Sex differences and trends in managing cardiovascular risk factors in primary care: a dynamic cohort study.

IF 2.5 Q2 PRIMARY HEALTH CARE BJGP Open Pub Date : 2024-08-28 DOI:10.3399/BJGPO.2024.0175
Geert Smits, Michiel L Bots, Monika Hollander, Sander van Doorn
{"title":"Sex differences and trends in managing cardiovascular risk factors in primary care: a dynamic cohort study.","authors":"Geert Smits, Michiel L Bots, Monika Hollander, Sander van Doorn","doi":"10.3399/BJGPO.2024.0175","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Treatment targets for cardiovascular risk management make no distinction between women and men.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To explore sex differences in achieving treatment targets in patients that participated in a nurse-led, integrated CVRM care programme in primary care between 2013 and 2019.</p><p><strong>Design & setting: </strong>We conducted a dynamic cohort study in the Eindhoven region, south-east of The Netherlands METHOD: We assessed outcomes of three biological risk factors (systolic blood pressure, low density lipoprotein-cholesterol and estimated glomerular filtration rate) and four lifestyle factors (smoking, physical activity, alcohol intake and body mass index). Points (1=on target; 0=not on target) were assigned for biological risk factors, lifestyle factors and an overall score. Using the annual results, we applied, multivariable regression models to study trends over time and differences in trends between women and men.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The number of participants increased from 24 889 to 38,067, mean age increased from 67.3 to 71.5 years, with around 52% women each year. The average of seven risk factors on target increased significantly from 4.6 to 4.9 in women, and from 4.7 to 5.0 in men, with no statistical difference between women and men. Differences between women and men in 2013 in the number of both biological and lifestyle factors on target did not materially change over time.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Integrated cardiovascular management care led to improvements in cardiovascular risk factors on target, equally well in women than in men. Differences in risk factors on target between women and men in 2013 were still present in 2019.</p>","PeriodicalId":36541,"journal":{"name":"BJGP Open","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BJGP Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3399/BJGPO.2024.0175","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PRIMARY HEALTH CARE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Treatment targets for cardiovascular risk management make no distinction between women and men.

Aim: To explore sex differences in achieving treatment targets in patients that participated in a nurse-led, integrated CVRM care programme in primary care between 2013 and 2019.

Design & setting: We conducted a dynamic cohort study in the Eindhoven region, south-east of The Netherlands METHOD: We assessed outcomes of three biological risk factors (systolic blood pressure, low density lipoprotein-cholesterol and estimated glomerular filtration rate) and four lifestyle factors (smoking, physical activity, alcohol intake and body mass index). Points (1=on target; 0=not on target) were assigned for biological risk factors, lifestyle factors and an overall score. Using the annual results, we applied, multivariable regression models to study trends over time and differences in trends between women and men.

Results: The number of participants increased from 24 889 to 38,067, mean age increased from 67.3 to 71.5 years, with around 52% women each year. The average of seven risk factors on target increased significantly from 4.6 to 4.9 in women, and from 4.7 to 5.0 in men, with no statistical difference between women and men. Differences between women and men in 2013 in the number of both biological and lifestyle factors on target did not materially change over time.

Conclusion: Integrated cardiovascular management care led to improvements in cardiovascular risk factors on target, equally well in women than in men. Differences in risk factors on target between women and men in 2013 were still present in 2019.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
初级保健中心血管风险因素管理的性别差异和趋势:动态队列研究。
背景:心血管风险管理的治疗目标对女性和男性没有区别:心血管风险管理的治疗目标对女性和男性没有任何区别。目的:探讨在 2013 年至 2019 年期间,在初级保健中参与护士主导的心血管风险管理综合护理计划的患者在实现治疗目标方面的性别差异:我们在荷兰东南部埃因霍温地区开展了一项动态队列研究 方法:我们评估了三个生物风险因素(收缩压、低密度脂蛋白胆固醇和肾小球滤过率)和四个生活方式因素(吸烟、体育锻炼、酒精摄入量和体重指数)的结果。对生物风险因素、生活方式因素和总分进行打分(1 分=达标;0 分=未达标)。利用年度结果,我们采用多变量回归模型来研究随时间变化的趋势以及男女之间趋势的差异:参与者人数从 24 889 人增加到 38 067 人,平均年龄从 67.3 岁增加到 71.5 岁,其中女性每年约占 52%。女性七项目标风险因素的平均值从 4.6 显著增加到 4.9,男性从 4.7 增加到 5.0,男女之间没有统计学差异。2013年,女性和男性在生物因素和生活方式因素达标数量上的差异并没有随着时间的推移而发生实质性变化:结论:综合心血管管理护理改善了心血管风险因素的达标情况,女性的改善效果与男性相同。2013年女性和男性在达标风险因素方面的差异在2019年依然存在。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
BJGP Open
BJGP Open Medicine-Family Practice
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
181
审稿时长
22 weeks
期刊最新文献
Correction: Exploring the facilitators and barriers to addressing social media's impact on anxiety within primary care: a qualitative study. Action on elevated natriuretic peptide in primary care: a retrospective cohort study. Identifying where hospital and community trusts are managing general practices in England: a service mapping study. 'ThinkCancer!': randomised feasibility trial of a novel practice-based early cancer diagnosis intervention. Signs and symptoms of serious illness in adults with acute abdominal pain presenting to ambulatory care: a systematic review.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1