Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32430002›Full record

ArticleBMC cardiovascular disorders2020

Pharmacological management of modifiable cardiovascular risk factors (blood pressure and lipids) following diagnosis of myocardial infarction, stroke and diabetes: comparison between population-based studies in Russia and Norway.

Sarah Cook, Laila A Hopstock, Anne Elise Eggen, Katie Bates, Olena Iakunchykova, Anna Kontsevaya, Martin McKee, Henrik Schirmer, Michael Voevoda, Alexander V Kudryavtsev and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC cardiovascular disorders, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 90% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 8 institutions in 4 countries.

Sarah CookDepartment of Community Medicine, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, 9037, Tromsø, Norway. sarah.cook@uit.no.ORCID 0000-0003-1250-2967
Laila A HopstockDepartment of Community Medicine, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, 9037, Tromsø, Norway.
Anne Elise EggenDepartment of Community Medicine, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, 9037, Tromsø, Norway.
Katie BatesDepartment of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, 15-17 Tavistock Place, London, WC1H 9SH, UK.
Olena IakunchykovaDepartment of Community Medicine, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, 9037, Tromsø, Norway.
Anna KontsevayaNational research center for preventive medicine, Moscow, Russian Federation, 101990.
Martin McKeeDepartment of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, 15-17 Tavistock Place, London, WC1H 9SH, UK.
Henrik SchirmerAkershus University Hospital, 1478, Lørenskog, Norway.
Michael VoevodaResearch Institute of Internal and Preventive Medicine, Branch of Institute of Cytology and Genetics, Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Novosibirsk, Russian Federation, 630090.
Alexander V KudryavtsevDepartment of Community Medicine, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, 9037, Tromsø, Norway.
Sofia MalyutinaResearch Institute of Internal and Preventive Medicine, Branch of Institute of Cytology and Genetics, Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Novosibirsk, Russian Federation, 630090.
David A LeonDepartment of Community Medicine, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, 9037, Tromsø, Norway.
UiT The Arctic University of Norway · NOLondon School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine · GBInnsbruck Medical University · ATInstitute of Cytology and Genetics · RUNational Research Center for Preventive Medicine · RUNorthern State Medical University · RUNovosibirsk State Medical University · RUUniversity of Oslo · NO

Funding

Northern Norway Regional Health Authority -Norwegian Institute of Public Health -Norwegian Ministry of Health and Social Affairs -Tromsø County -UiT, The Arctic University of Norway -Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust 100217
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality is substantially higher in Russia than in neighbouring Norway. We aimed to compare blood pressure- and lipid-lowering medication use and proportion meeting treatment targets between general population samples in the two countries in those with CVD and diabetes.

methodsThe study population was adults aged 40-69 years reporting a diagnosis of myocardial infarction (MI), stroke and/or diabetes participating in cross-sectional population-based studies in Russia (Know Your Heart (KYH) 2015-18 N = 626) and Norway (The Tromsø Study 2015-16 (Tromsø 7) N = 1353). Reported medications were coded according to the 2016 WHO Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical Classification system. Treatment targets were defined using the Joint European Societies guidelines for CVD prevention in clinical practice (2016).

resultsAge- and sex-standardized prevalence of use of lipid-lowering medications was higher in Tromsø 7 for all three conditions with a disproportionately large difference in those reporting MI (+ 48% (95% CI 39, 57%)). Proportion meeting treatment targets for LDL cholesterol was poor in both studies (age- and sex-standardized prevalence of control KYH vs Tromsø 7: MI 5.1% vs 10.1%; stroke 11.6% vs 5.8%; diabetes 24.9% vs 23.3%). Use of antihypertensive medication was higher in KYH for stroke (+ 40% (95% CI 30, 50%)) and diabetes (+ 27% (95% CI 19, 34%)) groups but approximately equal for the MI group (- 1% (95% CI -1, 1%)). Proportion meeting blood pressure targets was lower in KYH vs Tromsø 7 (MI 51.8% vs 76.3%; stroke 49.5% vs 69.6%; diabetes 51.9% vs 63.9%).

conclusionsWe identified different patterns of medication use in people with CVD and diabetes. However despite higher use of lipid-lowering medication in the Norwegian study treatment to target for total cholesterol was poor in both Russian and Norwegian studies. In contrast we found higher levels of use of antihypertensive medications in the Russian study but also that less participants met treatment targets for blood pressure. Further work should investigate what factors are responsible for this seeming paradox and how management of modifiable risk factors for secondary prevention could be improved.

Indexed as

Secondary PreventionAdultAgedAntihypertensive AgentsBiomarkersBlood PressureCross-Sectional StudiesDiabetes MellitusDrug UtilizationDyslipidemiasFemaleHealthcare DisparitiesHumansHypertensionHypolipidemic AgentsLipidsAntihypertensive AgentsBiomarkersHypolipidemic AgentsLipidsDiabetesMyocardial infarctionNorwayRussian FederationSecondary preventionStroke

Identifiers

PMID32430002
PMCPMC7236339
OpenAlexW3026952228

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.