Exploring sex-based differences in patient outcomes: A secondary analysis of Heartwatch, an Irish cardiovascular secondary prevention programme

IF 1.9 Q3 PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE
Ivana Keenan , Fintan Stanley , Robyn Homeniuk , Joseph Gallagher , Michael O'Callaghan , Claire Collins
{"title":"Exploring sex-based differences in patient outcomes: A secondary analysis of Heartwatch, an Irish cardiovascular secondary prevention programme","authors":"Ivana Keenan ,&nbsp;Fintan Stanley ,&nbsp;Robyn Homeniuk ,&nbsp;Joseph Gallagher ,&nbsp;Michael O'Callaghan ,&nbsp;Claire Collins","doi":"10.1016/j.ijcrp.2025.200376","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>In the last two decades, sex-related differences regarding cardiovascular diagnosis, treatment, and risk factors management have been reported. The current study aims to explore differences in cardiovascular outcomes among male and female patients attending the Irish secondary cardiovascular prevention programme - Heartwatch.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>This is a retrospective observational study. Anonymous data was extracted from the Heartwatch database from 2003 to 2017. Cardiovascular risk factors were analysed at sign-up and at four years follow-ups. An 8-point aggregate risk score (CCare Score) was assessed to calculate targeted outcomes. Generalized estimating equations models were applied for data analysis.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>In total 8893 patients (77 % male) were included. Females exhibited a higher risk profile across all cardiovascular risk factors and were more likely to be off target than males at baseline and after 4 years of programme attendance [M to F odds ratios(95 % CI); systolic blood pressure: 1.35 (1.21–1.49), waist circumference: 2.11(1.89–2.36), physical activity: 1.72 (1.53–1.95)]. CCare scores also demonstrated the gap between male and female patients at baseline [mean(sd); M: 5.1(1.2), F: 4.8(1.2)] and after 4 years of structured care [mean(sd); M: 5.3(1.2), F: 4.9(1.2)]. Female patients were less likely to be prescribed aspirin and ACE inhibitors but more likely to be prescribed AT2 inhibitors, calcium channel blockers, and diuretics compared to male patients.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>The Heartwatch programme has demonstrably improved patient care, however, the continuous underperformance of female patients necessitates further investigation to ensure appropriate and equitable secondary CVD prevention among the Irish population.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":29726,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Cardiology Cardiovascular Risk and Prevention","volume":"24 ","pages":"Article 200376"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Cardiology Cardiovascular Risk and Prevention","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772487525000145","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

In the last two decades, sex-related differences regarding cardiovascular diagnosis, treatment, and risk factors management have been reported. The current study aims to explore differences in cardiovascular outcomes among male and female patients attending the Irish secondary cardiovascular prevention programme - Heartwatch.

Methods

This is a retrospective observational study. Anonymous data was extracted from the Heartwatch database from 2003 to 2017. Cardiovascular risk factors were analysed at sign-up and at four years follow-ups. An 8-point aggregate risk score (CCare Score) was assessed to calculate targeted outcomes. Generalized estimating equations models were applied for data analysis.

Results

In total 8893 patients (77 % male) were included. Females exhibited a higher risk profile across all cardiovascular risk factors and were more likely to be off target than males at baseline and after 4 years of programme attendance [M to F odds ratios(95 % CI); systolic blood pressure: 1.35 (1.21–1.49), waist circumference: 2.11(1.89–2.36), physical activity: 1.72 (1.53–1.95)]. CCare scores also demonstrated the gap between male and female patients at baseline [mean(sd); M: 5.1(1.2), F: 4.8(1.2)] and after 4 years of structured care [mean(sd); M: 5.3(1.2), F: 4.9(1.2)]. Female patients were less likely to be prescribed aspirin and ACE inhibitors but more likely to be prescribed AT2 inhibitors, calcium channel blockers, and diuretics compared to male patients.

Conclusions

The Heartwatch programme has demonstrably improved patient care, however, the continuous underperformance of female patients necessitates further investigation to ensure appropriate and equitable secondary CVD prevention among the Irish population.
探讨患者结局的性别差异:爱尔兰心血管二级预防项目“心脏观察”的二级分析
在过去的二十年中,关于心血管诊断、治疗和危险因素管理的性别相关差异已被报道。目前的研究旨在探讨参加爱尔兰二级心血管预防计划-心脏观察的男性和女性患者心血管结果的差异。方法回顾性观察性研究。匿名数据是从2003年至2017年的“心脏观察”数据库中提取的。在注册时和四年随访时分析心血管危险因素。评估8分的总风险评分(CCare评分)以计算目标结果。采用广义估计方程模型进行数据分析。结果共纳入8893例患者,其中男性77%。女性在所有心血管危险因素中表现出更高的风险状况,并且在基线和4年后,女性比男性更有可能偏离目标[M对F优势比(95% CI);收缩压:1.35(1.21-1.49),腰围:2.11(1.89-2.36),体力活动:1.72(1.53-1.95)]。CCare评分也显示了男性和女性患者在基线时的差距[平均(sd);男:5.1(1.2),女:4.8(1.2)]和经过4年的结构化护理[mean(sd);M: 5.3(1.2), f: 4.9(1.2)]。与男性患者相比,女性患者较少使用阿司匹林和ACE抑制剂,但更有可能使用AT2抑制剂、钙通道阻滞剂和利尿剂。结论:心脏观察项目明显改善了患者护理,然而,女性患者的持续表现不佳需要进一步调查,以确保爱尔兰人口中适当和公平的继发性心血管疾病预防。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
72 days
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信