| Literature DB >> 26812643 |
M O'Flaherty1, P Bandosz2, J Critchley3, S Capewell2, M Guzman-Castillo2, T Aspelund4, K Bennett5, K Kabir6, L Björck7, J Bruthans8, J W Hotchkiss9, J Hughes10, T Laatikainen11, L Palmieri12, T Zdrojewski13.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Coronary heart disease (CHD) death rates have fallen across most of Europe in recent decades. However, substantial risk factor reductions have not been achieved across all Europe. Our aim was to quantify the potential impact of future policy scenarios on diet and lifestyle on CHD mortality in 9 European countries.Entities:
Keywords: Coronary heart disease; Food policy; Mortality trends; Physical activity; Policy modelling; Prevention; Smoking
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 26812643 PMCID: PMC4766942 DOI: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2016.01.147
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Cardiol ISSN: 0167-5273 Impact factor: 4.164
Fig. 1Structure of updated IMPACT CHD model.
Population and mortality projections (to 2020) for the EHII countries (adults 25–74 years).
| Country | Population in base year [million] | Population in 2020 (forecast) | Mortality in base year (per 100 000) | Mortality in 2020 (forecast) (per 100 000) | No of deaths observed in base year | Expected no of deaths in 2020 (exponential decay model) | Expected no of deaths in 2020 (no mortality change) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Czech | 6.8 | 7.3 | 145 | 67 | 9.9 | 4.9 (2.1–8.3) | 10.6 (5.6–15.7) |
| Finland | 3.3 | 3.5 | 113 | 58 | 3.8 | 2.2 (1.5–3.1) | 4.4 (3.5–5.3) |
| Iceland | 0.2 | 0.2 | 55 | 34 | 0.1 | 0.1 (0.1–0.1) | 0.1 (0.1–0.1) |
| Ireland | 2.7 | 3.6 | 74 | 52 | 2.0 | 1.5 (1.1–1.9) | 2.1 (1.7–2.6) |
| Italy | 38.6 | 38.0 | 40 | 27 | 15.6 | 11 (7.2–15.2) | 16.2 (13–19.5) |
| Northern Ireland | 1.1 | 1.2 | 83 | 39 | 0.9 | 0.4 (0.3–0.5) | 0.9 (0.7–1.1) |
| Poland | 25.1 | 25.6 | 91 | 56 | 22.8 | 13.6 (10.7–16.6) | 22.2 (17.8–26.7) |
| Scotland | 3.3 | 3.5 | 98 | 52 | 3.2 | 1.8 (1.2–2.4) | 3.4 (2.7–4) |
| Sweden | 5.8 | 6.3 | 59 | 37 | 3.4 | 2.4 (1.4–3.4) | 3.8 (3.2–4.4) |
Total forecast prevented deaths according to three scenarios in study countries (all risk factors changes together).
Adults aged 25–74 years old.
| Forecast decrease in deaths [n] (no mortality change) | Forecast decrease in deaths [n] (exponential decay model) | Forecast decrease in deaths [%] | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S1 | S2 | S3 | S1 | S2 | S3 | S1 | S2 | S3 | |
| Czech Republic | 1160 (540–1860) | 2240 (1060–3500) | 3150 (1500–4880) | 540 (210–950) | 1030 (410–1790) | 1450 (570–2520) | 10.9 (4.2–19.5) | 21.1 (8.3–36.7) | 29.7 (11.7–51.5) |
| Finland | 460 (280–640) | 880 (570–1180) | 1210 (810–1620) | 230 (120–360) | 440 (240–670) | 610 (340–910) | 10.3 (5.4–15.9) | 19.7 (10.9–29.6) | 27.2 (15.3–40.6) |
| Iceland | 11 (7–14) | 21 (15–26) | 31 (22–38) | 7 (4–9) | 13 (9–17) | 19 (13–25) | 10.3 (6.8–13.7) | 20 (13.8–26) | 29.3 (20.2–38.2) |
| Italy | 1740 (1110–2410) | 3380 (2260–4500) | 4710 (3220–6270) | 1170 (660–1780) | 2280 (1330–3340) | 3170 (1890–4620) | 10.6 (6–16.2) | 20.7 (12.1–30.4) | 28.8 (17.2–42) |
| Northern Ireland | 90 (60–120) | 170 (120–230) | 250 (170–330) | 40 (30–60) | 80 (50–120) | 120 (70–170) | 10.3 (6.1–14.6) | 20 (12.4–27.8) | 29.1 (18.1–40.3) |
| Poland | 2450 (700–4100) | 4620 (2600–6640) | 6530 (4150–8970) | 1480 (430–2510) | 2800 (1550–4060) | 3970 (2480–5530) | 10.9 (3.2–18.4) | 20.6 (11.4–29.8) | 29.2 (18.2–40.6) |
| Republic of Ireland | 220 (140–310) | 440 (290–580) | 640 (430–840) | 160 (90–230) | 300 (190–430) | 450 (280–620) | 10.5 (6.3–15.2) | 20.4 (12.9–28.7) | 29.9 (18.7–41.7) |
| Scotland | 330 (210–430) | 640 (430–830) | 930 (630–1220) | 180 (100–260) | 340 (200–490) | 500 (300–720) | 9.9 (5.7–14.3) | 19.2 (11.4–27.6) | 28.1 (16.6–40.3) |
| Sweden | 440 (290–600) | 860 (580–1140) | 1220 (830–1600) | 280 (140–440) | 530 (280–840) | 760 (390–1170) | 11.5 (5.9–18.3) | 22.4 (11.7–35) | 31.7 (16.5–48.9) |
| Total | 6900 (4820–8720) | 13240 (10340–15650) | 18670 (14990–21800) | 4080 (2760–5290) | 7830(5900–9550) | 11050 (8550–13260) | 10.8 (7.3–14) | 20.7 (15.6–25.2) | 29.1 (22.6–35) |
S1 — conservative scenario, S2 — intermediate scenario, S3 — optimistic scenario.
All numbers of deaths rounded to nearest 10, except for Iceland.
Fig. 2Percentage of total modelled CHD mortality reduction contributed by each policy (for “Conservative” scenario).
Fig. 3Reductions in mortality by country attributable to maximum theoretical improvements in physical inactivity and smoking (to achieve 0% prevalence).