Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (1)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by McLeod, A.L.
Right arrow Articles by Dewhurst, N.G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by McLeod, A.L.
Right arrow Articles by Dewhurst, N.G.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Q J Med 2004; 97: 127-131
QJM vol. 97 no. 3 (c) Association of Physicians 2004; all rights reserved.

Secondary prevention for coronary artery disease

A.L. McLeod1, L. Brooks2, V. Taylor3, P.F. Currie2 and N.G. Dewhurst2

From the 1Department of Cardiology, Ninewells Hospital, Dundee, 2Department of Cardiology, Perth Royal Infirmary, Perth, and 3Health Center, Dalkeith, UK

Received 3 October 2003 and in revised form 2 January 2004

Background: Secondary prevention of coronary artery disease is effective in reducing morbidity and mortality, but deficiencies in implementation and prescription bias have been identified.

Aim: To assess progress in secondary prevention measures for coronary heart disease and whether there was a difference between patient subgroups with angina, post myocardial infarction or revascularization.

Design: Retrospective analysis.

Methods: Between 1997 and 2001, data were collected on prophylactic prescribing, demographic and lifestyle information, at baseline and 1 year following attendance at a hospital-based, cardiac-nurse-led out-patient clinic.

Results: Patients (n = 945) were entered into the database at hospital discharge and 619 (72%) attended at 1 year. Aspirin and statin prescribing increased, though ACE inhibitor use was less. Mean total cholesterol at baseline reduced to 4.92 ± 0.11 mmol/l (p < 0.001) in 2000, with a further reduction to 4.59 ± 0.08 mmol/l at the 1-year visit in 2001 (p < 0.001). The proportion of patients with total cholesterol < 5 mmol/l increased to 38% in 2000, reaching 70% in 2001. Smokers at baseline were similar at around 30%, although this had reduced to 10% in 2001 (p < 0.001). No change in weight was seen for patients with BMI >= 30 (p = NS). No significant differences were seen between patient subgroups (p = NS).

Discussion: Secondary prevention measures are improving, especially in prophylactic prescribing, lipid management and smoking cessation, although scope for further improvement remains. No difference was seen between the patient subgroups. Lifestyle measures need to be addressed to gain maximum benefit in addressing overall cardiovascular risk.

Address correspondence to Dr A.L. McLeod, Specialist Registrar in Cardiology, Department of Cardiology, Ninewells Hospital, Dundee, DD1 9SY. e-mail: a.mcleod{at}ed.ac.uk


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.