Monika M Safford1, Christopher M Gamboa2, Raegan W Durant3, Todd M Brown3, Stephen P Glasser3, James M Shikany3, Richard M Zweifler4, George Howard5, Paul Muntner2. 1. Departments of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama. Electronic address: msafford@uab.edu. 2. Epidemiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama. 3. Departments of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama. 4. Sentara Healthcare & Department of Neurology, Eastern Virginia Medical School, Norfolk, Virginia. 5. Biostatistics, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Lipid management is less aggressive in blacks than whites and women than men. PURPOSE: To examine whether differences in lipid management for race-sex groups compared to white men are due to factors influencing health services utilization or physician prescribing patterns. METHODS: Because coronary heart disease (CHD) risk influences physician prescribing, Adult Treatment Panel III CHD risk categories were constructed using baseline data from REasons for Geographic And Racial Differences in Stroke study participants (recruited 2003-2007). Prevalence, awareness, treatment, and control of hyperlipidemia were examined for race-sex groups across CHD risk categories. Multivariable models conducted in 2013 estimated prevalence ratios adjusted for predisposing, enabling, and need factors influencing health services utilization. RESULTS: The analytic sample included 7,809 WM; 7,712 white women; 4,096 black men; and 6,594 black women. Except in the lowest risk group, black men were less aware of hyperlipidemia than others. A higher percentage of white men in the highest risk group was treated (83.2%) and controlled (72.8%) than others (treatment, 68.6%-72.1%; control, 52.2%-65.5%), with black women treated and controlled the least. These differences remained significant after adjustment for predisposing, enabling, and need factors. Stratified analyses demonstrated that treatment and control were lower for other race-sex groups relative to white men only in the highest risk category. CONCLUSIONS: Hyperlipidemia was more aggressively treated and controlled among white men compared with white women, black men, and especially black women among those at highest risk for CHD. These differences were not attributable to factors influencing health services utilization.
BACKGROUND:Lipid management is less aggressive in blacks than whites and women than men. PURPOSE: To examine whether differences in lipid management for race-sex groups compared to white men are due to factors influencing health services utilization or physician prescribing patterns. METHODS: Because coronary heart disease (CHD) risk influences physician prescribing, Adult Treatment Panel III CHD risk categories were constructed using baseline data from REasons for Geographic And Racial Differences in Stroke study participants (recruited 2003-2007). Prevalence, awareness, treatment, and control of hyperlipidemia were examined for race-sex groups across CHD risk categories. Multivariable models conducted in 2013 estimated prevalence ratios adjusted for predisposing, enabling, and need factors influencing health services utilization. RESULTS: The analytic sample included 7,809 WM; 7,712 white women; 4,096 black men; and 6,594 black women. Except in the lowest risk group, black men were less aware of hyperlipidemia than others. A higher percentage of white men in the highest risk group was treated (83.2%) and controlled (72.8%) than others (treatment, 68.6%-72.1%; control, 52.2%-65.5%), with black women treated and controlled the least. These differences remained significant after adjustment for predisposing, enabling, and need factors. Stratified analyses demonstrated that treatment and control were lower for other race-sex groups relative to white men only in the highest risk category. CONCLUSIONS:Hyperlipidemia was more aggressively treated and controlled among white men compared with white women, black men, and especially black women among those at highest risk for CHD. These differences were not attributable to factors influencing health services utilization.
Authors: Virginia J Howard; Mary Cushman; Leavonne Pulley; Camilo R Gomez; Rodney C Go; Ronald J Prineas; Andra Graham; Claudia S Moy; George Howard Journal: Neuroepidemiology Date: 2005-06-29 Impact factor: 3.282
Authors: Lori Mosca; Allison H Linfante; Emelia J Benjamin; Kathy Berra; Sharonne N Hayes; Brian W Walsh; Rosalind P Fabunmi; Johnny Kwan; Thomas Mills; Susan Lee Simpson Journal: Circulation Date: 2005-02-01 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Daniel W Jones; Lloyd E Chambless; Aaron R Folsom; Gerardo Heiss; Richard G Hutchinson; A Richey Sharrett; Moyses Szklo; Herman A Taylor Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 2002 Dec 9-23
Authors: K A Schulman; J A Berlin; W Harless; J F Kerner; S Sistrunk; B J Gersh; R Dubé; C K Taleghani; J E Burke; S Williams; J M Eisenberg; J J Escarce Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1999-02-25 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Nita A Limdi; Virginia J Howard; John Higginbotham; Jason Parton; Monika M Safford; George Howard Journal: J Racial Ethn Health Disparities Date: 2015-11-05
Authors: George Howard; Claudia S Moy; Virginia J Howard; Leslie A McClure; Dawn O Kleindorfer; Brett M Kissela; Suzanne E Judd; Fredrick W Unverzagt; Elsayed Z Soliman; Monika M Safford; Mary Cushman; Matthew L Flaherty; Virginia G Wadley Journal: Stroke Date: 2016-06-02 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Christopher M Gamboa; Lisandro D Colantonio; Todd M Brown; April P Carson; Monika M Safford Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2017-05-10 Impact factor: 5.501
Authors: Praful Schroff; Christopher M Gamboa; Raegan W Durant; Asikhame Oikeh; Joshua S Richman; Monika M Safford Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2017-08-28 Impact factor: 5.501
Authors: Cinzia Perrino; Péter Ferdinandy; Hans E Bøtker; Bianca J J M Brundel; Peter Collins; Sean M Davidson; Hester M den Ruijter; Felix B Engel; Eva Gerdts; Henrique Girao; Mariann Gyöngyösi; Derek J Hausenloy; Sandrine Lecour; Rosalinda Madonna; Michael Marber; Elizabeth Murphy; Maurizio Pesce; Vera Regitz-Zagrosek; Joost P G Sluijter; Sabine Steffens; Can Gollmann-Tepeköylü; Linda W Van Laake; Sophie Van Linthout; Rainer Schulz; Kirsti Ytrehus Journal: Cardiovasc Res Date: 2021-01-21 Impact factor: 10.787
Authors: Shipra Arya; Zachary Binney; Anjali Khakharia; Luke P Brewster; Phil Goodney; Rachel Patzer; Jason Hockenberry; Peter W F Wilson Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2018-01-12 Impact factor: 5.501
Authors: Xueyan Zhao; Xin Geng; Vinodh Srinivasasainagendra; Ninad Chaudhary; Suzanne Judd; Virginia Wadley; Orlando M Gutiérrez; Henry Wang; Ethan M Lange; Leslie A Lange; Daniel Woo; Frederick W Unverzagt; Monika Safford; Mary Cushman; Nita Limdi; Rakale Quarells; Donna K Arnett; Marguerite R Irvin; Degui Zhi Journal: BMC Med Genomics Date: 2019-01-31 Impact factor: 3.063
Authors: Leonard K Welsh; Andrew R Luhrs; Gerardo Davalos; Ramon Diaz; Andres Narvaez; Juan Esteban Perez; Reginald Lerebours; Maragatha Kuchibhatla; Dana D Portenier; Alfredo D Guerron Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2020-08 Impact factor: 3.479