Epstein F H, Gutzwiller F
Soz Praventivmed. 1983;28(2):95-8. doi: 10.1007/BF02341653.
Recently published intervention studies and their implications for Switzerland. Recently published results of large scale intervention studies (Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial, MRFIT, and European Intervention Study, World Health Organization European Collaborative Group) seem to question, according to some observers, the basis of population oriented cardiovascular prevention. As the National Research Program 1A "Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease in Switzerland" was based on the same assumptions regarding the relationship of risk factors and cardiovascular disease, the authors discussed the implication of the two studies for Switzerland. A detailed analysis of the European Intervention Study shows, that in spite of the overall non-significant mortality reduction of 8% there were important differences between participating countries, With significant differences in Belgium and Italy, both with innovative health education programs. MRFIT shows an important reduction of risk factors also in the control group, indicating a beneficial effect of "usual care" by practising physicians. Together with the recent recommendations of a WHO expert committee the authors conclude, that the two studies do not invalidate the principles of cardiovascular prevention.
近期发表的干预研究及其对瑞士的启示。据一些观察人士称，近期发表的大规模干预研究（多重危险因素干预试验，MRFIT，以及欧洲干预研究，世界卫生组织欧洲协作组）的结果似乎对以人群为导向的心血管疾病预防基础提出了质疑。由于国家研究计划1A“瑞士心血管疾病的预防”基于与危险因素和心血管疾病关系相同的假设，作者们讨论了这两项研究对瑞士的启示。对欧洲干预研究的详细分析表明，尽管总体死亡率降低8%不显著，但参与国之间存在重要差异，比利时和意大利差异显著，两国都有创新的健康教育计划。MRFIT显示，对照组的危险因素也有显著降低，表明执业医生的“常规护理”有有益效果。作者们结合世界卫生组织专家委员会最近的建议得出结论，这两项研究并未使心血管疾病预防原则无效。
