BACKGROUND:Improvements have been made in the treatment and control of some but not all major cardiovascular risk factors in the United States. It remains unclear whether women and men have benefited ...equally.
METHODS:Data from the 2001 to 2002 through the 2015 to 2016 US National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey on adults aged 20 to 79 years were used. We assessed sex differences in temporal trends in the levels of systolic blood pressure, body mass index, smoking status, high-density lipoprotein and total cholesterol, and hemoglobin A1c. Trends in treatment and control rates of hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and dyslipidemia were also assessed.
RESULTS:Overall, 35 416 participants (51% women) were included. Trends in systolic blood pressure, smoking status, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and hemoglobin A1c were similar between the sexes. Body mass index increased more in women than men (P=0.006). Mean levels were 28.1 and 29.6 kg/m in women and 27.9 and 29.0 kg/m in men in 2001 to 2004 and 2013 to 2016, respectively. Total cholesterol decreased more in men than women (P=0.002)mean levels in 2001 to 2004 and 2013 to 2016, respectively, were 203 and 194 mg/dL in women and 201 and 188 mg/dL in men. Improvements in the control of hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and dyslipidemia were similar between the sexes; however, sex differences persisted. In 2013 to 2016, control rates in women versus men were 30% versus 22% for hypertension, 30% versus 20% for diabetes mellitus, and 51% versus 63% for dyslipidemia.
CONCLUSIONS:Temporal trends in cardiovascular risk factor levels were broadly similar between the sexes, except for total cholesterol and body mass index. Sex differences in the control of hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and dyslipidemia persist, and further efforts are required to reduce this differential.
The 2017 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) Guideline for the Prevention, Detection, Evaluation and Management of High Blood Pressure in Adults provides ...recommendations for the definition of hypertension, systolic and diastolic blood pressure (BP) thresholds for initiation of antihypertensive medication, and BP target goals.
This study sought to determine the prevalence of hypertension, implications of recommendations for antihypertensive medication, and prevalence of BP above the treatment goal among U.S. adults using criteria from the 2017 ACC/AHA guideline and the Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure (JNC7).
The authors analyzed data from the 2011 to 2014 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (N = 9,623). BP was measured 3 times following a standardized protocol and averaged. Results were weighted to produce U.S. population estimates.
According to the 2017 ACC/AHA and JNC7 guidelines, the crude prevalence of hypertension among U.S. adults was 45.6% (95% confidence interval CI: 43.6% to 47.6%) and 31.9% (95% CI: 30.1% to 33.7%), respectively, and antihypertensive medication was recommended for 36.2% (95% CI: 34.2% to 38.2%) and 34.3% (95% CI: 32.5% to 36.2%) of U.S. adults, respectively. Nonpharmacological intervention is advised for the 9.4% of U.S. adults with hypertension who are not recommended for antihypertensive medication according to the 2017 ACC/AHA guideline. Among U.S. adults taking antihypertensive medication, 53.4% (95% CI: 49.9% to 56.8%) and 39.0% (95% CI: 36.4% to 41.6%) had BP above the treatment goal according to the 2017 ACC/AHA and JNC7 guidelines, respectively.
Compared with the JNC7 guideline, the 2017 ACC/AHA guideline results in a substantial increase in the prevalence of hypertension, a small increase in the percentage of U.S. adults recommended for antihypertensive medication, and more intensive BP lowering for many adults taking antihypertensive medication.
Display omitted
BACKGROUND:The 2017 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) Guideline for the Prevention, Detection, Evaluation and Management of High Blood Pressure in Adults provides ...recommendations for the definition of hypertension, systolic and diastolic blood pressure (BP) thresholds for initiation of antihypertensive medication, and BP target goals.
OBJECTIVES:This study sought to determine the prevalence of hypertension, implications of recommendations for antihypertensive medication, and prevalence of BP above the treatment goal among US adults using criteria from the 2017 ACC/AHA guideline and the Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure (JNC7).
METHODS:The authors analyzed data from the 2011 to 2014 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (N = 9 623). BP was measured 3 times following a standardized protocol and averaged. Results were weighted to produce US population estimates.
RESULTS:According to the 2017 ACC/AHA and JNC7 guidelines, the crude prevalence of hypertension among US adults was 45.6% (95% confidence interval CI43.6% to 47.6%) and 31.9% (95% CI30.1% to 33.7%), respectively, and antihypertensive medication was recommended for 36.2% (95% CI34.2% to 38.2%) and 34.3% (95% CI32.5% to 36.2%) of US adults, respectively. Nonpharmacological intervention is advised for the 9.4% of US adults with hypertension who are not recommended for antihypertensive medication according to the 2017 ACC/AHA guideline. Among US adults taking antihypertensive medication, 53.4% (95% CI49.9% to 56.8%) and 39.0% (95% CI36.4% to 41.6%) had BP above the treatment goal according to the 2017 ACC/AHA and JNC7 guidelines, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS:Compared with the JNC7 guideline, the 2017 ACC/AHA guideline results in a substantial increase in the prevalence of hypertension, a small increase in the percentage of US adults recommended for antihypertensive medication, and more intensive BP lowering for many adults taking antihypertensive medication.
Abstract Background Many patients report adverse reactions to, and may not tolerate, statin therapy. These patients may be at increased risk for coronary heart disease (CHD) events and mortality. ...Objectives This study evaluated the risk for recurrent myocardial infarction (MI), CHD events, and all-cause mortality in Medicare beneficiaries with statin intolerance and in those with high adherence to statin therapy. Methods We studied 105,329 Medicare beneficiaries who began a moderate- or high-intensity statin dosage after hospitalization for MI between 2007 and 2013. Statin intolerance was defined as down-titrating statins and initiating ezetimibe therapy, switching from statins to ezetimibe monotherapy, having International Classification of Diseases, 9th revision, diagnostic codes for rhabdomyolysis or an antihyperlipidemic adverse event, followed by statin down-titration or discontinuation, or switching between ≥3 types of statins within 1 year after initiation. High statin adherence over the year following hospital discharge was defined as proportion of days covered ≥80%. Recurrent MI, CHD events (recurrent MI or a coronary revascularization procedure), and mortality were identified from 1 year after hospital discharge through December 2014. Results Overall, 1,741 patients (1.65%) had statin intolerance, and 55,567 patients (52.8%) had high statin adherence. Over a median of 1.9 to 2.3 years of follow-up, there were 4,450 recurrent MIs, 6,250 CHD events, and 14,311 deaths. Compared to beneficiaries with high statin adherence, statin intolerance was associated with a 36% higher rate of recurrent MI (41.1 vs. 30.1 per 1,000 person-years, respectively), a 43% higher rate of CHD events (62.5 vs. 43.8 per 1,000 person-years, respectively), and a 15% lower rate of all-cause mortality (79.9 vs. 94.2 per 1,000 person-years, respectively). The multivariate-adjusted hazard ratios (HR) comparing beneficiaries with statin intolerance versus those with high statin adherence were 1.50 (95% confidence interval CI: 1.30 to 1.73) for recurrent MI, 1.51 (95% CI: 1.34 to 1.70) for CHD events, and 0.96 (95% CI: 0.87 to 1.06) for all-cause mortality. Conclusions Statin intolerance was associated with an increased risk for recurrent MI and CHD events but not all-cause mortality.
The accurate measurement of blood pressure (BP) is essential for the diagnosis and management of hypertension. This article provides an updated American Heart Association scientific statement on BP ...measurement in humans. In the office setting, many oscillometric devices have been validated that allow accurate BP measurement while reducing human errors associated with the auscultatory approach. Fully automated oscillometric devices capable of taking multiple readings even without an observer being present may provide a more accurate measurement of BP than auscultation. Studies have shown substantial differences in BP when measured outside versus in the office setting. Ambulatory BP monitoring is considered the reference standard for out-of-office BP assessment, with home BP monitoring being an alternative when ambulatory BP monitoring is not available or tolerated. Compared with their counterparts with sustained normotension (ie, nonhypertensive BP levels in and outside the office setting), it is unclear whether adults with white-coat hypertension (ie, hypertensive BP levels in the office but not outside the office) have increased cardiovascular disease risk, whereas those with masked hypertension (ie, hypertensive BP levels outside the office but not in the office) are at substantially increased risk. In addition, high nighttime BP on ambulatory BP monitoring is associated with increased cardiovascular disease risk. Both oscillometric and auscultatory methods are considered acceptable for measuring BP in children and adolescents. Regardless of the method used to measure BP, initial and ongoing training of technicians and healthcare providers and the use of validated and calibrated devices are critical for obtaining accurate BP measurements.
CONTEXT It is unknown whether long-standing disparities in incidence of coronary heart disease (CHD) among US blacks and whites persist. OBJECTIVE To examine incident CHD by black and white race and ...by sex. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Prospective cohort study of 24 443 participants without CHD at baseline from the Reasons for Geographic and Racial Differences in Stroke (REGARDS) cohort, who resided in the continental United States and were enrolled between 2003 and 2007 with follow-up through December 31, 2009. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE Expert-adjudicated total (fatal and nonfatal) CHD, fatal CHD, and nonfatal CHD (definite or probable myocardial infarction MI; very small non–ST-elevation MI NSTEMI had peak troponin level <0.5 μg/L). RESULTS Over a mean (SD) of 4.2 (1.5) years of follow-up, 659 incident CHD events occurred (153 in black men, 138 in black women, 254 in white men, and 114 in white women). Among men, the age-standardized incidence rate per 1000 person-years for total CHD was 9.0 (95% CI, 7.5-10.8) for blacks vs 8.1 (95% CI, 6.9-9.4) for whites; fatal CHD: 4.0 (95% CI, 2.9-5.3) vs 1.9 (95% CI, 1.4-2.6), respectively; and nonfatal CHD: 4.9 (95% CI, 3.8-6.2) vs 6.2 (95% CI, 5.2-7.4). Among women, the age-standardized incidence rate per 1000 person-years for total CHD was 5.0 (95% CI, 4.2-6.1) for blacks vs 3.4 (95% CI, 2.8-4.2) for whites; fatal CHD: 2.0 (95% CI, 1.5-2.7) vs 1.0 (95% CI, 0.7-1.5), respectively; and nonfatal CHD: 2.8 (95% CI, 2.2-3.7) vs 2.2 (95% CI, 1.7-2.9). Age- and region-adjusted hazard ratios for fatal CHD among blacks vs whites was near 2.0 for both men and women and became statistically nonsignificant after multivariable adjustment. The multivariable-adjusted hazard ratio for incident nonfatal CHD for blacks vs whites was 0.68 (95% CI, 0.51-0.91) for men and 0.81 (95% CI, 0.58-1.15) for women. Of the 444 nonfatal CHD events, 139 participants (31.3%) had very small NSTEMIs. CONCLUSIONS The higher risk of fatal CHD among blacks compared with whites was associated with cardiovascular disease risk factor burden. These relationships may differ by sex.
Abstract Background In SPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial), a systolic blood pressure (SBP) goal of <120 mm Hg resulted in lower cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk compared with an SBP ...goal of <140 mm Hg. Objectives The purpose of this study was to estimate the prevalence, number, and characteristics of U.S. adults meeting SPRINT eligibility criteria and determine the broader population to whom SPRINT could be generalized. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional, population-based study using data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 2007 to 2012. The SPRINT inclusion criteria were age ≥50 years, SBP 130 to 180 mm Hg depending on the number of antihypertensive medication classes being taken, and high CVD risk (history of coronary heart disease, estimated glomerular filtration rate of 20 to 59 ml/min/1.73 m2 , 10-year CVD risk ≥15%, or age ≥75 years). Exclusion criteria were diabetes, history of stroke, >1 g in 24 h of proteinuria daily, heart failure, estimated glomerular filtration rate <20 ml/min/1.73 m2 , or receiving dialysis. Treated hypertension was defined by self-reported use of medication to lower blood pressure with ≥1 class of antihypertensive medication identified through a pill bottle review. Results Overall, 7.6% (95% confidence interval CI: 7.0% to 8.3%) or 16.8 million (95% CI: 15.7 to 17.8 million) U.S. adults, and 16.7% (95% CI: 15.2% to 18.3%) or 8.2 million (95% CI: 7.6 to 8.8 million) adults with treated hypertension met the SPRINT eligibility criteria. Among both the overall U.S. population and adults with treated hypertension, the percentage meeting SPRINT eligibility criteria increased with older age, was higher among males than females, and was higher among non-Hispanic whites compared with non-Hispanic blacks or Hispanics. Of U.S. adults eligible for SPRINT, 51.0% (95% CI: 47.8% to 54.1%) or 8.6 million (95% CI: 8.0 to 9.1 million) were not treated for hypertension. Conclusions A substantial percentage of U.S. adults meet the eligibility criteria for SPRINT.
PDF
