Applying the Evidence
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The importance of early and aggressive initiation of secondary prevention strategies for patients with both coronary artery disease (CAD) and cerebrovascular disease (CVD) is emphasized by multiple guidelines. However, limited information is available on cardiovascular protection and stroke prevention in an outpatient setting from community-based populations. We sought to evaluate and compare differences in treatment patterns and the attainment of current guideline-recommended targets in unselected high-risk ambulatory patients with CAD, CVD, or both. METHODS: This multicenter, prospective, cohort study was conducted from December 2001 to December 2004 among ambulatory patients in a primary care setting. The prospective Vascular Protection and Guidelines-Oriented Approach to Lipid-Lowering Registries recruited 4933 outpatients with established CAD, CVD, or both. All patients had a complete fasting lipid profile measured within 6 months before enrollment. The primary outcome measure was the achievement of blood pressure (BP) <140/90 mm Hg (or <130/80 mm Hg for patients with diabetes) and LDL cholesterol <2.5 mmol/L (<97 mg/dL) according to the Canadian guidelines in place at that time (similar to the National Cholesterol Education Program's value of 100 mg/dL). Secondary outcomes include use of antithrombotic, antihypertensive, and lipid-modifying therapies. RESULTS: Of the 4933 patients, 3817 (77%) had CAD only; 647 (13%) had CVD only; and 469 (10%) had both CAD and CVD. Mean+/-SD age was 67+/-10 years, and 3466 (71%) were male. Mean systolic and diastolic BPs were 130+/-16 and 75+/-9 mm Hg, respectively. Minor but significant differences were observed on baseline BP, total cholesterol, and LDL cholesterol measurements among the 3 groups. Overall, 83% of patients were taking a statin and 93% were receiving antithrombotic therapy (antiplatelet and/or anticoagulant agents). Compared with patients with CAD, those with CVD only were less likely to achieve the recommended BP (45.3% vs 57.3%, respectively; P<0.001) and lipid (19.4% vs 30.5%, respectively; P<0.001) targets. Among patients with CVD only, women were less likely to achieve the recommended BP and lipid targets compared with their male counterparts (for LDL cholesterol <2.5 mmol/L, 18.7% vs 23.8%, respectively; P=0.048). In multivariable analysis, patients with CVD alone were less likely to achieve treatment success (BP or lipid targets) after adjusting for age, sex, diabetes, and use of pharmacologic therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the proven benefits of available antihypertensive and lipid-lowering therapies, current management of hypertension and dyslipidemia continues to be suboptimal. A considerable proportion of patients failed to achieve guideline-recommended targets, and this apparent treatment gap was more pronounced among patients with CVD and women. Quality improvement strategies should target these patient subgroups.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».