Preview

Rational Pharmacotherapy in Cardiology

Advanced search

GENDER DIFFERENCES IN THE EFFICACY OF RISK FACTORS CORRECTION AND TREATMENT COMPLIANCE IN PATIENTS AFTER ACUTE CORONARY SYNDROME

https://doi.org/10.20996/1819-6446-2011-7-4-463-467

Full Text:

Abstract

Aim. To compare the efficacy of correction of modifiable risk factors for ischemic heart disease (IHD), and treatment compliance within 6 months of observation in group of men and group of women after acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Material and мethods. Patients (n=147: 100 men and 47 women) aged under 70 years who underwent ACS were examined. Prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors and frequency of basic drugs taking were evaluated at baseline and after 6 months. The efficacy of risk factors correction in men was compared with this in women. Results. A general number of patients with effective blood pressure (BP) control as well as patients who reached the target levels of total cholesterol (TC) <4.5 mmol/l and cholesterol of low>density lipoproteins (LDC) <2.5 mmol/l after 6 months increased significantly in comparison with this before observation. Taking of drugs from all main groups left unsatisfactory and did not>reach the advisable values. Women have better antihypertensive treatment compliance, but worse lipidemia level control; they more often have glucose metabolism disorders, arterial hypertension and obesity. Men smoked more often, but have better BP, TC and cholesterol LDC control. Conclusion. The high prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors requires intensification of preventive activity regarding IHD onset and progression among both men and women.

About the Authors

A. Y. Efanov
Tyumen State Medical Academy
Russian Federation


D. F. Nizamova
Tyumen State Medical Academy
Russian Federation


E. F. Dorodneva
Tyumen State Medical Academy
Russian Federation


I. V. Medvedev
Tyumen State Medical Academy
Russian Federation


S. V. Shalaev
Tyumen State Medical Academy
Russian Federation


References

1. Ades P.A. Cardiac rehabilitation and secondary prevention of coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med 2001; 345: 892–902.

2. Balady G.J., Williams M.A., Ades P.A. et al. Core components of cardiac rehabilitation/secondary prevention programs: 2007 update: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association Exercise, Cardiac Rehabilitation, and Prevention Committee, the Council on Clinical Cardiology; the Councils on Cardiovascular Nursing, Epidemiology and Prevention, and Nutrition, Physical Activity, and Metabolism; and the American Association of Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Rehabilitation. Circulation 2007; 115: 2675–2682

3. Wenger N.K. Current status of cardiac rehabilitation. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol 2008; 51: 1619–1631.

4. Clark A.M., Hartling L., Vandermeer B., McAlister F.A. Secondary prevention program for patients with coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis of randomized control trials. Ann Intern Med 2005;143: 659–672.

5. Clark A.M., Hartling L., Vandermeer B., Lissel S., McAlister F.A. Secondary prevention programmes for coronary heart disease: a meta-regression showing the merits of shorter, generalist, primary care-based interventions. Eur J Cardiovasc Prev Rehabil 2007; 14: 538–546.

6. Taylor R.S., Brown A., Ebrahim S. et al. Exercise-based rehabilitation for patients with coronary heart disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials. Am J Med 2004; 116:682–697.

7. Karoff M., Held K., Bjarnason-Wehrens B. Cardiac rehabilitation in Germany. Eur J Cardiovasc Prev Rehabil 2007; 14: 18–27.

8. Leon A.S., Franklin B.A., Costa F. et al. Cardiac rehabilitation and secondary prevention of coronary heart disease: an American Heart Association Scientific Statement from Council on Clinical Cardiology (Subcommittee on Exercise, Cardiac Rehabilitation, and Prevention and the Council on Nutrition, Physical Activity, and Metabolism (Subcommittee on Physical Activity), in Collaboration with the American Association of Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Rehabilitation. Circulation 2005; 111: 369–376.

9. Rees K., Victory J., Beswick A.D. et al. Cardiac rehabilitation in the UK: uptake among under-represented groups. Heart 2005; 91: 375–376.

10. Suaya J.A., Shepard D.S., Normand S.-L.T. et al. Use of cardiac rehabilitation by Medicare beneficiaries after myocardial infarction or coronary bypass surgery. Circulation 2007; 116: 1653–1662.

11. Denolle T. et al. Effectiveness of a health network in secondary prevention among coronary patients. Arch Mal Coeur Vaiss 2004; 112(4): 1189-96.

12. European guidelines on cardiovascular disease prevention: executive summary. Eur Heart J 2007; 28: 2375 – 2414.

13. К. Kotseva; D.Wood; et al. EUROASPIRE III: a survey on the lifestyle, risk factors and use of cardioprotective drug therapies in coronary patients from 22 European countries. European Journal of Cardiovascular Prevention & Rehabilitation 2009; 16 (2): 121-137.

14. Dallongevillle J et al. Gender differences in the implementation of cardiovascular prevention measures after an acute coronary event. Heart 2010; 96(21): 1744-9.


For citation:


Efanov A.Y., Nizamova D.F., Dorodneva E.F., Medvedev I.V., Shalaev S.V. GENDER DIFFERENCES IN THE EFFICACY OF RISK FACTORS CORRECTION AND TREATMENT COMPLIANCE IN PATIENTS AFTER ACUTE CORONARY SYNDROME. Rational Pharmacotherapy in Cardiology. 2011;7(4):463-467. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.20996/1819-6446-2011-7-4-463-467

Views: 262


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.


ISSN 1819-6446 (Print)
ISSN 2225-3653 (Online)