scholarly journals INDICATIONS OF PRESCRIPTION OF STATINS IN TERTIARY CARE CENTRE OF NORTH INDIA

Author(s):  
Shilpa Atwal ◽  
Jitender Thakur

Background: To determine the indications for which statins are being prescribed Methods: Study was conducted on Patients with indications for statins presenting to cardiology OPD,Medicine OPD and Endocrinology OPD and started on statins at PGIMER, Chandigarh, within a period of 9 months. Results: In our study, out of 243 prescriptions, 55.1%(n=134) were prescribed statins for secondary prevention and 44.9%(n=109) had statins prescribed for primary prevention. Overall coronary artery disease (37.03%) was the leading indication followed by Diabetes mellitus without ASCVD(70.64%).Other indications of secondary preventionincluded newly diagnosed statin naïve patients diagnosed with stable coronary artery disease ,unstable coronary artery disease /acute coronary artery disease , ischemic cardiovascular accidentsand peripheral arterial disease .64.22 percent patients in primary prevention group were diabetics in our study . Concluded: We concluded that secondary prevention was found to the more common indication of statin prescription than primary prevention (ratio 1.22:1). Keywords: Statin, CAD, Prevention

Open Heart ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. e000997 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rani Khatib ◽  
Kay Marshall ◽  
Jon Silcock ◽  
Claire Forrest ◽  
Alistair S Hall

BackgroundNon-adherence to secondary prevention medicines (SPMs) among patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) remains a challenge in clinical practice. This study attempted to identify actual and potential modifiable barriers to adherence that can be addressed in cardiology clinical practice.MethodsThis was a cross-sectional, postal survey-based study of the medicines-taking experience of patients with CAD treated at a secondary/tertiary care centre. All participants had been on SPM for ≥3 months.ResultsIn total, 696 eligible patients were sent the survey and 503 responded (72.3%). The median age was 70 years, and 403 (80.1%) were male; the median number of individual daily doses of all medicines was 6. The rate of non-adherence to at least one SPM was 43.5% (n=219), but 53.3% of reported non-adherence was to only one SPM. Statins contributed to 66.7% and aspirin to 61.7% of overall non-adherence identified by the Single Question (SQ) tool. In 30.8% of non-adherent patients (n=65), this was at least partly intentional. Barriers included forgetfulness (84.9%; n=186), worry that medicines will do more harm than good (33.8%; n=74), feeling hassled about medicines taking (18.7%; n=41), feeling worse when taking medicines (14.2%; n=31) and not being convinced of the benefit of medicines (9.1%; n=20). In a multivariate analysis, modifiable factors associated with overall non-adherence included being prescribed aspirin (OR: 2.22; 95% CI: 1.18 to 4.17), having specific concern about SPM (OR: 1.12; 95% CI: 1.07 to 1.18) and issues with repeat prescriptions (OR: 2.48; 95% CI: 1.26 to 4.90). Different factors were often associated with intentional versus unintentional non-adherence.ConclusionsUsing appropriate self-report tools, patients share actual and potential modifiable barriers to adherence that can be addressed in clinical practice. Non-adherence behaviour was selective. Most non-adherence was driven by forgetfulness, concern about the harm caused by SPM and practical barriers.


Author(s):  
Shilpa Atwal ◽  
Jitender Thakur

Background: To study the use of guidelines in statins prescription at tertiary care centre of North India Methods: Study was conducted on Patients with indications for statins presenting to cardiology OPD,Medicine OPD and Endocrinology OPD and started on statins at PGIMER, Chandigarh, within a period of 9 months. Results: In our study, 81.9% of total study population were receiving statins according to guideline and 18.1% were receiving statins not according to guideline. In the primary prevention group,91(83.5%) patients were receiving statins according to guideline and 18(16.5%) were receiving not according to guideline. In the secondary prevention group, 108(80.6%) patients were receiving statins according to guideline and 26(19.4%) patients were receiving statins not according to guideline. Concluded: In our study, more than two third of patients in our study were receiving prescriptions according to guideline Keywords: Statin, Guideline, Use


Open Heart ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. e001223 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sandeep Singh ◽  
Maurice W J de Ronde ◽  
Maayke G M Kok ◽  
Marcel AM Beijk ◽  
Robbert J De Winter ◽  
...  

BackgroundIn this study, we discovered and validated candidate microRNA (miRNA) biomarkers for coronary artery disease (CAD).MethodCandidate tissue-derived miRNAs from atherosclerotic plaque material in patients with stable coronary artery disease (SCAD) (n=14) and unstable coronary artery disease (UCAD) (n=25) were discovered by qPCR-based arrays. We validated differentially expressed miRNAs, along with seven promising CAD-associated miRNAs from the literature, in the serum of two large cohorts (n=395 and n=1000) of patients with SCAD and UCAD and subclinical atherosclerosis (SubA) and controls, respectively.ResultFrom plaque materials (discovery phase), miR-125b-5p and miR-193b-3p were most upregulated in SCAD, whereas miR-223-3p and miR-142-3p were most upregulated in patients with UCAD. Subsequent validation in serum from patients with UCAD, SCAD, SubA and controls demonstrated significant upregulation of miR-223-3p, miR-133a-3p, miR-146-3p and miR-155-5p. The ischaemia-related miR-499-5p was also highly upregulated in patients with UCAD compared with the other groups (SCAD OR 20.63 (95% CI 11.16 to 38.15), SubA OR 96.10 (95% CI 40.13 to 230.14) and controls OR 15.73 (95% CI 7.80 to 31.72)). However, no significant difference in miR-499-5p expression was observed across SCAD, SubA and controls. MiR-122-5p was the only miRNA to be significantly upregulated in the serum of both patients with UCAD and SCAD.ConclusionIn conclusion, miR-122-5p and miR-223-3p might be markers of plaque instability.


2014 ◽  
Vol 66 (1) ◽  
pp. 52-56 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cholenahally Nanjappa Manjunath ◽  
Ashish Agarwal ◽  
Prabhavathi Bhat ◽  
Khandenahally Shankarappa Ravindranath ◽  
Rajiv Ananthakrishna ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document