean than baseline BP levels. In particular, more evidence was available in the SBP 130-139 mmHg range than any other range. Benefits were apparent in numerous high-risk patient groups with baseline mean SBP less than 140 mmHg. CONCLUSION: Clinical practice should focus less on pretreatment BP levels, which rarely predict future untreated BP levels or rule out capacity to benefit from BP lowering in high cardiovascular risk patients. Instead, focus should be on prompt, empirical treatment to maintain lower BP for those with high BP and/or high risk