Gender bias in lipid assessment and treatment following percutaneous coronary intervention.

Jennifer A Corbelli, John C Corbelli, Michael F Bullano, Vincent J Willey, Mark J Cziraky, Lois D Banks, Beth E Cooke, Ann M Galla, Kevin A Berchou, Christopher J Drury
{"title":"Gender bias in lipid assessment and treatment following percutaneous coronary intervention.","authors":"Jennifer A Corbelli,&nbsp;John C Corbelli,&nbsp;Michael F Bullano,&nbsp;Vincent J Willey,&nbsp;Mark J Cziraky,&nbsp;Lois D Banks,&nbsp;Beth E Cooke,&nbsp;Ann M Galla,&nbsp;Kevin A Berchou,&nbsp;Christopher J Drury","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To identify a possible gender bias in lipid assessment and treatment of patients following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Following PCI, patients were identified from a cardiology practice database, with retrospective follow-up achieved through medical record review in a private cardiology practice and in primary care physician practices. Patients were assessed for lipid measurement of total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), and triglycerides, and for changes in these measures.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 356 patients were identified for analysis: 221 men (62%) and 135 women (38%). Mean post-PCI follow-up was 2.2 +/- 1.6 years. Among females, 80% had lipids measured, as compared with 87% of males (P = 0.07). At pre- and post-PCI, all fractions were significantly higher (P < 0.05) in women, except pre-PCI triglycerides, which were significantly lower in women. From pre- to post-PCI, HDL-C and triglycerides improved significantly more in males, while LDL-C improved significantly more in females. Target LDL-C levels (< 100 mg/dL) were achieved in 46.4% of the overall group. There were no significant gender-related differences in the number of patients treated with dyslipidemic medications or in patients achieving an LDL-C of < 100 mg/dL (P = 0.081).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Following PCI, a gender bias did not exist for lipid assessment, number of patients treated with pharmacotherapy, or achievement of target LDL-C (< 100 mg/dL). However, in terms of absolute levels achieved, women were treated less aggressively than men for all lipid fractions.</p>","PeriodicalId":83105,"journal":{"name":"The journal of gender-specific medicine : JGSM : the official journal of the Partnership for Women's Health at Columbia","volume":"6 3","pages":"21-6"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2003-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The journal of gender-specific medicine : JGSM : the official journal of the Partnership for Women's Health at Columbia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To identify a possible gender bias in lipid assessment and treatment of patients following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

Methods: Following PCI, patients were identified from a cardiology practice database, with retrospective follow-up achieved through medical record review in a private cardiology practice and in primary care physician practices. Patients were assessed for lipid measurement of total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), and triglycerides, and for changes in these measures.

Results: A total of 356 patients were identified for analysis: 221 men (62%) and 135 women (38%). Mean post-PCI follow-up was 2.2 +/- 1.6 years. Among females, 80% had lipids measured, as compared with 87% of males (P = 0.07). At pre- and post-PCI, all fractions were significantly higher (P < 0.05) in women, except pre-PCI triglycerides, which were significantly lower in women. From pre- to post-PCI, HDL-C and triglycerides improved significantly more in males, while LDL-C improved significantly more in females. Target LDL-C levels (< 100 mg/dL) were achieved in 46.4% of the overall group. There were no significant gender-related differences in the number of patients treated with dyslipidemic medications or in patients achieving an LDL-C of < 100 mg/dL (P = 0.081).

Conclusion: Following PCI, a gender bias did not exist for lipid assessment, number of patients treated with pharmacotherapy, or achievement of target LDL-C (< 100 mg/dL). However, in terms of absolute levels achieved, women were treated less aggressively than men for all lipid fractions.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
经皮冠状动脉介入治疗后血脂评估和治疗的性别偏倚。
目的:探讨经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)后患者血脂评估和治疗中可能存在的性别偏差。方法:采用PCI后,从心脏病学实践数据库中确定患者,通过私人心脏病学实践和初级保健医生实践的病历回顾进行回顾性随访。评估患者的总胆固醇、低密度脂蛋白胆固醇(LDL-C)、高密度脂蛋白胆固醇(HDL-C)和甘油三酯的脂质测量,以及这些测量的变化。结果:共有356例患者被确定用于分析:221例男性(62%)和135例女性(38%)。pci术后平均随访时间为2.2 +/- 1.6年。在女性中,80%的人测量了脂质,而男性为87% (P = 0.07)。在pci前和pci后,除了pci前甘油三酯在女性中显著降低外,所有分数在女性中均显著升高(P < 0.05)。从pci术前到术后,男性的HDL-C和甘油三酯改善明显更多,而女性的LDL-C改善明显更多。46.4%的患者达到了目标LDL-C水平(< 100 mg/dL)。在接受降脂药物治疗的患者数量或LDL-C < 100 mg/dL的患者数量方面,没有显著的性别差异(P = 0.081)。结论:PCI后,在血脂评估、接受药物治疗的患者数量或LDL-C达标(< 100 mg/dL)方面不存在性别偏倚。然而,就达到的绝对水平而言,女性在所有脂质部分的治疗都不如男性积极。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Why do we need an Association for Gender-Specific Medicine? The impact of gender and pregnancy on antiretroviral therapy for HIV: pharmacokinetic and disease-related differences. Correlates of osteoporosis among Jewish and Arab women aged 45-74 in Israel: national women's health interview survey. Physician gender and patient care. The interlinked depression, erectile dysfunction, and coronary heart disease syndrome in older men: a triad often underdiagnosed.
×
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