Literature DB >> 19539079

Potential reductions in United States coronary heart disease mortality by treating more patients.

Simon Capewell1, Martin O'Flaherty, Earl S Ford, Julia A Critchley.   

Abstract

Approximately one half of the recent decline observed in age-adjusted coronary heart disease (CHD) mortality rates can be attributed to the use of modern medical and surgical interventions. In 2000, however, only about 30% to 60% of eligible patients actually received the appropriate treatment. To examine the reduction in CHD mortality potentially achievable by increasing the provision of specific medical and surgical treatment to eligible patients with CHD in the United States, we integrated the data on CHD patient numbers, medical and surgical treatment uptake levels, and treatment effectiveness using a previously validated CHD policy model. We estimated the number of deaths prevented or postponed for 2000 (baseline) and for an alternative scenario (60% of eligible patients). In 2000, the treatment levels in the United States were generally poor; only 30% to 60% of eligible patients received the appropriate therapy. These treatments resulted in approximately 159,330 fewer deaths. By treating 60% of eligible patients, 297,470 fewer deaths would have been obtained (minimum 118,360; maximum 628,120), representing 134,635 less than in 2000, with approximately 32% from heart failure therapy, 30% from secondary prevention therapy, 19% from acute coronary syndrome treatment, 15% from primary prevention with statins, 0.5% from hypertension treatment, and 1% from coronary bypass surgery for chronic angina. These findings remained stable in the sensitivity analysis. In conclusion, increasing the proportion of eligible patients with CHD who received the appropriate treatment could have achieved approximately 135,000 fewer deaths in 2000, almost doubling the benefit actually achieved. Future strategies should maximize the delivery of appropriate therapies to all eligible patients with CHD and prioritize medical therapies for secondary prevention and heart failure.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19539079     DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2009.02.036

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Cardiol        ISSN: 0002-9149            Impact factor:   2.778


  6 in total

1.  Utility of nonspecific resting electrocardiographic features for detection of coronary artery stenosis by computed tomography in acute chest pain patients: from the ROMICAT trial.

Authors:  Quynh A Truong; Dahlia Banerji; Leon M Ptaszek; Carolyn Taylor; Joao D Fontes; Matthias Kriegel; Thomas Irlbeck; John T Nagurney; Udo Hoffmann
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2011-02-02       Impact factor: 2.357

Review 2.  Will cardiovascular disease prevention widen health inequalities?

Authors:  Simon Capewell; Hilary Graham
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2010-08-24       Impact factor: 11.069

3.  Why have total cholesterol levels declined in most developed countries?

Authors:  Simon Capewell; Earl S Ford
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2011-08-11       Impact factor: 3.295

4.  The predicted impact of heart disease prevention and treatment initiatives on mortality in Lithuania, a middle-income country.

Authors:  Thomas E Kottke; Lina Jancaityte; Abdonas Tamosiunas; Vilius Grabauskas
Journal:  Prev Chronic Dis       Date:  2011-10-17       Impact factor: 2.830

5.  Beyond case fatality rate: using potential impact fraction to estimate the effect of increasing treatment uptake on mortality.

Authors:  Nicholas Mitsakakis; Harindra C Wijeysundera; Murray Krahn
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2013-09-04       Impact factor: 4.615

6.  Underuse of medication for circulatory disorders among unmarried women and men in Norway?

Authors:  Øystein Kravdal; Emily Grundy
Journal:  BMC Pharmacol Toxicol       Date:  2014-11-24       Impact factor: 2.483

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.