Displaying all 2 publications

Abstract:
Sort:
  1. Murphy A, Palafox B, O'Donnell O, Stuckler D, Perel P, AlHabib KF, et al.
    Lancet Glob Health, 2018 Mar;6(3):e292-e301.
    PMID: 29433667 DOI: 10.1016/S2214-109X(18)30031-7
    BACKGROUND: There is little evidence on the use of secondary prevention medicines for cardiovascular disease by socioeconomic groups in countries at different levels of economic development.

    METHODS: We assessed use of antiplatelet, cholesterol, and blood-pressure-lowering drugs in 8492 individuals with self-reported cardiovascular disease from 21 countries enrolled in the Prospective Urban Rural Epidemiology (PURE) study. Defining one or more drugs as a minimal level of secondary prevention, wealth-related inequality was measured using the Wagstaff concentration index, scaled from -1 (pro-poor) to 1 (pro-rich), standardised by age and sex. Correlations between inequalities and national health-related indicators were estimated.

    FINDINGS: The proportion of patients with cardiovascular disease on three medications ranged from 0% in South Africa (95% CI 0-1·7), Tanzania (0-3·6), and Zimbabwe (0-5·1), to 49·3% in Canada (44·4-54·3). Proportions receiving at least one drug varied from 2·0% (95% CI 0·5-6·9) in Tanzania to 91·4% (86·6-94·6) in Sweden. There was significant (p<0·05) pro-rich inequality in Saudi Arabia, China, Colombia, India, Pakistan, and Zimbabwe. Pro-poor distributions were observed in Sweden, Brazil, Chile, Poland, and the occupied Palestinian territory. The strongest predictors of inequality were public expenditure on health and overall use of secondary prevention medicines.

    INTERPRETATION: Use of medication for secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease is alarmingly low. In many countries with the lowest use, pro-rich inequality is greatest. Policies associated with an equal or pro-poor distribution include free medications and community health programmes to support adherence to medications.

    FUNDING: Full funding sources listed at the end of the paper (see Acknowledgments).

    Matched MeSH terms: Secondary Prevention/statistics & numerical data*
  2. Kassab YW, Hassan Y, Aziz NA, Akram H, Ismail O
    J Eval Clin Pract, 2013 Aug;19(4):658-63.
    PMID: 22845427 DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2012.01894.x
    RATIONALE: Despite the availability of various prevention guidelines on acute coronary syndrome (ACS), secondary prevention practice utilizing aspirin, beta-blockers, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors and statins still can be sub-optimal.
    AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To review and document the utilization of pharmacotherapy for the secondary prevention of ACS in patients discharged from a Malaysian hospital.
    METHODS: A retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted at a tertiary hospital in Penang, Malaysia. Patients with a primary diagnosis of ACS were identified from medical records over a 4-month period. A range of clinical data was extracted from medical records, including medical history, clinical presentation and pharmacotherapy both on admission and at discharge. This audit focused on the use of four guideline-recommended therapies: aspirin ± clopidogrel, beta-blockers, statins and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEI)/angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs).
    RESULTS: Data pertaining to a total of 380 ACS patients was extracted and reviewed, the mean age of the study population was 57.49 years and 73.9% of population was males. Patients with unstable angina accounted for 56.6% of the admissions whereas 23.4% and 20% of the patients were admitted for ST-elevation myocardial infarction and non-ST-segment elevation infarct respectively. 95.7% of the patients received antiplatelets comprising of at least aspirin, and 82% received aspirin plus clopidogrel. Furthermore, 80.3% of the patients received a beta-blocker at discharge, 95% a statin and 69.7% received either an ACEI or ARB. Compared with patients who presented with myocardial infarction (with or without ST-segment elevation), those presenting with unstable angina were less likely to receive the combination of aspirin plus clopidogrel or an ACEI/ARB at discharge. Patients over 65 years of age were also less likely to receive a beta-blocker at discharge, compared with younger patients.
    CONCLUSIONS: There is a good adherence to evidence-based guidelines for the secondary prevention of ACS in this local setting. However, there is some potential underutilization in the older population and patients presenting with unstable angina.
    KEYWORDS: acute coronary syndromes; evidence-based pharmacotherapy; secondary prevention; utilization
    Matched MeSH terms: Secondary Prevention/statistics & numerical data*
Related Terms
Filters
Contact Us

Please provide feedback to Administrator (afdal@afpm.org.my)

External Links