288 research outputs found

    Trends and cardiovascular mortality effects of state-level blood pressure and uncontrolled hypertension in the United States.

    No full text
    BACKGROUND: Blood pressure is an important risk factor for cardiovascular disease and mortality and has lifestyle and healthcare determinants that vary across states. Only self-reported hypertension status is measured at the state level in the United States. Our aim was to estimate levels and trends in state-level mean systolic blood pressure (SBP), the prevalence of uncontrolled systolic hypertension, and cardiovascular mortality attributable to all levels of higher-than-optimal SBP. METHODS AND RESULTS: We estimated the relationship between actual SBP/uncontrolled hypertension and self-reported hypertension, use of blood pressure medication, and a set of health system and sociodemographic variables in the nationally representative National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. We applied this relationship to identical variables from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System to estimate state-specific mean SBP and uncontrolled hypertension. We used the comparative risk assessment methods to estimate cardiovascular mortality attributable to higher-than-optimal SBP. In 2001-2003, age-standardized uncontrolled hypertension prevalence was highest in the District of Columbia, Mississippi, Louisiana, Alabama, Texas, Georgia, and South Carolina (18% to 21% for men and 24% to 26% for women) and lowest in Vermont, Minnesota, Connecticut, New Hampshire, Iowa, and Colorado (15% to 16% for men and approximately 21% for women). Women had a higher prevalence of uncontrolled hypertension than men in every state by 4 (Arizona) to 7 (Kansas) percentage points. In the 1990s, uncontrolled hypertension in women increased the most in Idaho and Oregon (by 6 percentage points) and the least in the District of Columbia and Mississippi (by 3 percentage points). For men, the worst-performing states were New Mexico and Louisiana (decrease of 0.6 and 1.3 percentage points), and the best-performing states were Vermont and Indiana (decrease of 4 and 3 percentage points). Age-standardized cardiovascular mortality attributable to higher-than-optimal SBP ranged from 200 to 220 per 100,000 (Minnesota and Massachusetts) to 360 to 370 per 100,000 (District of Columbia and Mississippi) for women and from 210 per 100,000 (Colorado and Utah) to 370 per 100,000 (Mississippi) and 410 per 100,000 (District of Columbia) for men. CONCLUSIONS: Lifestyle and pharmacological interventions for lowering blood pressure are particularly needed in the South and Appalachia, and with emphasis on control among women. Self-reported data on hypertension diagnosis from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System can be used to obtain unbiased state-level estimates of blood pressure and uncontrolled hypertension as benchmarks for priority setting and for designing and evaluating intervention programs

    External Validation of Cardiovascular Risk Scores in the Southern Cone of Latin America: Which Predicts Better?

    Get PDF
    Introducción: La estimación inexacta del riesgo cardiovascular poblacional puede llevar a un manejo inadecuado de las intervenciones médicas preventivas, como, por ejemplo, el uso de estatinas. Objetivo: Evaluar la validez externa de ecuaciones de predicción de riesgo cardiovascular en población general del Cono Sur de Latinoamérica. Material y métodos: Se evaluaron ecuaciones que incluyen variables evaluadas en el estudio CESCAS y que predicen tanto morbilidad como mortalidad cardiovascular global (CUORE, Framingham, Globorisk y Pooled Cohort Studies Equations). Para cada ecuación se realizó un análisis independiente en el que se tuvieron en cuenta los eventos cardiovasculares relevados. Se evaluó la discriminación de cada ecuación a través del cálculo del estadístico-C y el índice Harrell C. Para evaluar la calibración se graficó la proporción de riesgos observados vs. estimados por quintilos de riesgo para cada ecuación y se calculó la pendiente β de regresión lineal para las estimaciones. Se calculó sensibilidad y especificidad para la detección de personas con elevado riesgo cardiovascular. Resultados: La mediana del tiempo de seguimiento de la cohorte al momento del análisis es de 2,2 años, con un rango intercuartilo de 1,9 a 2,8 años. Se incorporaron a los análisis 60 eventos cardiovasculares. Todos los valores de estadístico-C y del índice de Harrell fueron superiores a 0,7. El valor de la pendiente β más alejado de 1 fue el de Pooled Cohort Studies Euations. Conclusiones: Si bien los parámetros de validación externa evaluados fueron similares, CUORE, Globorisk y el índice de Framingham fueron las ecuaciones con mejores indicadores globales de predicción de riesgo cardiovascular.Background: Inaccurate estimates of demographic cardiovascular risk may lead to an inadequate management of preventive medical interventions such as the use of statins. Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the external validity of cardiovascular risk equations in the general population of the Southern Cone of Latin America. Methods: Equations including variables evaluated in the CESCAS cohort study and that estimate overall cardiovascular mortality (CUORE, Framingham, Globorisk and Pooled Cohort Studies) were assessed. For each equation, an independent analysis was performed taking into account the cardiovascular events originally considered. Discrimination of each equation was evaluated through C-statistic and Harrell’s C-index. To assess calibration, a graph was built for each equation with the proportion of observed events vs. the proportion of estimated events by risk quintiles and the β slope of the resulting linear regression was calculated. Sensitivity and specificity were determined for the detection of people at high cardiovascular risk. Results: The median follow-up time of the cohort at the time of the analysis was 2.2 years, with an interquartile range of 1.9 to 2.8 years. Sixty cardiovascular events were incorporated into the analysis. All C-statistic and Harrell’s-C index values were greater than 0.7. The value of the β slope farthest from 1 was that of the Pooled Cohort Studies score. Conclusions: Although the external validation parameters evaluated were similar, CUORE, Globorisk and the Framingham equations showed the best global performance for cardiovascular risk estimation in our population.Fil: Gulayin, Pablo Elías. Universidad Nacional de La Plata; Argentina. Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria; ArgentinaFil: Danaei, Goodarz. Harvard University. Harvard School of Public Health; Estados UnidosFil: Gutierrez, Laura. Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria; ArgentinaFil: Poggio, Rosana. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Parque Centenario. Centro de Investigaciones en Epidemiología y Salud Pública. Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria. Centro de Investigaciones en Epidemiología y Salud Pública; ArgentinaFil: Ponzo, Jaqueline. Universidad de la República; UruguayFil: Lanas, Fernando. Universidad de La Frontera; ChileFil: Rubinstein, Adolfo Luis. Ministerio de Salud de la Nación; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaFil: Irazola, Vilma. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Parque Centenario. Centro de Investigaciones en Epidemiología y Salud Pública. Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria. Centro de Investigaciones en Epidemiología y Salud Pública; Argentin

    An innovative approach to improve the detection and treatment of risk factors in poor urban settings: a feasibility study in Argentina

    Get PDF
    Background: The effective management of cardiovascular (CVD) prevention among the population with exclusive public health coverage in Argentina is low since less than 30% of the individuals with predicted 10-year CVD risk ≥10% attend a clinical visit for CVD risk factors control in the primary care clinics (PCCs). Methods: We conducted a non-controlled feasibility study using a mixed methods approach to evaluate acceptability, adoption and fidelity of a multi-component intervention implemented in the public healthcare system. The eligibility criteria were having exclusive public health coverage, age ≥ 40 years, residence in the PCC’s catchment area and 10-year CVD risk ≥10%. The multi-component intervention addressed (1) system barriers through task shifting among the PCC’s staff, protected medical appointments slots and a new CVD form and (2) Provider barriers through training for primary care physicians and CHW and individual barriers through a home-based intervention delivered by community health workers (CHWs). Results: A total of 185 participants were included in the study. Of the total number of eligible participants, 82.2% attended at least one clinical visit for risk factor control. Physicians intensified drug treatment in 77% of participants with BP ≥140/90 mmHg and 79.5% of participants with diabetes, increased the proportion of participants treated according to GCP from 21 to 32.6% in hypertensive participants, 7.4 to 33.3% in high CVD risk and 1.4 to 8.7% in very high CVD risk groups. Mean systolic and diastolic blood pressure were lower at the end of follow up (156.9 to 145.4 mmHg and 92.9 to 88.9 mmHg, respectively) and control of hypertension (BP < 140/90 mmHg) increased from 20.3 to 35.5%. Conclusion: The proposed CHWs-led intervention was feasible and well accepted to improve the detection and treatment of risk factors in the poor population with exclusive public health coverage and with moderate or high CVD risk at the primary care setting in Argentina. Task sharing activities with CHWs did not only stimulate teamwork among PCC staff, but it also improved quality of care. This study showed that community health workers could have a more active role in the detection and clinical management of CVD risk factors in low-income communities.Fil: Poggio, Rosana. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Parque Centenario. Centro de Investigaciones en Epidemiología y Salud Pública. Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria. Centro de Investigaciones en Epidemiología y Salud Pública; ArgentinaFil: Danaei, Goodarz. Harvard University. Harvard School of Public Health; Estados UnidosFil: Gutierrez, Laura. Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria; ArgentinaFil: Cavallo, Ana. Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria; ArgentinaFil: Lopez, María Victoria. Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria; ArgentinaFil: Irazola, Vilma. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Parque Centenario. Centro de Investigaciones en Epidemiología y Salud Pública. Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria. Centro de Investigaciones en Epidemiología y Salud Pública; Argentin

    Iranian general populations' and health care providers' preferences for benefits and harms of statin therapy for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease

    Get PDF
    Acknowledgements This study was conducted at the Research Institute for Endocrine Sciences, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences Tehran, Iran. Lown Scholar Program of the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health helped in funding and designing the study. We thank the respectful staff of the Non-Communicable Diseases Office of the Ministry of Health and Medical Education in Iran for their help and advice on developing the survey. We gratefully thank Prof. MA Puhan for sharing their experience on the design and implementation of best-worst scaling. Funding This study is a part of a project funded by the National Institute of Medical Research. Development (NIMAD) (Grant No. 964114) and was supported by the Iran University of Medical. Sciences. The funding bodies had no role in the design of the study and collection, analysis, and interpretation of data and in writing the manuscript.Peer reviewedPublisher PD
    corecore