Hardy Shakia T, Loehr Laura R, Butler Kenneth R, Chakladar Sujatro, Chang Patricia P, Folsom Aaron R, Heiss Gerardo, MacLehose Richard F, Matsushita Kunihiro, Avery Christy L
Department of Epidemiology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC (S.T.H., L.R.L., P.P.C., G.H., C.L.A.).
Department of Medicine, University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, MS (K.R.B.).
J Am Heart Assoc. 2015 Oct 27;4(10):e002276. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.115.002276.
US blood pressure reduction policies are largely restricted to hypertensive populations and associated benefits are often estimated based on unrealistic interventions.
We used multivariable linear regression to estimate incidence rate differences contrasting the impact of 2 pragmatic hypothetical interventions to reduce coronary heart disease, stroke, and heart failure (HF) incidence: (1) a population-wide intervention that reduced systolic blood pressure by 1 mm Hg and (2) targeted interventions that reduced the prevalence of unaware, untreated, or uncontrolled blood pressure above goal (per Eighth Joint National Committee treatment thresholds) by 10%. In the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities Study (n=15 744; 45 to 64 years at baseline, 1987-1989), incident coronary heart disease and stroke were adjudicated by physician panels. Incident HF was defined as the first hospitalization with discharge diagnosis code of "428." A 10% proportional reduction in unaware, untreated, or uncontrolled blood pressure above goal resulted in ≈4.61, 3.55, and 11.01 fewer HF events per 100,000 person-years in African Americans, and 3.77, 1.63, and 4.44 fewer HF events per 100 000 person-years, respectively, in whites. In contrast, a 1 mm Hg population-wide systolic blood pressure reduction was associated with 20.3 and 13.3 fewer HF events per 100 000 person-years in African Americans and whites, respectively. Estimated event reductions for coronary heart disease and stroke were smaller than for HF, but followed a similar pattern for both population-wide and targeted interventions.
Modest population-wide shifts in systolic blood pressure could have a substantial impact on cardiovascular disease incidence and should be developed in parallel with interventions targeting populations with blood pressure above goal.
美国的血压降低政策主要局限于高血压人群,且相关益处通常基于不切实际的干预措施来估计。
我们使用多变量线性回归来估计发病率差异,对比两种务实的假设干预措施对降低冠心病、中风和心力衰竭(HF)发病率的影响:(1)一项在全人群中实施的干预措施,使收缩压降低1 mmHg;(2)针对性干预措施,将未意识到、未治疗或未控制在目标值以上的血压患病率(根据第八次美国国家联合委员会治疗阈值)降低10%。在社区动脉粥样硬化风险研究(n = 15744;基线年龄为45至64岁,时间为1987 - 1989年)中,冠心病和中风事件由医生小组判定。HF事件定义为首次因出院诊断代码为“428”而住院。在目标值以上未意识到、未治疗或未控制的血压比例降低10%,导致非裔美国人每10万人年的HF事件分别减少约4.61、3.55和11.01例,白人每10万人年的HF事件分别减少3.77、1.63和4.44例。相比之下,全人群收缩压降低1 mmHg,非裔美国人和白人每10万人年的HF事件分别减少20.3例和13.3例。冠心病和中风的估计事件减少量小于HF,但在全人群和针对性干预措施中均呈现类似模式。
全人群收缩压的适度变化可能对心血管疾病发病率产生重大影响,应与针对血压高于目标值人群的干预措施并行开展。