Value of Primordial and Primary Prevention for Cardiovascular Diseases: A Global Perspective

Author(s):  
Armin Barekatain ◽  
Sandra Weiss ◽  
William S. Weintraub
Medic ro ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (123) ◽  
pp. 48
Author(s):  
Lucia Cojocaru ◽  
Sergiu Chirila ◽  
Luminiţa Matei

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
N. Aerts ◽  
D. Le Goff ◽  
M. Odorico ◽  
J. Y. Le Reste ◽  
P. Van Bogaert ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Cardiovascular diseases are the world’s leading cause of morbidity and mortality. An active lifestyle is one of the cornerstones in the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease. An initial step in guiding primary prevention programs is to refer to clinical guidelines. We aimed to systematically review clinical practice guidelines on primary prevention of cardiovascular disease and their recommendations regarding physical activity. Methods We systematically searched Trip Medical Database, PubMed and Guidelines International Network from January 2012 up to December 2020 using the following search strings: ‘cardiovascular disease’, ‘prevention’, combined with specific cardiovascular disease risk factors. The identified records were screened for relevance and content. We methodologically assessed the selected guidelines using the AGREE II tool. Recommendations were summarized using a consensus-developed extraction form. Results After screening, 27 clinical practice guidelines were included, all of which were developed in Western countries and showed consistent rigor of development. Guidelines were consistent about the benefit of regular, moderate-intensity, aerobic physical activity. However, recommendations on strategies to achieve and sustain behavior change varied. Multicomponent interventions, comprising education, counseling and self-management support, are recommended to be delivered by various providers in primary health care or community settings. Guidelines advise to embed patient-centered care and behavioral change techniques in prevention programs. Conclusions Current clinical practice guidelines recommend similar PA lifestyle advice and propose various delivery models to be considered in the design of such interventions. Guidelines identify a gap in evidence on the implementation of these recommendations into practice.


Trials ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 409 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samuel O Oti ◽  
Steven JM van de Vijver ◽  
Catherine Kyobutungi ◽  
Gabriela B Gomez ◽  
Charles Agyemang ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 98 ◽  
Author(s):  
Twinkle Agrawal ◽  
FarahNaaz Fathima ◽  
Shailendra KumarB Hegde ◽  
Rajnish Joshi ◽  
Nallasamy Srinivasan ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 34-37 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Elagizi ◽  
Edward Archer ◽  
Carl J. Lavie

2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Gebre Teklemariam Demoz ◽  
Shishay Wahdey ◽  
Gebremicheal Gebreslassie Kasahun ◽  
Kalay Hagazy ◽  
Daniel Gebrehawaria Kinfe ◽  
...  

2012 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claudio Napoli ◽  
Amelia Casamassimi ◽  
Vincenzo Grimaldi ◽  
Concetta Schiano ◽  
Teresa Infante ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hassan Saadati ◽  
Hamid Reza Baradaran ◽  
Goodarz Danaei ◽  
Afshin Ostovar ◽  
Farzad Hadaegh ◽  
...  

Abstract Background The use of statins for primary prevention of cardiovascular diseases is associated with different benefit and harm outcomes. The aime of this study is how important these outcomes are for people and what people's preferences are. Methods We conducted a preference-eliciting survey incorporating a best–worst scaling (BWS) instrument in Iran from June to November 2019. The relative importance of 13 statins-related outcomes was assessed on a sample of 1085 participants, including 913 general population (486 women) and 172 healthcare providers from the population covered by urban and rural primary health care centers. The participants made trade-off decisions and selected the most and least worrisome outcomes concurrently from 13 choice sets; each contains four outcomes generated using the balanced incomplete block design. Results According to the mean (SD) BWS scores, which can be (+ 4) in maximum and (− 4) in minimum, in the general population, the most worrisome outcomes were severe stroke (3.37 (0.8)), severe myocardial infarction (2.71(0.7)), and cancer (2.69 (1.33)). While myopathy (− 3. 03 (1.03)), nausea/headache (− 2.69 (0.94)), and treatment discontinuation due to side effects (− 2.24 (1.14)) were the least worrisome outcomes. Preferences were similar between rural and urban areas and among health care providers and the general population with overlapping uncertainty intervals. Conclusion The rank of health outcomes may be similar in various socio-cultural contexts. The preferences for benefits and harms of statin therapy are essential to assess benefit-harm balance when recommending statins for primary prevention of cardiovascular diseases.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document