| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hypertension.
Volume 60, Issue 08, August 2007
|
|
|
Blood Pressure Findings in Spanish Dyslipidemic Primary-Care Patients. LIPICAPPA Study
Gustavo C Rodríguez-Rocaa; Francisco J Alonso-Morenob; Vivencio Barriosc; José L Llisterrid; Salvador Loue; Arantxa Matalíf; José R Banegasg
a Servicio de Cardiología, Hospital Ramón y Cajal, Madrid, Spain b Centro de Salud de La Puebla de Montalbán, Toledo, Spain c Centro de Salud de Sillería, Toledo, Spain d Centro de Salud Ingeniero Joaquín Benlloch, Valencia, Spain e Centro de Salud de Utebo, Zaragoza, Spain f Departamento Médico, Laboratorios Almirall Prodesfarma, S.A., Barcelona, Spain g Departamento de Medicina Preventiva y Salud Pública, Facultad de Medicina, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Spain.
Rev Esp Cardiol. 2007;60:825-32.
Background and objectives. Despite the well-known significant relationship between blood pressure and cardiovascular mortality, few data are available on the blood pressure characteristics of dyslipidemic patients. The aims of this study were to determine the blood pressure characteristics of dyslipidemic patients being treated in primary care, and to identify factors associated with poor blood pressure control. Methods. This multicentre cross-sectional study involved patients of both sexes aged ≥18 years who were diagnosed with dyslipidemia (i.e., hypercholesterolemia, hypertriglyceridemia, mixed dyslipidemia, or a low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol level) in the 17 Spanish autonomous regions. Blood pressure was measured according to standard procedures, and was considered well-controlled if it was <140/90 mm Hg (or <130/80 mm Hg in patients with diabetes, nephropathy or cardiovascular disease). Results. In total, 7054 patients were studied (mean age 61.3 [11.2] years, 50.8% male). Mean systolic and diastolic blood pressures were 134.6 [14.2]/79.8 [8.9] mm Hg, with significant differences (P<.001) between hypertensives (140.8 [14.6]/82.8 [9.0] mmHg) and normotensives (128.5 [10.7]/76.9 [7.7] mm Hg). Good blood pressure control was
observed in 47.4% (95% confidence interval, 46.348.5%) of subjects overall, in 29.3% of hypertensives, and in 12.8% of hypertensive diabetics. Poor control was associated with an increased cardiovascular disease risk (hazard ratio [HR]=2.89), poor control of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HR=1.43), a higher body mass index (HR=1.06), and older age (HR=1.02). Conclusions. Fewer than half of dyslipidemic primary-care patients in Spain had good blood pressure control. Poor control was associated, in particular, with increased cardiovascular risk and poor control of the low-density lipoprotein cholesterol level.
Keywords: Dyslipidemia. Blood pressure. Cardiovascular risk. Primary care.
INTRODUCTION
Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death in Spain and
its main causes are ischemic cardiopathy in men and stroke in
women.1 Dyslipidemia and hypertension are very prevalent
cardiovascular risk factors (CVRF) in the primary care setting.
These CVRF are usually poorly controlled, especially in patients
with coronary disease or similar risk
factors.2-9
Good control of dyslipidemia and blood pressure (BP) is essential
in prevention of cardiovascular disease.10-12 The
National Cholesterol Education Program-Adult Treatment Panel III
(NCEP-ATP III)13,14 recommends low density lipoprotein
cholesterol (LDL-C) levels of <160 mg/dL in patients with fewer
than 2 CVRF, <130 mg/dL in patients with 2 or more CVRF, and
<100 mg/dL in persons who have a history of coronary disease or
similar risk factors. The hypertension guidelines recommend a
systolic BP (SBP) <140 mm Hg and diastolic BP (DBP) <90 mm Hg
in general, and <130 and <80 mm Hg, respectively, if the
person has diabetes mellitus, kidney, or cardiovascular
disease.5,15,16 BP has been significantly associated
with cardiovascular mortality,17-19 but little
information is available concerning its characteristics in patients
with dyslipidemia seen in primary care, an ideal health care
setting to carry out follow-up of patients.4
The
aims of the LIPICAPPA (a substudy of the LIPICAP20)
were to determine the blood pressure characteristics in a Spanish
dyslipidemic population seen in primary care and assess the factors
associated with poor BP control.
METHODS
The
LIPICAP20 was an epidemiological, cross-sectional,
multicenter study carried out in dyslipidemic patients in the 17
autonomous regions of Spain. Dyslipidemia was considered to be
present if the patient had a history of total cholesterolemia
>240 mg/dL, triglyceridemia >200 mg/dL, high density
lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) <40 mg/dL, or mixed dyslipidemia
on the results of 2 blood tests at least 3 months previously, a
prior diagnosis of dyslipidemia or was receiving lipid-lowering
treatment.4
The
study was approved by 2 independent clinical research ethics
committees and the patients all gave informed consent. A total of
1454 physicians provided 7181 patients by consecutive sampling
(first 5 patients who presented to the office during the week of 4
to 8 October 2004). Of these, 127 were excluded (75 due to lack of
a diagnosis or time of dyslipidemia, 50 because their diagnosis was
made <3 months previously, and 2 who were younger than 18 years
of age). The analyses were therefore done with a definitive sample
of 7054 persons20 (Table 1).
Patient Data
The
study included male and female normotensive and hypertensive
dyslipidemic patients ≥
18 years of age of any race.
Patients were excluded if the type or duration of the dyslipidemia
were unknown, or if they refused to participate. Data were recorded
on age, sex, habitat,21 weight, height, BP, type, and
duration of the dyslipidemia,4 family history of
premature cardiovascular disease (women <65 years; men <55
years), and personal history of hypertension for 3 or more months
(average SBP ≥
140 or DBP ≥
90 mm Hg for 2 or more
measurements carried out at 2 or more visits after the first, or
receiving treatment with anti-hypertensive drugs),15,16
smoking (≥
1 cigarette per day per month),22 overweight and
obesity (body mass indices 25-29.9 and ≥
30 kg/m2,
respectively), life style (exercise <30 min 3 times per
week),16 high intake of alcohol (≥
4 beers, ≥
4 glasses of wine
or ≥
2
whiskies, or similar drinks per day),23 hyperuricemia
(≥
7
mg/dL), coronary disease (angina, myocardial infarction, or
revascularization), or similar risk factors (microalbuminuria
30-299 mg/24 h, proteinuria ≥
300 mg/24 h or creatinine
>1.3 mg/dL in men, or >1.2 mg/dL in women),16
stroke, peripheral arterial disease, or diabetes (diagnosed from
the clinical history).4,5,7-9
Cardiovascular Risk and Dyslipidemia Data
Cardiovascular risk (CVR) was considered to be low (<10%) if
there were fewer than 2 CVRF, moderate (10%-20%) if there were 2 or
more CVRF, and high (≥
20%) when there was a history
of coronary disease, or similar risk
factors.4,10,11,13,14 Negative CVRF were considered to
be age ≥
45 years in men and ≥
55 years in women, a personal
history of hypertension, smoking, HDL-C <40 mg/dL, and a family
history of premature cardiovascular disease. HDL-C ≥
60 mg/dL was considered
to be a positive CVRF (subtract 1 CVRF from the general
count).16
The
dyslipidemia was assumed to be well-controlled if the LDL-C was
<160 mg/dL when the CVR was low, <130 mm/dL when it was
moderate, and <100 mg/dL when it was
high.4,10,13
Blood Pressure Data
The
BP was measured on 2 separate occasions for 2 min in a seated
position with recently calibrated mercury, aneroid, or automatic
devices, after 5 min rest.15 Good BP control was
considered to be a SBP <140 mm Hg and DBP <90 mm Hg (<130
and <80 mm Hg if the patient had diabetes, kidney, or
cardiovascular disease).5,15,16
Data on Lipid Lowering and Antihypertensive
Treatment
Data were recorded on whether the patient was taking any
lipid-lowering drugs (statins, fibrates, resins, combinations,
others) or antihypertensive agents (angiotensin converting enzyme
inhibitors, angiotensin II receptor antagonists, calcium
antagonists, diuretics, beta-blockers, alpha-blockers, or
aldosterone blockers), duration of treatment, whether the treatment
was modified or not at the visit, and the reason for modification,
or maintenance of the treatment.
Statistical Analysis
Considering that 10% of the persons included initially would not be
valid for the final analysis, the sample size was estimated to be
7203 patients (4-5 per researcher) to calculate (alpha error: 1%;
precision: 1.5%) the prevalence of good control of the dyslipidemia
found in other studies.24
The
95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated for the variables of
interest, assuming normality and using the exact method for small
proportions.25 Quantitative variables were analyzed with
measures of central trend (mean, median) and dispersion (standard
deviation, 25th percentile, 75th percentile, minimum, and maximum).
Qualitative variables were studied with frequencies and percentages
of each of the possible responses. The means were compared with the
Student t test for independent data. Quantitative data that
did not follow a normal distribution were analyzed with the
Mann-Whitney non-parametric test, and possible associations between
the qualitative variables were studied with the χ
2 test. A
P value less than .05 was considered significant.
Variables associated with poor BP control (SBP ≥
140 mm Hg or DBP
≥
90 mm Hg in
general, and ≥
130 or ≥
80 mm Hg, respectively, if the patient had diabetes,
kidney, or cardiovascular disease5,15,16) were studied
by backward stepwise unconditional logistic regression analysis,
including in the model those variables that were significant in the
univariate analysis, as well as by calculating the odds ratio (OR).
The analyses were carried out with the SPSS program (version
12.0.1).
RESULTS
Description of the Sample and Cardiovascular Risk of the
Patients
Half the patients (50.8%) were male. The mean age of the study
population was 61.3 (11.2) years, though this was older
(P<.001) in the women (63.2 [10.9] years) than the men
(59.4 [11.2] years). Most of the men (90.4%; 95% CI, 89.7-91.1)
were aged 45 years or older and 79.8% (95% CI, 78.9-80.7) of the
women were aged 55 years or older; 40.4% (95% CI, 39.3-41.5) of the
whole sample were aged 65 years or older.
Hypertension was present in 49.6% (95% CI, 48.0-51.2) of the
sample, obesity in 29.1% (95% CI, 28.1-30.1), 26.1% (95% CI,
25.2-27.1) were smokers, 22.8% (95% CI, 21.9-23.7) had a family
history of premature cardiovascular disease and 13.3% (95% CI,
12.5-14.1) had HDL-C levels <40 mg/dL; 67.3% (95% CI, 66.2-68.4)
had a sedentary life style, 52.3% (95% CI, 51.2-53.4) were
overweight, 18.1% (95% CI, 17.2-19.0) had hyperuricemia, and 13.0%
(95% CI, 12.2-13.8) had a high consumption of alcohol. HDL-C
levels ≥
60 mg/dL were present in 29.8% (95% CI, 28.7-30.9) of the
sample.
Forty point three percent (95% CI, 39.2-41.5) had a high CVR, 28.6%
(95% CI, 27.6-29.7) a moderate risk and 31.1% (95% CI, 30.0-32.2) a
low risk; 41.5% (95% CI, 40.4-42.6) had a history of coronary
disease or similar risk factors, with coronary artery disease
present in 21.4% (95% CI, 20.5-22.3), diabetes in 27.3% (95% CI,
26.3-28.3), peripheral arterial disease in 8.0% (95% CI, 7.4-8.6),
and a history of stroke in 5.5% (95% CI, 4.98-6.02) of the
patients.
Control of the Dyslipidemia
Hypercholesterolemia was present in 64.4% of the patients, mixed
dyslipidemia in 26.7%, low HDL-C in 5.2%, and hypertriglyceridemia
in 3.7%; 32.3% of the participants were found to have good control
of their LDL-C.20 LDL-C control fell (P<.001)
with the increase in coronary risk (Figure 1) and was higher
(P<.0001) in those patients with good BP control (43%;
95% CI, 41.2-44.8) than in those with poor BP control (22.4%; 95%
CI, 21.0-23.8).
Figure 1.
Good control of blood pressure and
LDL-C according to the coronary risk of the patient*.
LDL-C indicates low density
lipoprotein cholesterol; BP, blood pressure; CR, coronary
risk.
*Good
control of LDL-C: <160 mg/dL when the coronary risk was low,
<130 mg/dL when the risk was moderate, and <100 mg/dL when it
was high; good control of blood pressure: SBP <140 mm Hg and DBP
<90 mm Hg in general, and SBP <130 mm Hg and DBP <80 mm Hg
in the presence of coronary disease, kidney disease, stroke, or
diabetes.
Blood Pressure Findings
Of
the 7054 dyslipidemic patients, SBP or DBP readings were
unavailable for 113, so that the final study sample included 6941
patients. The mean values for SBP/DBP were 134.6 (14.2)/79.8 (8.9)
mm Hg, with significant differences (P<.001) between the
hypertensive (140.8 [14.6]/82.8 [9.0] mm Hg) and the normotensive
(128.5 [10.7]/76.9 [7.7] mm Hg) patients, and between the patients
with a low CVR (130.1 [11.9]/77.8 [7.9] mm Hg), moderate CVR (137.2
[14.0]/81.7 [8.9] mm Hg) and high CVR (136.3 [15.2]/80.0 [9.3] mm
Hg). The classification of the BP values (6th Report of the Joint
National Committee)15 is shown in Table 2.
Of
the whole dyslipidemic population studied, 47.4% (95% CI,
46.3-48.5) had good BP control. Control of the BP was associated
(P<.001) with control of the LDL-C and the degree of
coronary risk (Figure 1). Poor control was more common
(P<.0001) in men and in patients with a greater body mass
index (Table 3), older age (Figure 2) or a history of diabetes,
kidney, or cardiovascular disease (P<.001); the patients
with hyperuricemia had worse control (36.8%; 95% CI, 35.7-37.9)
than the normouricemic patients (50.4%; 95% CI, 49.2-51.6)
(P<.0001).
Figure 2.
Percentages of patients with good
and poor control of blood pressure by age interval*.
*n=6941 evaluable patients.
Good control: SBP <140 mm Hg and DBP <90 mm Hg in general,
and SBP <130 mm Hg and DBP <80 mm Hg in the presence of
coronary disease, kidney disease, stroke, or diabetes.
Good BP control was found in 29.3% (95% CI, 28.8-29.8) of the
dyslipidemic patients with hypertension (whether or not diabetic),
19.3% (95% CI, 17.5-21.1) of the dyslipidemic patients with
diabetes (normotensive and hypertensive), and in 29.5% (95% CI,
27.5-31.5) of the normotensive dyslipidemic patients with diabetes.
Significant differences (P<.001) were found between the
good control in the dyslipidemic hypertensive patients with
diabetes (12.8%; 95% CI, 12.4-13.2) and without diabetes (38.1%;
95% CI, 37.5-38.7) (Figure 3).
Figure 3.
Percentages of patients with good
and poor control of blood pressure in the overall study population,
patients with hypertension, and diabetic, and non-diabetic
hypertensive patients*.
DM indicates diabetes mellitus, HBP, high blood
pressure.
*n=6941
evaluable patients. Good control: SBP <140 mm Hg and DBP <90
mm Hg in general, and SBP <130 mm Hg and DBP <80 mm Hg in the
presence of coronary disease, kidney disease, stroke, or
diabetes.
Data on Lipid-Lowering and Antihypertensive
Therapy
Of
the patients studied, 80.0% were receiving lipid-lowering drugs,
with statins being the most common agents
(90.8%).20
Fifty-two point five percent of the study subjects and 86.0% of
those with hypertension were receiving some antihypertensive drug
therapy, the most common of which were angiotensin-converting
enzyme inhibitors (30.9%), angiotensin II receptor antagonists
(20.7%), calcium antagonists (12.9%), thyazides (12.5%),
beta-blockers (11.1%), loop diuretics (8.6%), alpha-blockers
(2.4%), and aldosterone blockers (0.9%). The physician had
maintained the same antihypertensive treatment plan in 94.9% of the
visits.
Factors Associated With Poor Control of Blood
Pressure
After the univariate analysis, the factors still remaining in the
model, because their P<.05, were the degree of CVR, poor
control of LDL-C, the body mass index, and age. Poor BP control was
2.9 times more likely when the CVR increased and 1.4 times more
likely in the presence of poor LDL-C control (Table 4).
DISCUSSION
The
LIPICAPPA study was designed to determine the blood pressure
characteristics in a Spanish population with dyslipidemia seen in
the primary care setting. A wide sample of patients was examined,
49.6% of whom had hypertension. The blood pressure was poorly
controlled in over half the patients (52.6%), associated with an
increase in CVR, poor control of LDL-C, and an increase in body
mass index or age (Table 4).
Possible Limitations of the Study
No
random selection of physicians or patients was undertaken in this
study and the results, therefore, may not be strictly applicable to
the overall Spanish dyslipidemic population. Another limitation
concerns the fact that the analysis was undertaken in a Spanish
population using the NCEP-ATP-III criteria, which is based on a
North American population,13,14 to calculate the
coronary risk. Nonetheless, this method seems reasonable as we were
unable to apply the SCORE method for Mediterranean
populations10,11 to persons aged 65 years or older, who
comprised 40.4% of our study sample, and because, as mentioned by
other researchers, the main point in the clinical evaluation of a
patient is to choose the cut-off level to identify a high
risk.20,26
As
our aim was to determine the blood pressure characteristics and the
factors associated with its poor control in a Spanish population
seen in the primary care setting, the sample size obtained was
relatively large and the response was very high, (blood pressure
data were available for 6941 of the 7054 persons), selecting
consecutively just 5 persons per researcher over 1 working week.
However, we consider that the results are reasonably representative
of primary care dyslipidemic patients.
Sample Description
We
examined a homogenous sample of dyslipidemic patients. Their mean
age was 61.3 (11.2) years, there were slightly more men (50.8%),
and a high incidence of hypercholesterolemia (66.4%), overweight
(52.3%), hypertension (49.6%), obesity (29.1%), and diabetes
(27.3%). Four out of every 10 patients (40.4%) were aged 65 years
or older and had a high CVR (40.3%). As this profile is similar to
that found by others,2,4,12,20,24,27-29 we consider that
it corresponds approximately to the dyslipidemic population usually
seen in primary care.
Dyslipidemia Data
We
found good control of the LDL-C in 1 out of 3
patients,20 and that this worsened significantly when
the coronary risk increased (Figure 1). These results are in
agreement with those reported by others who assessed the situation
in a similar population.24,30-32
Blood Pressure Data
The
mean SBP and DBP values in our sample population (134.6 [14.2]/79.8
[8.9] mm Hg) were slightly lower in the systolic component than
those found in other studies carried out in Spain.24,29
We found significant differences (P<.001) between these
mean values in persons with a low CVR (130.1 [11.9]/77.8 [7.9] mm
Hg), moderate CVR (137.2 [14.0]/81.7 [8.9] mm Hg), and high CVR
(136.3 [15.2]/80.0 [9.3] mm Hg). The 3 degrees of CVR showed BP
values that could be considered to fall within the so-called
"prehypertension" stage (120-139/80-89 mm Hg),33 which
appears to increase the risk for coronary
disease.34
We
found good BP control in almost half (47.4%) the study population.
As reported by others in studies involving populations with similar
characteristics,7-9,29,35 control of the BP worsens when
control of LDL-C worsens or there is a rise in CVR (Figure 1), body
mass index or weight (Figure 2). This inverse relation between BP
control and the CVR could account for the poor control found in
hypertensive patients (29.3%), persons with a high CVR (21.2%),
and, especially (Figure 3), in hypertensive diabetic patients
(12.8%). This reduced control of the BP could thus warrant
continued research along these lines in primary care.
We
found poor BP control to be more common in men and older persons
(Figure 2) or those with a greater body mass index (Table 3).
Additionally, we especially noted that the higher CVR (OR=2.89) and
poor control of LDL-C (OR=1.43) were associated (P<.001)
with a greater likelihood of having poor BP control (Table 4).
Other researchers in Spain have also found a direct association
between these variables and the greater incidence of
dyslipidemia36 and poor control of
hypertension.7,8
Although hyperuricemia failed to enter the regression model,
probably due to the greater weight of other factors, 2 out of every
10 patients had hyperuricemia (18.1%) and it was associated
(P<.0001) with a greater likelihood of finding poor
control of the BP. These results agree with those of others finding
that hyperuricemia is a predictive factor for hypertension and that
it is associated with worse BP control and greater
CVR.37-39
Antihypertensive Therapy and Therapeutic Behavior of the
Physician
We
found that over half (52.5%) the patients and almost 9 out of 10
(86.0%) of those with hypertension took some antihypertensive drug.
The most common drugs were angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors
(30.9%) and angiotensin II receptor antagonists (20.7%). These
results are again in agreement with those of other studies carried
out in Spain.6,7
The
physician did not modify the patient's antihypertensive therapy at
94.9% of the visits. This notable therapeutic inertia on behalf of
the physician, much higher than in other
studies,6-8,32,40-42 may be due to the fact that we
examined a dyslipidemic population. However, the high prevalence of
hypertension (49.6%), diabetes (27.3%), and high CVR (40.3%) should
have been reflected in a greater percentage of changes in
antihypertensive drug therapy at the visit. This therapeutic
inertia could also be attributed to the poor application of the
clinical practice guidelines,43 without underestimating
other factors, such as the physician-patient relationship and the
time available per patient visit. These arguments should also
promote further research in primary care on the control of CVRF and
the therapeutic behavior of the physicians.
CONCLUSIONS
Good BP control was found in just under half the Spanish
dyslipidemic patients seen in the primary care setting, one third
of the dyslipidemic patients with hypertension and barely 1 in 10
dyslipidemic patients with hypertension and diabetes. Poor control
of the BP was specially associated with increased CVR and poor
control of the LDL-C.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The
authors are grateful to all the primary care physicians who
participated in this study by providing the information requested
and to Almirall, S.A., for providing the infrastructure required to
carry out the study.
Full English text available from:
www.revespcardiol.org
ABBREVIATIONS
BP: blood
pressure
CVR: cardiovascular
risk
CVRF:
cardiovascular risk factors
*Promoters of the study: Working Groups on Cardiovascular Risk and
Hypertension of the SEMERGEN. A total of 1454 practising primary
care family physicians participated in the study from 17 autonomous
regions in Spain.
This study was undertaken with the unconditioned collaboration of
Laboratorios Almirall, S.A.
Correspondence: Dr. G.C. Rodríguez-Roca.
Avda. de Irlanda, 12, 2.o A. 45005 Toledo.
España.
E-mail:
grodriguezr@semergen.es
Received: January 18, 2007.
Accepted for publication: May 10, 2007.
References
1. Instituto Nacional de Estadística. Defunciones según la causa de muerte 2002. INebase [online] december 2004 [acceded 23 Dec 2004]. Available from: URL: http://www.ine.es/ inebase/ 2. Banegas JR, Villar F, Pérez C, Jiménez R, Gil E, Muñiz J, et al. Estudio epidemiológico de los factores de riesgo cardiovascular en la población española de 35 a 64 años. Rev San Hig Pub. 1993;67:419-45. 3. Cía P, Armario P, Badimón L, Redón J. Hipertensión arterial en el paciente dislipidémico. Hipertensión. 2002;19:222-37. 4. Lapetra J, González JR, Rodríguez GC, Rubio MA, Masana L, Redón J, et al. Detección, diagnóstico y tratamiento de factores de riesgo cardiovascular. En: Castro-Beiras A, Bohigas L, De la Mata I, Infante A, Soria P, Brotons C, et al, editores. Plan Integral de Cardiopatía Isquémica 2004-2007. Madrid: Ministerio de Sanidad y Consumo; 2003. p. 45-58. 5. Sociedad Española de Hipertensión-Liga Española para la lucha contra la Hipertensión Arterial (SEH-LELHA). Guía de diagnóstico y tratamiento de la hipertensión arterial en España 2005. Hipertensión. 2005;22 Suppl 2:1-84. 6. Coca A. Evolución del control de la hipertensión arterial en atención primaria en España. Resultados del estudio Controlpres 2003. Hipertensión. 2005;22:5-14. 7. Llisterri JL, Rodríguez GC, Alonso FJ, Lou S, Divisón JA, Santos JA, et al. Control de la presión arterial en la población hipertensa española atendida en Atención Primaria. Estudio PRESCAP 2002. Med Clin (Barc) 2004;122:165-71.[Medline] 8. Rodríguez Roca GC, Artigao Rodenas LM, Llisterri Caro JL, Alonso Moreno FJ, Banegas Banegas JR, Lou Arnal S, et al. Control de la hipertensión arterial en la población española ≥ 65 años asistida en Atención Primaria. Rev Esp Cardiol. 2005;58: 359-66.[Medline][Artículo] 9. Llisterri Caro JL, Alonso Moreno FJ, Rodríguez Roca G, Barrios Alonso V, Lou Arnal S, Divisón Garrote JA, et al. Control de la presión arterial en la población diabética hipertensa asistida en Atención Primaria. Estudio PRESCAP-Diabetes. Revista Clínica de Cardiología en Atención Primaria. 2006;1:19-30. 10. de Backer G, Ambrosioni E, Borch-Johnsen K, Brotons C, Cifkova R, Dallongeville J, et al; Third Joint Task Force of European and Other Societies on Cardiovascular Disease Prevention in Clinical Practice. European guidelines on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice. Third Joint Task Force of European and Other Societies on Cardiovascular Disease Prevention in Clinical Practice. Eur Heart J. 2003;24:1601-10.[Medline] 11. Brotons C, Royo-Bordonada MA, Álvarez-Sala L, Armario P, Artigao R, Conthe P, et al; Comité Español Interdisciplinario para la Prevención Cardiovascular (CEIPC). Adaptación española de la guía europea de prevención cardiovascular. Rev Esp Salud Pública. 2004;78:435-8. 12. Villar F, Mata P, Plaza I, Pérez F, Maiques A, Casasnovas JA, et al. Control de la colesterolemia en España, 2000. Un instrumento para la prevención cardiovascular. Rev Esp Cardiol. 2000;53: 815-37.[Medline][Artículo] 13. Executive Summary of the Third Report of The National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP). Expert Panel on Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Cholesterol In Adults Human (Adult Treatment Panel III). JAMA. 2001;285:2486-97.[Medline] 14. Grundy SM, Cleeman JI, Merz CN, Brewer HB Jr, Clark LT, Hunninghake DB, et al; National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; American College of Cardiology Foundation; American Heart Association. Implications of recent clinical trials for the National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III guidelines. Circulation. 2004;110:227-39.[Medline] 15. Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure. The sixth report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure (JNC VI). Arch Intern Med. 1997;157:2413-46.[Medline] 16. 2003 European Society of Hypertension-European Society of Cardiology. Guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension. J Hypertens. 2003;21:1011-53.[Medline] 17. Baena JM, del Val JL, Tomás J, Martínez JL, Martín R, González I, et al. Epidemiología de las enfermedades cardiovasculares y factores de riesgo en atención primaria. Rev Esp Cardiol. 2005; 58:367-73.[Medline][Artículo] 18. Medrano MJ, Cerrato E, Boix R, Delgado-Rodríguez M. Factores de riesgo cardiovascular en la población española: metaanálisis de estudios transversales. Med Clin (Barc). 2005;124:606-12.[Medline][Artículo] 19. Banegas JR, Rodríguez-Artalejo F, de la Cruz JJ, De Andrés B, Rey J. Mortalidad relacionada con la hipertensión y la presión arterial en España. Med Clin (Barc). 1999;112:489-94.[Medline][Artículo] 20. Rodríguez-Roca GC, Llisterri JL, Barrios V, Alonso-Moreno FJ, Banegas JR, Lou S, et al. Grado de control de la dislipemia en los pacientes españoles asistidos en Atención Primaria. Estudio LIPICAP. Clin Invest Arterioscl. 2006;18:226-38. 21. Instituto Nacional de Estadística (INE). Censos de Población y viviendas 1991. Madrid: Instituto Nacional de Estadística; 1991. 22. Organización Mundial de la Salud (OMS). Consecuencias del tabaco para la salud. Informe técnico n.º 568. Geneva: OMS; 1974. 23. Anderson P, Cremona A, Paton A, Turner Ch, Wallace P. The risk of alcohol. Addiction. 1993;88:1493-1508.[Medline] 24. Banegas JR, Vegazo O, Serrano P, Luengo E, Mantilla T, Fernández R, et al; HISPALIPID Study Group Investigators. The gap between dyslipidemia control perceived by physicians and objective control patterns in Spain. Atherosclerosis. 2006;188:420-4.[Medline] 25. Altman DG, Machin D, Bryant TN, Gardner MJ, editors. Statistics with confidence. 2nd ed. London: British Medical Journal; 2000. 26. Ramos R, Marrugat J. Valoración del riesgo cardiovascular en la población. En: Del Río A, De Pablo C, editores. Manual de cardiología preventiva. Madrid: SMC; 2005. p. 44-6. 27. de la Peña A, Suárez C, Cuende I, Muñoz M, Garré J, Camafort M, et al; Grupo estudio CIFARC; Grupo Riesgo Vascular SEMI. Control integral de los factores de riesgo en pacientes de alto y muy alto riesgo cardiovascular en España. Estudio CIFARC. Med Clin (Barc). 2005;124:44-9.[Artículo] 28. Aranda P, Rodicio JL, Luque M, Banegas JR, Barajas R, Aranda FJ, et al. Cholesterol levels in untreated Spanish hypertensive patients. The Compas Study Group, Spanish Hypertension Society. Blood Press. 1999;8:273-8.[Medline] 29. Álvarez-Sala LA, Suárez C, Mantilla T, Franch J, Ruilope LM, Banegas JR, et al. Estudio PREVENCAT: control del riesgo cardiovascular en atención primaria. Med Clin (Barc). 2005;124: 406-10.[Medline][Artículo] 30. Pearson TA, Laurora I, Chu H, Kafonek S. The Lipid Treatment Assessment Project (L-TPC). A multivariate survey to evaluate the percentages of dyslipidemic patients receiving lipid-lowering therapy and achieving low-density lipoprotein cholesterol goals. Arch Intern Med. 2000;160:459-67.[Medline] 31. Schwandt P, Brady AJ. Achieving lipid goals in Europe: how large is the treatment gap? Expert Rev Cardiovasc Ther. 2004;2: 431-49. 32. van Ganse E, Laforest L, Alemao E, Davies G, Gutkin S, Yin D. Lipid-modifying therapy and attainment of cholesterol goals in Europe: the Return on Expenditure Achieved for Lipid Therapy (REALITY) study. Curr Med Res Opin. 2005;21:1389-99.[Medline] 33. Chobanian AV, Bakris GL, Black HR, Cushman WC, Green LA, Izzo JL, et al. The Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation and Treatment of High Blood Pressure: The JNC 7 Report. JAMA. 2003;289:2560-72.[Medline] 34. Qureshi AI, Suri MF, Kirmani JF, Divani AA, Mohammad Y. Is prehypertension a risk factor for cardiovascular diseases? Stroke. 2005;36:1859-63. 35. Barrios V, Llisterri JL, Calderón A, Alegría E, Muñiz J, Matalí A, et al. Blood pressure and lipid control rates according to the risk profile in a hypertensive population attended in primary care. The PRESCOT study. J Hypertens. 2005;23 Suppl 2:S84. 36. Vegazo O, Banegas JR, Civeira F, Serrano Aisa PL, Jiménez FJ, Luengo E, en representación de los investigadores del Estudio HISPALIPID. Prevalencia de dislipemia en las consultas ambulatorias del Sistema Nacional de Salud: Estudio HISPALIPID. Med Clin (Barc). 2006;127:331-4.[Medline][Artículo] 37. Campo C, García Puig J, Segura J, Alcázar JM, García-Robles R, Ruilope LM. Relación entre la gravedad de la hipertensión arterial esencial y la prevalencia de hiperuricemia. Med Clin (Barc). 2001;117:85-9.[Medline][Artículo] 38. Fang J, Alderman MH. Serum uric acid and cardiovascular mortality the NHANES I epidemiologic follow-up study, 1971-1992. National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. JAMA. 2000;283:2404-10.[Medline] 39. Nagahama K, Inoue T, Iseki K, Kinjo K, Ohya Y, Takishita S. Hyperuricemia as a predictor of hypertension in a screened cohort in Okinawa, Japan. Hypertens Res. 2004;27:835-41.[Medline] 40. Alonso FJ, Divisón JA, Llisterri JL, Rodríguez GC, Lou S, Banegas JR, et al. Conducta del médico de atención primaria ante el mal control de la presión arterial. Aten Primaria. 2005;36:204-10.[Medline][Artículo] 41. Rodríguez Roca GC, Aznar Costa J, Llisterri Caro JL, Alonso Moreno FJ, Lou Arnal S, División Garrote JA, et al. Control de la presión arterial en los pacientes con insuficiencia cardíaca asistidos en Atención Primaria. Estudio CARDIOPRES 2004. Revista Clínica de Cardiología en Atención Primaria (RCAP). 2006;1:15-27. 42. de Velasco JA, Cosín J, López-Sendón JL, de Teresa E, de Oya M, Sellers G. Nuevos datos sobre la prevención secundaria del infarto de miocardio en España. Resultados del estudio PREVESE II. Rev Esp Cardiol. 2002;55:801-9.[Medline][Artículo] 43. González-Juanatey JR, Alegría-Ezquerra E, Aznar-Costa J, Bertomeu-Martínez V, Franch-Nadal J, Palma-Gámiz JL. Conocimiento y aplicación de las guías de práctica clínica sobre riesgo cardiovascular en las consultas generales y especializadas. Rev Esp Cardiol. 2006;59:801-6.[Medline][Artículo]
|
|
|
| |
(c) Copyright 1997 -
Spanish Society of Cardiology
We recommend viewing this site in:
MS Explorer v6.0, Firefox v2.0 or higher. |
|