Umidakhon Makhmudova, Michaela Wolf, Kathy Willfeld, Lea Beier, Oliver Weingärtner
{"title":"[高胆固醇血症的一级和二级预防：PROCYON试验中与患者护理相关的差异]。","authors":"Umidakhon Makhmudova, Michaela Wolf, Kathy Willfeld, Lea Beier, Oliver Weingärtner","doi":"10.1055/a-2117-6504","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Cardiovascular disease accounts for one third of deaths in Germany. Elevated levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) are considered a major risk factor. Lowering LDL-C levels is therefore an integral part of the prevention of cardiovascular events.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The aim of this work is to identify potential differences between primary prevention (PP) and secondary prevention (SP) by means of a post-hoc comparison of cross-sectional data from the PROCYON survey. Medical history, concomitant diseases, adherence, and disease awareness in relation to hypercholesterolemia were queried.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>5,494 patients had participated in the survey (PP: 3,798; SP: 1,696). Comparison of the results showed a numerically higher proportion of women (PP 70.7% vs. SP 42.5%) as well as more frequent comorbidities such as hypertension (PP 45.6% vs. SP 61.0%), obesity (PP 20.9% vs. SP 27.4%), and type 2 diabetes mellitus (PP 14.1% vs. SP 23.8%). In primary prevention, hypercholesterolemia was most often diagnosed during screening (PP 74.6%), and in secondary prevention, the diagnosis was most often made during cardiovascular-related hospitalization (SP 58.0%). A cardiologist was consulted by 16.3% (PP) and 54.0% (SP) of patients, respectively. At least semiannual LDL-C checks (PP 46.8% vs. SP 77.9%) and drug intervention (PP 43.0% vs. SP 87.0%) were more frequent in the secondary prevention group. In addition, differences in the implementation of lifestyle changes, improvement of LDL-C levels, adjustment of therapy as well as adherence, treatment satisfaction and patient knowledge were observed.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The comparison of primary and secondary prevention from the PROCYON survey shows overall better utilization of treatment options and higher intensity of care in the secondary prevention group. However, there is still great potential for improvement in both groups to ensure efficient prevention of cardiovascular events.</p>","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10946085/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"[Primary and secondary prevention in hypercholesterolemia: differences relevant to patient care in the PROCYON trial].\",\"authors\":\"Umidakhon Makhmudova, Michaela Wolf, Kathy Willfeld, Lea Beier, Oliver Weingärtner\",\"doi\":\"10.1055/a-2117-6504\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Cardiovascular disease accounts for one third of deaths in Germany. Elevated levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) are considered a major risk factor. Lowering LDL-C levels is therefore an integral part of the prevention of cardiovascular events.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The aim of this work is to identify potential differences between primary prevention (PP) and secondary prevention (SP) by means of a post-hoc comparison of cross-sectional data from the PROCYON survey. Medical history, concomitant diseases, adherence, and disease awareness in relation to hypercholesterolemia were queried.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>5,494 patients had participated in the survey (PP: 3,798; SP: 1,696). Comparison of the results showed a numerically higher proportion of women (PP 70.7% vs. SP 42.5%) as well as more frequent comorbidities such as hypertension (PP 45.6% vs. SP 61.0%), obesity (PP 20.9% vs. SP 27.4%), and type 2 diabetes mellitus (PP 14.1% vs. SP 23.8%). In primary prevention, hypercholesterolemia was most often diagnosed during screening (PP 74.6%), and in secondary prevention, the diagnosis was most often made during cardiovascular-related hospitalization (SP 58.0%). A cardiologist was consulted by 16.3% (PP) and 54.0% (SP) of patients, respectively. At least semiannual LDL-C checks (PP 46.8% vs. SP 77.9%) and drug intervention (PP 43.0% vs. SP 87.0%) were more frequent in the secondary prevention group. In addition, differences in the implementation of lifestyle changes, improvement of LDL-C levels, adjustment of therapy as well as adherence, treatment satisfaction and patient knowledge were observed.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The comparison of primary and secondary prevention from the PROCYON survey shows overall better utilization of treatment options and higher intensity of care in the secondary prevention group. However, there is still great potential for improvement in both groups to ensure efficient prevention of cardiovascular events.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":0,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10946085/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2117-6504\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/8/21 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2117-6504","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/8/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
[Primary and secondary prevention in hypercholesterolemia: differences relevant to patient care in the PROCYON trial].
Background: Cardiovascular disease accounts for one third of deaths in Germany. Elevated levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) are considered a major risk factor. Lowering LDL-C levels is therefore an integral part of the prevention of cardiovascular events.
Methods: The aim of this work is to identify potential differences between primary prevention (PP) and secondary prevention (SP) by means of a post-hoc comparison of cross-sectional data from the PROCYON survey. Medical history, concomitant diseases, adherence, and disease awareness in relation to hypercholesterolemia were queried.
Results: 5,494 patients had participated in the survey (PP: 3,798; SP: 1,696). Comparison of the results showed a numerically higher proportion of women (PP 70.7% vs. SP 42.5%) as well as more frequent comorbidities such as hypertension (PP 45.6% vs. SP 61.0%), obesity (PP 20.9% vs. SP 27.4%), and type 2 diabetes mellitus (PP 14.1% vs. SP 23.8%). In primary prevention, hypercholesterolemia was most often diagnosed during screening (PP 74.6%), and in secondary prevention, the diagnosis was most often made during cardiovascular-related hospitalization (SP 58.0%). A cardiologist was consulted by 16.3% (PP) and 54.0% (SP) of patients, respectively. At least semiannual LDL-C checks (PP 46.8% vs. SP 77.9%) and drug intervention (PP 43.0% vs. SP 87.0%) were more frequent in the secondary prevention group. In addition, differences in the implementation of lifestyle changes, improvement of LDL-C levels, adjustment of therapy as well as adherence, treatment satisfaction and patient knowledge were observed.
Conclusion: The comparison of primary and secondary prevention from the PROCYON survey shows overall better utilization of treatment options and higher intensity of care in the secondary prevention group. However, there is still great potential for improvement in both groups to ensure efficient prevention of cardiovascular events.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
