Suppr超能文献

比较基于证据的与非基于证据的药物治疗在已确诊心血管疾病患者中心血管住院风险和全因死亡率方面的差异。

Comparison of evidence-based versus non-evidence-based pharmacotherapy on the risk of cardiovascular hospitalization and all-cause mortality among patients with established cardiovascular disease.

机构信息

Kaiser Permanente, Center for Health Research, Portland, Oregon, USA.

出版信息

Am J Cardiol. 2010 Mar 15;105(6):786-91. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2009.11.008.

Abstract

Landmark studies have proved that several therapies reduce cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk; however, the rates of secondary CVD in the context of therapies delivered according to current guidelines are largely unknown. Therefore, we sought to estimate the incidence of secondary CVD hospitalizations and all-cause mortality among patients who did and did not receive guideline-level pharmacotherapy. For the 12,278 patients added to the Kaiser Permanente, Northwest CVD registry in 2000 to 2005, we used the pharmacy records to define guideline-level care (GLC) as at least one dispense of aspirin/antiplatelets, statins, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers, and beta blockers within 6 months after registry enrollment. We followed patients until they died, experienced a CVD hospitalization, or June 30, 2008. We compared the age- and gender-adjusted incidence rates per 1,000 person-years of CVD hospitalization, death, and the composite, and estimated the hazard ratios using Cox regression analysis. During a mean follow-up of 45.8 +/- 22.8 months, 25% of the study sample experienced the composite outcome. The age- and gender-adjusted incidence per 1,000 person-years of the composite outcome was significantly lower among GLC patients (hazard ratio 50.3, 95% confidence interval [CI] 46.6 to 54.3) versus non-GLC patients (hazard ratio 60.7, 95% CI 58.1 to 63.4). The difference was driven by lower mortality rates (hazard ratio 18.1, 95% CI 16.1 to 20.4 vs hazard ratio 28.1, 95% CI 26.3 to 30.0). The incidence of CVD hospitalizations did not differ significantly between the 2 groups (hazard ratio 29.2, 95% CI 26.4 to 32.2 vs hazard ratio 27.7, 95% CI 26.0 to 29.5). Multivariate adjustment resulted in a marginally significant 8% lower risk of the composite outcome among GLC recipients (hazard ratio 0.92, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.01, p = 0.067). In conclusion, treatment according to current guidelines was significantly associated with reduced mortality but not the risk of secondary hospitalizations.

摘要

landmark 研究已证实,某些疗法可降低心血管疾病(CVD)风险;然而,根据现行指南提供治疗时的二级 CVD 发生率在很大程度上尚不清楚。因此,我们旨在评估接受和未接受指南水平药物治疗的患者的二级 CVD 住院和全因死亡率。对于 2000 年至 2005 年加入 Kaiser Permanente Northwest CVD 注册中心的 12278 名患者,我们使用药房记录将至少一种阿司匹林/抗血小板、他汀类药物、血管紧张素转换酶抑制剂或血管紧张素受体阻滞剂和β受体阻滞剂的配药定义为指南水平的治疗(GLC)在登记后 6 个月内。我们随访患者,直至其死亡、发生 CVD 住院或 2008 年 6 月 30 日。我们比较了每 1000 人年 CVD 住院、死亡和复合终点的年龄和性别调整发生率,并使用 Cox 回归分析估计风险比。在平均 45.8±22.8 个月的随访期间,研究样本中有 25%发生了复合结局。GLC 患者的年龄和性别调整的每 1000 人年复合终点发生率显著低于非 GLC 患者(风险比 50.3,95%置信区间 [CI] 46.6 至 54.3)(风险比 60.7,95% CI 58.1 至 63.4)。差异是由死亡率降低驱动的(风险比 18.1,95% CI 16.1 至 20.4 与风险比 28.1,95% CI 26.3 至 30.0)。两组间 CVD 住院发生率无显著差异(风险比 29.2,95% CI 26.4 至 32.2 与风险比 27.7,95% CI 26.0 至 29.5)。多变量调整后,GLC 接受者的复合结局风险降低了 8%,但差异无统计学意义(风险比 0.92,95% CI 0.83 至 1.01,p=0.067)。总之,根据现行指南进行治疗与死亡率降低显著相关,但与二级住院风险无关。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验