ArticleJournal of preventive medicine and hygiene2022
Inadequate management of cardiovascular risk factors prior to admission for an acute coronary event.
Article in Journal of preventive medicine and hygiene, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Optimal regulation of modifiable risk factors has been proposed as the standard of care both for primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD). The aim of this study was to assess primary and secondary cardiovascular risk management received before admission for an acute coronary event. Methods: Data were analyzed for 185 consecutive hospitalized patients with a diagnosis of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) in the Cardiology department of a University hospital during an annual period (1/7/2019 until 30/6/2020). The study population was divided into two groups, the primary and secondary prevention subgroups, according to previous medical history of cardiovascular disease (CVD). Results: The mean age of the participants was 65.5 ±12.2 years and most patients were male (81.6%). Previous CVD was present in 51 patients (27.9%). Fifty-seven patients (30.8%) had a history of diabetes mellitus (DM) and 97 (52.4%) had a history of dyslipidemia. Hypertension was present in 101 (54.6%) patients. In the secondary prevention group, the LDL-C was on target in only 33.3% of the patients, while 20% patients did not use statins. The use of antiplatelet/anticoagulant agents was 94.5%. Among patients with diabetes, only 20% had been using a GLP-1 receptor agonist or/and an SGLT-2 inhibitor, while the HbA Conclusions: Our data show that in a substantial proportion of patients presenting with ACS, previous CVD prevention, both primary and secondary, fails to meet the current recommendations provided by scientific societies.
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.