ArticleAnatolian journal of cardiology2016
Using a standardized follow-up program to improve coronary heart disease secondary prevention.
Article in Anatolian journal of cardiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trial
- A Quasi-Randomized Controlled Trial of an Integrated Healthcare Model for Patients with Coronary Heart Disease.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Article
- Effectiveness of a standard secondary coronary prevention program: not obligate.Anatolian journal of cardiology · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo reveal the current status and effectiveness of a standardized follow-up of the secondary prevention of coronary heart disease (CHD) at Peking University First Hospital.
methodsThe study group comprised 496 patients diagnosed with CHD between January 1, 2007 and December 31, 2009 after a standardized follow-up program began. A group of 300 patients with CHD diagnosed between January 1, 2004 and December 31, 2004 was evaluated as the control group. The study group participants were followed-up every 3 months for 1 year in the outpatient department and were interviewed by telephone between November 2012 and January 2013. Data on the control of risk-factors, medical therapy, and clinical events were collected.
resultsAt discharge, 75.4% of the study group patients were non-smokers, 51.4% exercised regularly, 42.4% were overweight, 56.7% had blood pressure <140/90 mm Hg (<130/80 in those with diabetes mellitus), 51% had serum low-density-lipoprotein cholesterol <2.60 mmol/L, and 64.2% had fasting plasma glucose <6.11 mmol/L. Antiplatelet medication was used by 99.4% of the study group patients, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin-receptor blockers by 64.5%, beta-blockers by 79.1%, and statins by 94.3%. Major adverse cardiac events, the primary clinical outcome, occurred in 22.7% of the study group patients. The proportions of non-smokers (82.2% vs. 73.7%, p=0.014), control of serum lipids (84.4% vs. 45.6%, p<0.001), and use of statins (92.5% vs. 54.3%, p<0.001) at the end of follow-up were significantly greater in the study group than those in the control group.
conclusionAlthough some patients with CHD were still not achieving the goals of lifestyle change, control of risk factors, and medication therapy, standardized follow-up helped improve and standardize CHD secondary prevention.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.