2 research outputs found

    Screening families of patients with premature coronary heart disease to identify avoidable cardiovascular risk: a cross-sectional study of family members and a general population comparison group

    Get PDF
    <b>Background:</b> Primary prevention should be targeted at individuals with high global cardiovascular risk, but research is lacking on how best to identify such individuals in the general population. Family history is a good proxy measure of global risk and may provide an efficient mechanism for identifying high risk individuals. The aim was to test the feasibility of using patients with premature cardiovascular disease to recruit family members as a means of identifying and screening high-risk individuals. <b>Findings:</b> We recruited family members of 50 patients attending a cardiology clinic for premature coronary heart disease (CHD). We compared their cardiovascular risk with a general population control group, and determined their perception of their risk and current level of screening. 103 (36%) family members attended screening (27 siblings, 48 adult offspring and 28 partners). Five (5%) had prevalent CHD. A significantly higher percentage had an ASSIGN risk score >20% compared with the general population (13% versus 2%, p < 0.001). Only 37% of family members were aware they were at increased risk and only 50% had had their blood pressure and serum cholesterol level checked in the previous three years. <b>Conclusions:</b> Patients attending hospital for premature CHD provide a mechanism to contact family members and this can identify individuals with a high global risk who are not currently screened

    Long-term outcome following attendance at a transient ischemic attack clinic

    No full text
    Background and purpose Many patients who attend transient ischemic attack clinics have a noncerebrovascular diagnosis. The long-term outcomes in this group are not well described. We evaluated these in a cohort referred to a transient ischemic attack clinic with a suspected transient ischemic attack. Methods Patients were clinically classified as having stroke or a transient ischemic attack or a noncerebrovascular diagnosis (nontransient ischemic attack). Follow-up was via electronic record linkage. The primary endpoint was cardiovascular death or a major cardiovascular event. Secondary outcomes included incident neurological disease (excluding stroke or transient ischemic attack) and the need for permanent pacemaker insertion. Outcomes in the transient ischemic attack and nontransient ischemic attack cohorts were compared using Cox's proportional hazards models. Mortality outcomes were further compared with those in a contemporary control group of individuals with hypertension. Results Of the 3533 patients who attended the transient ischemic attack clinic, 53.5% had a transient ischemic attack. Of these, 769 (40.7%) suffered a cardiovascular endpoint, compared with 458 (27.9%) with a nontransient ischemic attack (hazard ratio 1.53, 95% confidence interval 1.36-1.72). The risk remained higher but was attenuated following adjustment (hazard ratio 1.21, 95% confidence interval 1.05-1.41). Cardiovascular mortality in both groups was higher than that in hypertensive controls. The risk of a subsequent nonstroke neurological event was higher in those without a transient ischemic attack. Conclusions Patients without a transient ischemic attack referred to a transient ischemic attack clinic have a high risk of future vascular events that exceeds risk in a cohort with hypertension. All patients attending transient ischemic attack clinics should undergo assessment of their cardiovascular risk and the use of methods to reduce this risk should be explore
    corecore