BackgroundCardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention guidelines stress the importance of smoking cessation and recommend intensive follow-up. To guide the development of such cessation support strategies, we analysed the characteristics that are associated with successful smoking cessation after an acute coronary syndrome (ACS).MethodsWe used data from the Randomised Evaluation of Secondary Prevention for ACS patients coordinated by Outpatient Nurse SpEcialists (RESPONSE) trial (n = 754). This was designed to quantify the impact of a nurse-coordinated prevention program, focusing on healthy lifestyles, traditional CVD risk factors and medication adherence. For the current analysis we included all smokers (324/754, 43 %). Successful quitters were defined as those who reported abstinence at 1 year of follow-up.ResultsThe majority of successful quitters quit immediately after the ACS event and remained abstinent through 1 year of follow-up, without extra support (128/156, 82 %). Higher education level (33 vs. 15 %, p < 0.01), no history of CVD (87 vs. 74 %, p < 0.01) and being on target for LDL-cholesterol level at 1 year (78 vs. 63 %, p < 0.01) were associated with successful quitting.ConclusionThe majority of successful quitters at 1 year stopped immediately after their ACS. Patients in this group showed that it was within their own ability to quit, and they did not relapse through 1 year of follow-up. Our study indicates that in a large group of patients who quit immediately after a life-threatening event, no relapse prevention program is needed.
DOCUMENT
Background Having a partner is associated with better prognosis in patients with cardiovascular disease. However, the influence of partners on modification of patients’ lifestyle-related risk factors (LRFs) is unclear. Therefore, we studied the influence of partners and the level of partner participation on LRF modification in patients after an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) or revascularization. Methods The RESPONSE-2 trial was a community-based lifestyle intervention trial comparing nurse-coordinated referral to a comprehensive set of lifestyle interventions (physical activity, weight reduction and/or smoking cessation) to usual care. In the current analysis, we investigated the association of having a partner on the improvement in >1 LRF without deterioration in other LRFs at 12 months follow-up. Secondary, the influence of the level of partner participation (participating partner, non-participating partner and no partner) in the intervention group was studied. Results In total 824 individuals (411 intervention, 413 control) were included in the analysis. The presence of a partner was comparable in both groups (intervention 74%, control 69%). In the intervention group, 48% of partners participated in the lifestyle interventions. Overall, having a partner was positively associated with improvement in LRFs (odds ratio (OR) 2.57 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.57 – 4.21), p<0.001). In the intervention group, having a participating partner was also positively associated with improvement in LRFs compared to patients without a partner (OR 2.45 95% CI 1.25 – 4.79, p=0.009). When analysed the influence of partners on LRFs separately, patients with a participating partner were most successful in reducing weight compared to patients without a partner (OR 2.71 95% CI 1.16 – 6.36, p=0.02). Conclusion Having a partner is associated with improvement on LRFs in patients after ACS or revascularization. Moreover, patients with participating partners in the lifestyle programs were most successful in LRF modification. Involvement of partners in lifestyle interventions should be considered in routine practice.
DOCUMENT
BACKGROUND: Improvement of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) is an important goal in preventive cardiology. HRQOL is also related to depressive symptoms, which represent a common co-morbidity and risk factor in patients with an acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Comprehensive nurse-coordinated prevention programmes (NCPP) in secondary care have been shown to reduce cardiovascular risk, however their effects on HRQOL and depressive symptoms have not been evaluated. We therefore investigated HRQOL and depressive symptoms in a secondary analysis in the RESPONSE trial, evaluating the effect of a NCPP on cardiovascular risk.METHODS: RESPONSE was a multicentre (n = 11) randomised controlled trial in ACS-patients in secondary and tertiary healthcare settings evaluating a NCPP. The intervention consisted of four outpatient nurse clinic visits in the first 6 months after the index event, focusing on healthy lifestyles, biometric risk factors and medication adherence, in addition to usual care. The control group received usual care only. The outcome was change in HRQOL as measured by the MacNew questionnaire and change in depressive symptoms as measured by Beck's Depression Inventory (BDI) questionnaire at 12-months follow-up relative to baseline.RESULTS: Of 754 patients randomised, 615 were analysed for HRQOL; 120 for depressive symptoms. At baseline, HRQOL was 5.17 (SD 1.09) and 5.20 (SD1.04) (scale range 1.0 to 7.0) in the intervention and control group, respectively. At 12 months follow-up, HRQOL increased by 0.57 (SD 0.89) in the intervention group as compared with 0.42 (SD 0.90) in the control group (p = 0.03). This increase was observed across all relevant subscales. The BDI decreased by 1.9 in the intervention group as compared with 0.03 in the control group (p = 0.03) (scale range 1.0 to 63).CONCLUSION: Participation in a NCPP is associated with a modest but statistically significant increase in HRQOL, and a decrease of depressive symptoms, both of which are highly relevant to patients. A reduction in depressive symptoms may in addition contribute to a reduction in the overall risk of recurrent events.TRIAL REGISTRATION: Dutch trials register: NTR1290 . Registered 24 April 2008.
DOCUMENT
Abstract: Hypertension is both a health problem and a financial one globally. It affects nearly 30 % of the general population. Elderly people, aged ≥65 years, are a special group of hypertensive patients. In this group, the overall prevalence of the disease reaches 60 %, rising to 70 % in those aged ≥80 years. In the elderly population, isolated systolic hypertension is quite common. High systolic blood pressure is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular disease, cerebrovascular disease, peripheral artery disease, cognitive impairment and kidney disease. Considering the physiological changes resulting from ageing alongside multiple comorbidities, treatment of hypertension in elderly patients poses a significant challenge to treatment teams. Progressive disability with regard to the activities of daily life, more frequent hospitalisations and low quality of life are often seen in elderly patients. There is discussion in the literature regarding frailty syndrome associated with old age. Frailty is understood to involve decreased resistance to stressors, depleted adaptive and physiological reserves of a number of organs, endocrine dysregulation and immune dysfunction. The primary dilemma concerning frailty is whether it should only be defined on the basis of physical factors, or whether psychological and social factors should also be included. Proper nutrition and motor rehabilitation should be prioritised in care for frail patients. The risk of orthostatic hypotension is a significant issue in elderly patients. It results from an autonomic nervous system dysfunction and involves maladjustment of the cardiovascular system to sudden changes in the position of the body. Other significant issues in elderly patients include polypharmacy, increased risk of falls and cognitive impairment. Chronic diseases, including hypertension, deteriorate baroreceptor function and result in irreversible changes in cerebral and coronary circulation. Concurrent frailty or other components of geriatric syndrome in elderly patients are associated with a worse perception of health, an increased number of comorbidities and social isolation of the patient. It may also interfere with treatment adherence. Identifying causes of non-adherence to pharmaceutical treatment is a key factor in planning therapeutic interventions aimed at increasing control, preventing complications, and improving long-term outcomes and any adverse effects of treatment. Diagnosis of frailty and awareness of the associated difficulties in adhering to treatment may allow targeting of those elderly patients who have a poorer prognosis or may be at risk of complications from untreated or undertreated hypertension, and for the planning of interventions to improve hypertension control.
DOCUMENT
Objective: To compare the treatment effect on lifestyle-related risk factors (LRFs) in older (≥65 years) versus younger (<65 years) patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) in The Randomised Evaluation of Secondary Prevention by Outpatient Nurse SpEcialists 2 (RESPONSE-2) trial. Methods: The RESPONSE-2 trial was a community-based lifestyle intervention trial (n=824) comparing nurse-coordinated referral with a comprehensive set of three lifestyle interventions (physical activity, weight reduction and/or smoking cessation) to usual care. In the current analysis, our primary outcome was the proportion of patients with improvement at 12 months follow-up (n=711) in ≥1 LRF stratified by age. Results: At baseline, older patients (n=245, mean age 69.2±3.9 years) had more adverse cardiovascular risk profiles and comorbidities than younger patients (n=579, mean age 53.7±6.6 years). There was no significant variation on the treatment effect according to age (p value treatment by age=0.45, OR 1.67, 95% CI 1.22 to 2.31). However, older patients were more likely to achieve ≥5% weight loss (OR old 5.58, 95% CI 2.77 to 11.26 vs OR young 1.57, 95% CI 0.98 to 2.49, p=0.003) and younger patients were more likely to show non-improved LRFs (OR old 0.38, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.67 vs OR young 0.88, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.26, p=0.01). Conclusion: Despite more adverse cardiovascular risk profiles and comorbidities among older patients, nurse-coordinated referral to a community-based lifestyle intervention was at least as successful in improving LRFs in older as in younger patients. Higher age alone should not be a reason to withhold lifestyle interventions in patients with CAD.
DOCUMENT
Background: Marital status is associated with prognosis in patients with cardiovascular disease (CVD). However, the influence of partners on successful modification of lifestyle-related risk factors (LRFs) in secondary CVD prevention is unclear. Therefore, we studied the association between the presence of a partner, partner participation in lifestyle interventions and LRF modification in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). Methods: In a secondary analysis of the RESPONSE-2 trial (n = 711), which compared nurse-coordinated referral to community-based lifestyle programs (smoking cessation, weight reduction and/or physical activity) to usual care in patients with CAD, we investigated the association between the presence of a partner and the level of partner participation on improvement in >1 LRF (urinary cotinine <200 ng/l, ≥5% weight reduction, ≥10% increased 6-min walking distance) without deterioration in other LRFs at 12 months follow-up. Results: The proportion of patients with a partner was 80% (571/711); 19% women (108/571). In the intervention group, 48% (141/293) had a participating partner in ≥1 lifestyle program. Overall, the presence of a partner was associated with patients' successful LRF modification (adjusted risk ratio (aRR) 1.93, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.40-2.51). A participating partner was associated with successful weight reduction (aRR 1.73, 95% CI 1.15-2.35). Conclusion: The presence of a partner is associated with LRF improvement in patients with CAD. Moreover, patients with partners participating in lifestyle programs are more successful in reducing weight. Involving partners of CAD patients in weight reduction interventions should be considered in routine practice.
DOCUMENT
Objective: To study the effects of a comprehensive secondary prevention programme on weight loss and to identify determinants of weight change in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). Methods: We performed a secondary analysis focusing on the subgroup of overweight CAD patients (BMI ≥27 kg/m2) in the Randomised Evaluation of Secondary Prevention by Outpatient Nurse SpEcialists-2 (RESPONSE-2) multicentre randomised trial. We evaluated weight change from baseline to 12-month follow-up; multivariable logistic regression with backward elimination was used to identify determinants of weight change. Results: Intervention patients (n=280) lost significantly more weight than control patients (n=257) (-2.4±7.1 kg vs -0.2±4.6 kg; p<0.001). Individual weight change varied widely, with weight gain (≥1.0 kg) occurring in 36% of interventions versus 41% controls (p=0.21). In the intervention group, weight loss of ≥5% was associated with higher age (OR 2.94), lower educational level (OR 1.91), non-smoking status (OR 2.92), motivation to start with weight loss directly after the baseline visit (OR 2.31) and weight loss programme participation (OR 3.33), whereas weight gain (≥1 kg) was associated with smoking cessation ≤6 months before or during hospitalisation (OR 3.21), non-Caucasian ethnicity (OR 2.77), smoking at baseline (OR 2.70), lower age (<65 years) (OR 1.47) and weight loss programme participation (OR 0.59). Conclusion: The comprehensive secondary prevention programme was, on average, effective in achieving weight loss. However, wide variation was observed. As weight gain was observed in over one in three participants in both groups, prevention of weight gain may be as important as attempts to lose weight.
LINK
BackgroundRoutine outpatient care of patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) lacks a simple measure of physical fitness and risk of mortality. Heart rate recovery (HRR) is noninvasive and easily obtainable in outpatient settings. Prior studies have suggested that delayed postexercise HRR in the first minutes is associated withmortality in several types of populations. However, a comprehensive overview of the prognostic value of delayed HRR for time to mortality specifically in CAD patients is not available. The purpose of the current meta-analysis is to evaluate the prognostic value of delayed HRR in CAD patients.MethodsWe conducted a systematic search in OVID MEDLINE and OVID EMBASE to identify studies reporting on HRR and risk of incident cardiovascular events or mortality in CAD patients. Hazard ratios for delayed versus nondelayed HRR were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis.Results Four studies were included, comprising 2,428 CAD patients. The study quality of the included studies was rated moderate (n = 2) to high (n = 2). Delayed HRR was defined by ≤12 to ≤21 beat/min in the recovery period. During follow-up (range 2.0-9.8 years), 151 patients died (6.2% [range 2.5%-19.5%]). Only data on mortality could be pooled. Heterogeneity was limited (I² = 32%; P = .23); pooled unadjusted hazard ratio for mortality, based on 3 studies, was 5.8 (95% CI 3.2-10.4).CoclusionsIn CAD patients, delayed HRR is significantly associated with all-cause mortality. As exercise testing is performed routinely in CAD patients, HRR can be considered in monitoring exercise; still, further research must investigate the addition of HRR in current risk scores.
DOCUMENT
Background: Marital status is associated with prognosis in patients with cardiovascular disease (CVD).However, the influence of partners on successful modification of lifestyle-related risk factors (LRFs) in secondaryCVD prevention is unclear. Therefore, we studied the association between the presence of a partner,partner participation in lifestyle interventions and LRF modification in patients with coronary arterydisease (CAD).Methods: In a secondary analysis of the RESPONSE-2 trial (n=711),which compared nurse-coordinated referralto community-based lifestyle programs (smoking cessation, weight reduction and/or physical activity) to usualcare in patients with CAD, we investigated the association between the presence of a partner and the level ofpartner participation on improvement in >1 LRF (urinary cotinine <200 ng/l, ≥5% weight reduction, ≥10% increased6-min walking distance) without deterioration in other LRFs at 12 months follow-up.Results: The proportion of patients with a partner was 80% (571/711); 19% women (108/571). In the interventiongroup, 48% (141/293) had a participating partner in ≥1 lifestyle program. Overall, the presence of apartner was associated with patients' successful LRF modification (adjusted risk ratio (aRR) 1.93, 95% confidenceinterval (CI) 1.40–2.51). A participating partner was associated with successful weight reduction(aRR 1.73, 95% CI 1.15–2.35).Conclusion: The presence of a partner is associated with LRF improvement in patients with CAD. Moreover, patientswithpartners participating in lifestyle programs aremore successful in reducingweight. Involving partnersof CAD patients in weight reduction interventions should be considered in routine practice.
DOCUMENT
OBJECTIVE: To study the effects of a comprehensive secondary prevention programme on weight loss and to identify determinants of weight change in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD).METHODS: We performed a secondary analysis focusing on the subgroup of overweight CAD patients (BMI ≥27 kg/m2) in the Randomised Evaluation of Secondary Prevention by Outpatient Nurse SpEcialists-2 (RESPONSE-2) multicentre randomised trial. We evaluated weight change from baseline to 12-month follow-up; multivariable logistic regression with backward elimination was used to identify determinants of weight change.RESULTS: Intervention patients (n=280) lost significantly more weight than control patients (n=257) (-2.4±7.1 kg vs -0.2±4.6 kg; p<0.001). Individual weight change varied widely, with weight gain (≥1.0 kg) occurring in 36% of interventions versus 41% controls (p=0.21). In the intervention group, weight loss of ≥5% was associated with higher age (OR 2.94), lower educational level (OR 1.91), non-smoking status (OR 2.92), motivation to start with weight loss directly after the baseline visit (OR 2.31) and weight loss programme participation (OR 3.33), whereas weight gain (≥1 kg) was associated with smoking cessation ≤6 months before or during hospitalisation (OR 3.21), non-Caucasian ethnicity (OR 2.77), smoking at baseline (OR 2.70), lower age (<65 years) (OR 1.47) and weight loss programme participation (OR 0.59).CONCLUSION: The comprehensive secondary prevention programme was, on average, effective in achieving weight loss. However, wide variation was observed. As weight gain was observed in over one in three participants in both groups, prevention of weight gain may be as important as attempts to lose weight.TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NTR3937.
DOCUMENT
