| Literature DB >> 32685362 |
Emmanuela B Aboagye-Mensah1, Rosevine A Azap1, James B Odei2, Darrell M Gray1,3, Timiya S Nolan3,4, Rana Elgazzar1, DeVeonne White5, John Gregory5, Joshua J Joseph1.
Abstract
African American (AA) men have the highest age-adjusted all-cause mortality rate in the United States of America (US) and a high burden of cardiovascular risk factors. The African American Male Wellness Walk (AAMWW) seeks to reduce such health disparities among AA males. The association of a combination of ideal cardiovascular health (ICH) metrics (blood pressure, glucose, cholesterol, body mass index (BMI), physical activity, and smoking) with self-reported health, diabetes, and body fat percentage was examined among 729 AA male participants from the 2017 and 2018 AAMWWs. Six metrics of ICH were categorized into a three-tiered ICH score 0-2, 3-4, 5-6. Linear and logistic regression modeling was performed with adjustment for age and insurance. Seven percent of men attained 5-6 ICH metrics at baseline. Participants with 5-6 ICH metrics versus 0-2 had 256% higher odds of excellent self-reported health compared to good, fair or poor (p < 0.0001). After exclusion of glucose from the ideal cardiovascular health score, participants with 3-4 versus 0-2 ICH metrics had a 48% lower odds of diabetes (p < 0.0031). After exclusion of BMI from the ICH score, participants with 5 ICH metrics had a 14.1% lower body fat percentage versus participants with 0-2 ICH metrics (p = 0.0057). Attainment of higher ideal cardiovascular health scores is associated with higher odds of self-reported health, lower odds of diabetes and lower body fat percentage among AA men. Future strategies leading to greater attainment of cardiovascular health in AA males will be important to advance health equity.Entities:
Keywords: AA, African American; AAMWI, African American Male Wellness Initiative; AAMWW, African American Male Wellness Walk; AHA, American Heart Association; African Americans; BF%, Body Fat Percentage; BMI, Body Mass Index; Body Fat Percentage; CVD, Cardiovascular Disease; Cardiovascular Health; Diabetes; Health Disparities; ICH, Ideal Cardiovascular Health; Self-Reported Health; US, United States of America
Year: 2020 PMID: 32685362 PMCID: PMC7358269 DOI: 10.1016/j.pmedr.2020.101151
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Prev Med Rep ISSN: 2211-3355
Fig. 12017 and 2018 African American Male Wellness Walks Sample Exclusion Flowchart 2017 and 2018 Study Population. Data included 1,694 individuals who participated in African American Male Wellness Walks. Exclusions: Following data collection, we excluded: Participants who were under 18 years of age (n = 12) participants who were women or missing data on sex (n = 106), participants of other racial/ethnic groups (n = 62), participants with missing data on age (n = 27), participants with missing data on insurance (n = 29), and participants with missing data on ideal metrics (n = 729). After exclusions, we included 729 participants in the final analysis.
Characteristics of Participants in the African American Male Wellness Walk by Ideal Cardiovascular Health Score 2017–2018.
| All | 0–2 Ideal CV Health Score | 3–4 Ideal CV Health Score | 5–6 Ideal CV Health Score | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Baseline Characteristics | n = 729 | n = 187 | n = 488 | n = 54 | p-value |
| Age (years) | 48.0 (13.6) | 51.0 (12.7) | 47.3 (13.4) | 43.7 (16.3) | p = 0.0005 |
| Insurance Status (%) | p = 0.0088 | ||||
| Uninsured | 10.7 | 13.9 | 9.0 | 14.8 | |
| Combination | 2.9 | 5.4 | 2.3 | 0.0 | |
| Medicaid | 7.1 | 7.0 | 6.6 | 13.0 | |
| Medicare | 12.2 | 16.6 | 10.3 | 14.8 | |
| Other | 0.3 | 0.0 | 0.4 | 0.0 | |
| Private Insurance | 66.8 | 57.2 | 71.5 | 57.4 | |
| Ideal AHA Smoking | 84.0 | 66.3 | 89.8 | 92.6 | p < 0.0001 |
| Ideal AHA Physical Activity | 64.6 | 34.8 | 72.5 | 96.3 | p < 0.0001 |
| Ideal AHA Blood Pressure | 7.3 | 1.1 | 5.1 | 48.2 | p < 0.0001 |
| Ideal AHA Glucose | 70.6 | 30.0 | 83.4 | 96.3 | p < 0.0001 |
| Ideal AHA Body mass index | 15.0 | 3.2 | 12.1 | 81.5 | p < 0.0001 |
| Ideal AHA Cholesterol | 74.2 | 42.8 | 83.6 | 98.2 | p < 0.0001 |
| Body-mass Index (kilograms/meter2) | 30.6 (6.3) | 32.7 (6.8) | 30.6 (5.8) | 23.4 (2.9) | p < 0.0001 |
| Systolic blood pressure (mmHg) | 139.8 (19.3) | 146.3 (19.1) | 139.2 (17.6) | 122.2 (22.0) | p < 0.0001 |
| Diastolic blood pressure (mmHg) | 87.1 (12.4) | 91.9 (12.2) | 86.3 (11.8) | 77.6 (11.5) | p < 0.0001 |
| Cholesterol | 157.6 (38.7) | 162.1 (44.0) | 157.2 (36.7) | 146.2 (33.7) | p = 0.0265 |
| Fasting glucose (mg/dL) | 101.5 (35.7) | 124.0 (43.2) | 92.3 (26.9) | 81.4 (16.2) | p < 0.0001 |
| Random glucose (mg/dL) | 107.2 (41.9) | 136.9 (63.6) | 100.9 (29.5) | 84.2 (19.1) | p < 0.0001 |
| Body fat percentage | 25.4 (6.8) | 28.9 (4.7) | 25.6 (6.6) | 17.4 (5.8) | p = 0.0057 |
| Family History of Diabetes (%) | p = 0.0002 | ||||
| Yes | 47.2 | 59.0 | 44.5 | 31.5 | |
| Prevalence of Diabetes (%) | 15.6 | 40.6 | 7.8 | 0.0 | p < 0.0001 |
| Self-Reported Health (%) | p < 0.0001 | ||||
| Poor | 0.6 | 1.1 | 0.4 | 0.0 | |
| Fair | 19.0 | 24.2 | 18.5 | 5.6 | |
| Good | 58.2 | 60.4 | 59.3 | 40.7 | |
| Excellent | 22.3 | 14.3 | 21.8 | 53.7 | |
| Prevalence of hypertension (%) | 61.0 | 73.3 | 60.3 | 25.9 | p < 0.0001 |
| Prevalence of hypercholesterolemia (%) | 8.6 | 18.2 | 5.7 | 1.9 | p < 0.0001 |
Mean (SD) or percentages are listed, p-values calculated using chi-square (categorical variables), and ANOVA (parametric continuous variables).
AHA = American Heart Association, Ideal Cardiovascular (CV) Health recommendations were defined by AHA “2020” guidelines with the following modifications. Physical activity was considered ideal if participant exercised ≥ 3 times per week. Glucose was defined using standard fasting glucose guidelines and random glucose guidelines < 140 ideal, 140–180 intermediate and ≥ 180 “poor”.
Fasting glucose, n = 336, (0–2 Ideal Cardiovascular Health Score, n = 103), (3–4 Ideal Cardiovascular Health Score, n = 212), (5–6 Ideal Cardiovascular Health Score, n = 21);
Random glucose, n = 393, (0–2 Ideal Cardiovascular Health Score, n = 84), (3–4 Ideal Cardiovascular Health Score, n = 276),(5–6 Ideal Cardiovascular Health Score, n = 33);
Body fat percentage, n = 42, (0–2 Ideal Cardiovascular Health Score, n = 10), (3–4 Ideal Cardiovascular Health Score, n = 27), (5–6 Ideal Cardiovascular Health Score, n = 5);
Family History of Diabetes, n = 720 (0–2 Ideal Cardiovascular Health Score, n = 183), (3–4 Ideal Cardiovascular Healt.h Score, n = 483), (5–6 Ideal Cardiovascular Health Score, n = 54);
Self-Reported Health, n = 722 total, (0–2 Ideal Cardiovascular Health Score, n = 182), (3–4 Ideal Cardiovascular Health Score, n = 486),(5–6 Ideal Cardiovascular Health Score, n = 54).
The Association of Ideal Cardiovascular Health Score with Self-Reported Health.
| Self-Reported Health - Ordinal Logistic Regression – Odds Ratio (95%CI), p-value | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Model 0 (n = 722) | Model 1 (n = 722) | Model 2 (n = 722) | |
| Continuous Ideal CV Health Score | 1.36 (1.18, 1.57), p < 0.0001 | 1.32 (1.14, 1.53), p < 0.0001 | 1.33 (1.15, 1.54), p = 0.0008 |
| Categorical Ideal CV Health Score | |||
| 0–2 Ideal CV Health Score | Referent | Referent | Referent |
| 3–4 Ideal CV Health Score | 1.20 (0.86, 1.69), p = 0.2863 | 1.14 (0.81, 1.61), p = 0.4474 | 1.14 (0.81, 1.62), p = 0.4488 |
| 5–6 Ideal CV Health Score | 3.84 (2.15, 6.86), p < 0.0001 | 3.49 (1.94, 6.27), p < 0.0001 | 3.56 (1.98, 6.42), p < 0.0001 |
| Good or Excellent vs. Fair or Poor Self-Reported Health - Logistic Regression – Odds Ratio - (95%CI), p-value | |||
| Continuous Ideal CV Health Score | 1.28 (1.07, 1.54), p = 0.0065 | 1.36 (1.13, 1.64), p = 0.0010 | 1.33 (1.11, 1.60), p = 0.0025 |
| Categorical Ideal CV Health Score | |||
| 0–2 Ideal CV Health Score | Referent | Referent | Referent |
| 3–4 Ideal CV Health Score | 1.45 (0.97, 2.17), p = 0.0723 | 1.60 (1.06, 2.41), p = 0.0262 | 1.48 (0.97, 2.24), p = 0.0690 |
| 5–6 Ideal CV Health Score | 5.75 (1.71, 19.31), p = 0.0047 | 7.16 (2.10, 24.39), p = 0.0017 | 7.19 (2.09, 24.69), p = 0.0017 |
Models:
Model 0: unadjusted
Model 1: age
Model 2: age and insurance status
Interpretation: In continuous analyses, a 1-unit increase in Ideal CV Health Score was associated with a 33% higher odds of excellent compared to good, fair or poor self-reported health (Model 2). A 1-unit increase in Ideal CV Health Score was associated with a 33% higher odds of excellent or good compared to fair or poor self-reported health (Model 2).
In the categorical analyses, the odds of self-reporting excellent compared to good, fair or poor health was 256% higher for those with an ideal cardiovascular health score of 5–6 compared to 0–2 (Model 2). The odds of self-reporting excellent or good health versus fair or poor health was 619% higher for those with an ideal cardiovascular health score of 5–6 compared to 0–2 (Model 2).
Analyses completed among 722 participants, as there were 7 participants missing self-reported health status. CV = cardiovascular.
The Association of Ideal Cardiovascular Health with Diabetesa.
| Diabetes vs. None - Logistic Regression – Odds Ratio (95% CI), p-value | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Model 0 | Model 1 | Model 2 | |
| Continuous Ideal CV Health Score (0–5) | 0.63 (0.50, 0.80), p = 0.0001 | 0.65 (0.51, 0.83), p = 0.0005 | 0.66 (0.52, 0.85), p = 0.0010 |
| Diabetes vs. None - Logistic Regression – Odds Ratio (95% CI), p-value | |||
| Model 0 | Model 1 | Model 2 | |
| 0–2 Ideal CV Health Score | Referent | Referent | Referent |
| 3–4 Ideal CV Health Score | 0.50 (0.33, 0.76), p = 0.0011 | 0.51 (0.33, 0.79), p = 0.0024 | 0.52 (0.34, 0.80), p = 0.0031 |
| 5 Ideal CV Health Score | n/a | n/a | n/a |
Models:
Model 0: unadjusted
Model 1: age
Model 2: age and insurance status
Interpretation: In continuous analyses, a 1-unit increase in ideal CV health score was associated with a 34% lower odds of diabetes in Model 2. In categorical analyses, an ideal cardiovascular health score of 3–4 compared to 0–2 was associated with a 48% lower odds of diabetes in Model 2. There were not enough cases of prevalent diabetes in the 5 ideal cardiovascular health score group to calculate an estimate for odds compared to 0–2, thus n/a is placed in the table.
CV = cardiovascular
The exposure (ideal cardiovascular health score) included blood pressure, cholesterol, body mass index, smoking, physical activity and excluded glucose due to glucose being a component of the diagnostic criteria for diabetes.
The Association of Ideal Cardiovascular Health Score with Body Fat Percentage among 42 participants in the AAMWW.
| Body Fat % - Linear Regression – Beta Coef. (95% CI), p-value | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Model 0 | Model 1 | Model 2 | |
| Continuous Ideal CV Health Score (0–5) | −2.85 (−4.89, −0.81), p = 0.0073 | −2.69 (−4.52, −0.87), p = 0.0049 | −2.95 (−4.85, −1.05), p = 0.0033 |
| Body Fat % - Linear Regression – Beta Coef. (95% CI), p-value | |||
| 0–2 Ideal CV Health Score | Referent | Referent | Referent |
| 3–4 Ideal CV Health Score | −4.23 (−9.07, 0.60), p = 0.0844 | −2.95 (−7.33, 1.44), p = 0.1813 | −3.80 (−8.30, 0.71), p = 0.0963 |
| 5 Ideal CV Health Score | −10.40 (−20.66, −0.14), p = 0.0471 | −11.54 (−20.72, −2.37), p = 0.0151 | −14.11 (−23.84, −4.37), p = 0.0057 |
Models:
Model 0: unadjusted
Model 1: age
Model 2: age and insurance status
Interpretation: In the continuous analysis, a 1-unit increase in ideal cardiovascular health score was associated with a 2.95% lower body fat percentage in Model 2. In the categorical analysis, an ideal cardiovascular health score of 5 compared to 0–2 was associated with a 14.11% lower body percentage in Model 2.
CV = cardiovascular
The exposure (ideal cardiovascular health score) included blood pressure, glucose, cholesterol, smoking, and physical activity. Body mass index was excluded due to the high correlation between body mass index and body fat percentage.
The Association of Family History of Diabetes with Ideal Cardiovascular Health Score.
| Ideal Cardiovascular Health Score Categories (0–2, 3–4, 5–6) – Ordinal Logistic Regression – Odds Ratio (95% CI), p-value | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Model 0 (n = 720) | Model 1 (n = 720) | Model 2 (n = 720) | |
| - Family History of Diabetes | Referent | Referent | Referent |
| + Family History of Diabetes | 0.52 (0.38, 0.71), p < 0.0001 | 0.51 (0.37, 0.70), p < 0.0001 | 0.51 (0.37, 0.70), p < 0.0001 |
Models:
Model 0: unadjusted
Model 1: age
Model 2: age and insurance status
Interpretation: A family history of diabetes was associated with 49% lower odds of an ideal cardiovascular health score of 5–6 compared to 0–2, or 3–4 in Model 2.
The analyses were conducted in 720 participants, as 9 participants were missing data on family history of diabetes.