Lifestyle behaviour and risk factor control in coronary patients : Belgian results from the cross-sectional EUROASPIRE surveys

Objective: The aim of this study was to assess lifestyle behaviour as well as risk factor management across Belgian coronary patients who participated in the cross-sectional European Action on Secondary Prevention through Intervention to Reduce Events (EUROASPIRE) surveys. Methods: Analyses are based on a series of coronary patients by combining data from the Belgian participants in the EUROASPIRE III (328 patients; in 2006-2007) and EUROASPIRE IV (343 patients; in 2012-2013) surveys. Four hospitals located in the Ghent area participated in the surveys. Patients included in the analyses were >= 18 years old and had been hospitalised for a coronary event. Information on cardiovascular risk factors, lifestyle behaviour and medical treatment were obtained. Results: Overall, the proportion of smokers was 11% with 40% persistent smokers. Adequate physical activity levels were reported by 17%, 28% of patients were obese, 47% was central obese and known diabetes was prevalent in 21% of patients. Hypertension was observed in 46% of patients and 20% had a total cholesterol >= 5 mmol/L. About 80% had participated in a cardiac rehabilitation programme and the majority of patients were treated with blood pressure (92%) or lipid-lowering drugs (92%). Anxiety and depressive symptoms were reported by 30% and 24%, respectively. Differences between EUROASPIRE III and IV were limited. Conclusions: Compared to the overall EUROASPIRE results in Europe, Belgian CHD patients seem to do slightly better. However, tackling obesity, physical inactivity, hypertension and psychosocial distress remains an important challenge in the management of coronary patients

The impact of drop-out in cardiac rehabilitation on outcome among coronary artery disease patients

Background: The effect of adherence to cardiac rehabilitation (CR) on outcome is not clear. Therefore, we aimed to assess the impact of drop-out for non-medical reasons of CR on event-free survival in coronary artery disease (CAD). Methods: A total of 876 patients who attended CR after acute coronary syndrome (ACS), percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) were included. Drop-out was defined as attending 50% of the training sessions. A combined endpoint of all-cause mortality and rehospitalization for a cardiovascular event was used to specify event-free survival. Differences in clinical characteristics were assessed and parameters with p<0.10 were entered in a multiple Cox regression analysis. Results: A total of 15% died or had a cardiovascular event during a median follow-up period of 33 months (interquartile range 24, 51). Overall, 17% dropped out before finishing half of the program. Patients who withdrew prematurely had a risk twice as high for a cardiovascular event or death (hazard ratio 1.92, 95% confidence interval 1.28-2.90) than those who attended more than half of the sessions. Both ACS (2.36, 1.47-3.58) and PCI (2.20, 1.22-3.96), as primary indicators for CR, were associated with an adverse outcome and also a prior history of chronic heart failure (CHF) remained negatively associated with event-free survival (3.67, 1.24-10.91).Finally, the presence of hyperlipidemia was independently related to a worse outcome (1.48, 1.02-2.16). Conclusions: Drop-out for non-medical reasons was independently associated with a negative outcome in CAD. Therefore, underlying factors for drop-out should gain more attention in future research and should be taken into account when organizing CR

Engaging GPs in insulin therapy initiation : a qualitative study evaluating a support program in the Belgian context

Background: A program supporting the initiation of insulin therapy in primary care was introduced in Belgium, as part of a larger quality improvement project on diabetes care. This paper reports on a study exploring factors influencing the engagement of general practitioners (GPs) in insulin therapy initiation (research question 1) and exploring factors relevant for future program development (research question 2). Methods: We have used semi-structured interviews to answer the first research question: two focus group interviews with GPs who had at least one patient in the insulin initiation program and 20 one-to-one interviews with GPs who were not regular users of the overall support program in the region. To explore factors relevant for future program development, the data from the GPs were triangulated with data obtained from individual interviews with patients (n=10), the diabetes nurse educator (DNE) and the specialist involved in the program, and data extracted from meeting reports evaluating the insulin initiation support program. Results: We found differences between GPs engaged and those not engaged in insulin initiation in attitude, subjective norm and perceived behavioural control regarding insulin initiation. In general the support program was evaluated in a positive way by users of the program. Some aspects need further consideration: job boundaries between the DNE and GPs, job boundaries between GPs and specialists, protocol adherence and limited case load. Conclusion: The study shows that the transition of insulin initiation from secondary care to the primary care setting is a challenge. Although a support program addressing known barriers to insulin initiation was provided, a substantial number of GPs were reluctant to engage in this aspect of care. Important issues for future program development are: an interdisciplinary approach to job clarification, a dynamic approach to the integration of expertise in primary care and feedback on protocol adherence. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:NCT0082449