| Literature DB >> 31900134 |
J S Thakur1, R Vijayvergiya2, S Ghai3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) are the leading cause of morbidity and mortality in India. CVDs are to a large extent preventable with the availability of wide range of interventions focusing on primary and secondary prevention. However human resource deficit is the biggest challenge for implementing these prevention programs. Task shifting of the cardiovascular risk assessment and communication to nurses can be one of the most viable and sustainable option to run prevention programs.Entities:
Keywords: Cardiovascular risk assessment; Medication adherence; Primary prevention; Risk communication; Secondary prevention; Task shifting; WHO/ISH risk prediction charts
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 31900134 PMCID: PMC6942281 DOI: 10.1186/s12913-019-4864-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Health Serv Res ISSN: 1472-6963 Impact factor: 2.655
Fig. 1Patient flow: Recruitment of subjects for primary and secondary preventiton of CVDsfor primary prevention of CVDs
Socio demographic profile of subjects enrolled for primary prevention of CVDs
| S.No | Variable | Male | Female | Total | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. | Age group | |||||
| 40–49 | 27 (12.4) | 45 (24.3) | 72 (17.9) | |||
| 50–59 | 76 (35.0) | 71 (38.4) | 147 (36.6) | 13.27 | .004 | |
| 60–69 | 89 (41.0) | 54 (29.2) | 143((35.6) | |||
| ≥ 70 | 25 (11.5) | 15 (8.1) | 40 (10) | |||
| 2. | Marital Status | |||||
| Never married | –0 | 1 (0.5) | 1 (0.2) | |||
| Currently married | 202 (93.1) | 132 (71.4) | 334 (83.1) | 33.97 | .001 | |
| Separated | 0 | 1 (0.5) | 1 (0.2) | |||
| Widowed | 15 (6.9) | 51 (27.6) | 66 (16.4) | |||
| 3. | Family Type | |||||
| Nuclear | 99 (45.6) | 83 (44.9) | 182 (45.3) | 2.36 | .307 | |
| Joint | 118 (54.4) | 100 (54) | 218 (54.2) | |||
| Others | 0 | 2 (1.1) | 2 (0.5) | |||
| 4. | Socioeconomic class (Kuppuswamy) | |||||
| Upper (I) | 3(1.4) | 7 (3.8) | 10 (2.5) | 5.71 | 0.22 | |
| Upper Middle (II) | 109(50.2) | 77 (41.6) | 186 (46.3) | |||
| Lower middle (III) | 70(32.3) | 67 (36.2) | 137 (34.1) | |||
| Upper Lower (IV) | 35(16.1) | 33 (17.8) | 68 (16.9) | |||
| Lower (V) | 0 | 1 (0.5) | 1 (0.2) | |||
Figures in parentheses are percentages.
Mean change in CVD risk factors among subjects enrolled for primary prevention of CVDs at 1 year follow up
| S.No | CVD risk factor | N | Baseline | Post intervention | Mean change (95% CI) | % Change | t statistic | P valve | Cohen’s d |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean ± 1 SD | Mean ± 1SD | ||||||||
| 1. | Systolic BP (mmHg) | ||||||||
| Male | 201 | 140.94 ± 17.51 | 128.16 ± 14.28 | −12.78 (−15.41, −10.14) | −9.06 | 9.55 | .01 | 0.79 | |
| Female | 159 | 136.57 ± 17.00 | 125.91 ± 11.83 | −10.66 (−13.14,-8.18) | −7.80 | 8.49 | .01 | 0.72 | |
| Total | 360 | 139.01 ± 17.40 | 127.16 ± 13.29 | −11.84 (−13.67, −10.01) | −8.52 | 11.68 | .01 | 0.76 | |
| 2 | Diastolic BP (mmHg) | ||||||||
| Male | 201 | 88.49 ± 12.52 | 82.60 ± 9.16 | −5.88 (−7.71,-4.05) | −6.65 | 6.33 | .01 | 0.53 | |
| Female | 159 | 85.21 ± 10.29 | 80.48 ± 8.56 | −4.72 (−6.48,-2.97) | −5.55 | 5.31 | .01 | 0.49 | |
| Total | 360 | 87.04 ± 11.69 | 81.66 ± 8.95 | −5.38 (−6.65, −4.09) | − 6.18 | 7.52 | .01 | 0.51 | |
| 3. | RBS (mg/dl) | ||||||||
| Male | 148 | 139.16 ± 66.31 | 128.42 ± 42.93 | −10.73 (−20.47,-1.00) | −7.71 | 2.18 | .03 | 0.19 | |
| Female | 116 | 148.73 ± 66.57 | 135.38 ± 47.10 | −13.34 (−24.25,-2.43) | −8.97 | 2.42 | .01 | 0.23 | |
| Total | 264 | 143.36 ± 66.47 | 131.48 ± 44.86 | −11.88 (−19.10, −4.66,) | −8.28 | 2.68 | .01 | 0.20 | |
| 4. | FTND score | 28 | 5.35 ± 2.46 | 2.64 ± 1.98 | 2.71 (1.89,3.53) | 50.65 | 6.82 | <.01 | 1.2 |
Cohen’s d: small (0.2), medium (0.5) and large (0.8)
Fig. 2Shift in the WHO/ISH risk category baseline vs postintervention among subjects enrolled for primary prevention of CVDs at 1 year follow up in a tertiary health care hospital in Chandigarh (N = 360)
Fig. 3Percentage change from baseline to postintervention in WHO/ISH risk category among males and females enrolled for primary prevention of CVDs in a tertiary health care hospital in Chandigarh
Sociodemographic profile, baseline medication adherence, number of prescribed medication and family history of early CVD among subjects enrolled for secondary prevention of CVDs
| S.No | Variable | Intervention group ( | Comparison Group ( | Total N-500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. | Sex | |||||
| Male | 210 (84) | 205 (82) | 415 (83) | 0.35 | 0.55 | |
| Female | 40 (16) | 45 (18) | 85 (17) | |||
| 2. | Age | |||||
| 30–39 | 8 (3.2) | 7 (2.8) | 15 (3) | |||
| 40–49 | 40 (16) | 32 (12.8) | 72 (14.4) | 2.38 | 0.66 | |
| 50–59 | 80 (32) | 80 (32) | 160 (32) | |||
| 60–69 | 86 (34.4) | 100 (40) | 186 (37.2) | |||
| ≥ 70 | 36 (14.4) | 31 (12.4) | 67 (13.4) | |||
| 3. | Marital Status | |||||
| Never married | 0 | 1 (0.4) | 1 (0.2) | 3.05 | 0.38 | |
| Currently married | 228 (91.2) | 224 (89.6) | 452 (90.4) | |||
| Separated | 0 | 2 (0.8) | 2 (0.4) | |||
| Widowed | 22 (8.8) | 23 (9.2) | 45 (9) | |||
| 4. | Family Type | |||||
| Nuclear | 103 (41.2) | 96 (38.4) | 199 (39.8) | 0.79 | 0.67 | |
| Joint | 145 (58) | 153 (61.2) | 298 (59.6) | |||
| Others | 2 (0.8) | 1 (0.4) | 3 (0.6) | |||
| 5. | Socioeconomic class (Kuppuswamy) | |||||
| Upper (I) | 6 (2.4) | 12 (4.8) | 18 (3.6) | |||
| Upper Middle (II) | 101 (40.4) | 111 (44.4) | 212 (42.4) | 3.99 | 0.40 | |
| Lower middle (III) | 71 (28.4) | 68 (27.2) | 139 (27.8) | |||
| Upper Lower (IV) | 70 (28.0) | 58 (23.2) | 128 (25.6) | |||
| Lower (V) | 2 (0.8) | 1 (0.4) | 3 (0.6) | |||
| 6. | Medication adherence | |||||
| Low | 102 (40.8) | 104 (41.6) | 206 (41.2) | 0.24 | ||
| Medium | 69 (27.6) | 72 (28.8) | 141 (28.2) | 0.88 | ||
| High | 79 (31.6) | 74 (29.6) | 153 (30.6) | |||
| 7. | Number of prescribed Medication | |||||
| 1 | 0 | 3 (1.2) | 3 (0.6) | 3.15 | ||
| 2–3 | 102 (40.8) | 99 (39.6) | 201 (40.2) | 0.36 | ||
| 4–5 | 125 (50) | 127 (50.8) | 252 (50.4) | |||
| >5 | 23 (9.2) | 21 (8.4) | 44 (8.8) | |||
| 8. | Family h/o early CVD | |||||
| Yes | 74 (29.6) | 66 (26.4) | 140 (28) | 0.63 | ||
| No | 176 (70.4) | 184 (73.6) | 360 (72) | 0.42 | ||
| 9. | Duration of treatment | |||||
| <5 years | 201 (80.4) | 191 (76.4) | 392 (78.4) | 1.99 | ||
| 5–10 years | 34 (13.6) | 36 (14.4) | 70 (14) | 0.36 | ||
| >10 years. | 15 (6) | 23 (9.2) | 38 (7.6) | |||
Figures in parentheses are percentages
Mean difference in the number of prescribed medicines, duration of illness and medication adherence scores at baseline among intervention and comparison group subjects enrolled for secondary prevention of CVDs
| S.No | Variable | Intervention group | Comparison group | Mean difference | 95%CIof mean difference | t statistics | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. | Mean number of prescribed medicines (±1 SD) | 3.81 ± 1.15 | 3.78 ± 1.14 | 0.03 | −0.16,0.23 | 0.31 | 0.74 |
| 2. | Mean duration of illness (years) | 3.16 ± 3.42 | 3.42 ± 4.24 | 0.25 | −0.97,0.45 | 0.71 | 0.47 |
| 3. | Mean medication adherence scores (MMAS-8) | 6.12 ± 1.91 | 6.12 ± 1.93 | 0.01 | −0.31,0.35 | 0.11 | 0.82 |
Mean change in medication adherence scores at baseline and at 1 year follow up among intervention and comparison group subjects enrolled for secondary prevention of CVDs
| S.No | Group | Baseline | Post intervention | Mean change (95% CI) | % Change | t statistic | Cohen’s d | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean ± 1SD | Mean ± 1SD | |||||||
| 1. | Intervention group ( | 6.12 ± 1.91 | 7.60 ± 1.00 | 1.48 (1.72,1.22) | 24.18 | 11.66 | 0.001 | 0.97 |
| 2. | Comparison group ( | 6.12 ± 1.93 | 5.96 ± 1.82 | 0.16 (0.10,-0.43) | −2.61 | −1.17 | 0.24 | 0.08 |
Mean difference in the post intervention medication adherence scores in intervention and comparison group subjects enrolled for secondary prevention of CVDs at 1 year follow up
| S.No | Medication adherence | Mean | SD | Mean difference | % difference | Cohen’s d | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. | Intervention group ( | 7.60 | 1.00 | 1.63 (1.36,1.91) | 24.18% | 11.72 | <0.001 | 1.1 |
| 2. | Comparison group ( | 5.96 | 1.82 |
Shift in the WHO/ISH risk category after 1 year follow up among subjects enrolled for primary prevention of CVDs in a tertiary health care hospital in Chandigarh
| S.No | CVD risk category Baseline | CVD risk at follow up | Total | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| <10% | 10–20% | 20–30% | 30–40% | > 40% | |||
| 1. | Low risk (<10%) | 202 (92.7) | 13 (6) | 2 (0.9) | 1 (0.5) | 0 | 218 (60.6) |
| 2. | Moderate Risk (10–20%) | 28 (35) | 49 (61.3) | 3 (3.8) | 0 | 0 | 80 (22.2) |
| 3. | High risk (20–30%) | 16 (36.4) | 20 (45.5) | 6 (13.6) | 1 (2.3) | 1 (2.3) | 44 (12.2) |
| 4. | Very high risk (30–40%) | 5 (55.6) | 2 (22.2) | 1 (11.1) | 1 (11.1) | 0 | 9 (2.5) |
| 5. | Very high risk (>40%) | 1 (11.1) | 6 (66.7) | 1 (11.1) | 1 (11.1) | 0 | 9 (2.5) |
| Total | 252 (70) | 90 (25) | 13 (3.6) | 4 (1.1) | 1 (0.3) | 360 | |
Mc Nemar <.01
Majority of the subjects (92.7%) in the low risk category remained in the same risk category at 1 year follow up. Among subjects in the moderate risk category nearly two third (61.3%) remained in the same category, however approximately one third (35%) moved to the low risk category. In the high risk group 36.4% subjects shifted risk down two categories, from high to low and 45.5% subjects shifted one category from high to moderate. There were significantly higher proportion of participants in the low risk category and lower proportion in high risk category at 1 year follow up in comparison to baseline assessment.(Mc Nemar <.01)