Nancy Houston Miller

AHA Guidelines for Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease and Stroke: 2002 Update Consensus Panel Guide to Comprehensive Risk Reduction for Adult Patients Without Coronary or Other Atherosclerotic Vascular Diseases

The initial Guide to the Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Diseases was published in 1997 as an aid to healthcare professionals and their patients without established coronary artery disease or other atherosclerotic diseases.1 It was intended to complement the American Heart Association (AHA)/American College of Cardiology (ACC) Guidelines for Preventing Heart Attack and Death in Patients with Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease (updated2) and to provide the healthcare professional with a comprehensive approach to patients across a wide spectrum of risk. The imperative to prevent the first episode of coronary disease or stroke or the development of aortic aneurysm and peripheral arterial disease remains as strong as ever because of the still-high rate of first events that are fatal or disabling or require expensive intensive medical care. The evidence that most cardiovascular disease is preventable continues to grow. Results of long-term prospective studies consistently identify persons with low levels of risk factors as having lifelong low levels of heart disease and stroke.3,4⇓ Moreover, these low levels of risk factors are related to healthy lifestyles. Data from the Nurses Health Study,5 for example, suggest that in women, maintaining a desirable body weight, eating a healthy diet, exercising regularly, not smoking, and consuming a moderate amount of alcohol could account for an 84% reduction in risk, yet only 3% of the women studied were in that category. Clearly, the majority of the causes of cardiovascular disease are known and modifiable. This 2002 update of the Guide acknowledges a number of advances in the field of primary prevention since 1997. Research continues to refine the recommendations on detection and management of established risk factors, including evidence against the safety and efficacy of interventions once thought promising (eg, antioxidant vitamins).6 This, in turn, has …

Efficacy and Safety of Exercise Training in Patients With Chronic Heart Failure: HF-ACTION Randomized Controlled Trial

CONTEXT Guidelines recommend that exercise training be considered for medically stable outpatients with heart failure. Previous studies have not had adequate statistical power to measure the effects of exercise training on clinical outcomes. OBJECTIVE To test the efficacy and safety of exercise training among patients with heart failure. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS Multicenter, randomized controlled trial of 2331 medically stable outpatients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction. Participants in Heart Failure: A Controlled Trial Investigating Outcomes of Exercise Training (HF-ACTION) were randomized from April 2003 through February 2007 at 82 centers within the United States, Canada, and France; median follow-up was 30 months. INTERVENTIONS Usual care plus aerobic exercise training, consisting of 36 supervised sessions followed by home-based training, or usual care alone. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Composite primary end point of all-cause mortality or hospitalization and prespecified secondary end points of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality or cardiovascular hospitalization, and cardiovascular mortality or heart failure hospitalization. RESULTS The median age was 59 years, 28% were women, and 37% had New York Heart Association class III or IV symptoms. Heart failure etiology was ischemic in 51%, and median left ventricular ejection fraction was 25%. Exercise adherence decreased from a median of 95 minutes per week during months 4 through 6 of follow-up to 74 minutes per week during months 10 through 12. A total of 759 patients (65%) in the exercise training group died or were hospitalized compared with 796 patients (68%) in the usual care group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.93 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 0.84-1.02]; P = .13). There were nonsignificant reductions in the exercise training group for mortality (189 patients [16%] in the exercise training group vs 198 patients [17%] in the usual care group; HR, 0.96 [95% CI, 0.79-1.17]; P = .70), cardiovascular mortality or cardiovascular hospitalization (632 [55%] in the exercise training group vs 677 [58%] in the usual care group; HR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.83-1.03]; P = .14), and cardiovascular mortality or heart failure hospitalization (344 [30%] in the exercise training group vs 393 [34%] in the usual care group; HR, 0.87 [95% CI, 0.75-1.00]; P = .06). In prespecified supplementary analyses adjusting for highly prognostic baseline characteristics, the HRs were 0.89 (95% CI, 0.81-0.99; P = .03) for all-cause mortality or hospitalization, 0.91 (95% CI, 0.82-1.01; P = .09) for cardiovascular mortality or cardiovascular hospitalization, and 0.85 (95% CI, 0.74-0.99; P = .03) for cardiovascular mortality or heart failure hospitalization. Other adverse events were similar between the groups. CONCLUSIONS In the protocol-specified primary analysis, exercise training resulted in nonsignificant reductions in the primary end point of all-cause mortality or hospitalization and in key secondary clinical end points. After adjustment for highly prognostic predictors of the primary end point, exercise training was associated with modest significant reductions for both all-cause mortality or hospitalization and cardiovascular mortality or heart failure hospitalization. TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00047437.

2013 AHA/ACC Guideline on Lifestyle Management to Reduce Cardiovascular Risk

This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

AHA/ACC Guidelines for Preventing Heart Attack and Death in Patients With Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease: 2001 Update A Statement for Healthcare Professionals From the American Heart Association and the American College of Cardiology

Since the original publication (in 1995) of the American Heart Association (AHA) consensus statement on secondary prevention, which was endorsed by the American College of Cardiology (ACC), important evidence from clinical trials has emerged that further supports the merits of aggressive risk reduction therapies for patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. As noted in that statement, aggressive risk factor management clearly improves patient survival, reduces recurrent events and the need for interventional procedures, and improves the quality of life for these patients. The compelling evidence from recent clinical trials was the impetus …

Call to action on use and reimbursement for home blood pressure monitoring: a joint scientific statement from the American Heart Association, American Society Of Hypertension, and Preventive Cardiovascular Nurses Association.

Home blood pressure monitoring (HBPM) overcomes many of the limitations of traditional office blood pressure (BP) measurement and is both cheaper and easier to perform than ambulatory BP monitoring. Monitors that use the oscillometric method are currently available that are accurate, reliable, easy to use, and relatively inexpensive. An increasing number of patients are using them regularly to check their BP at home, but although this has been endorsed by national and international guidelines, detailed recommendations for their use have been lacking. There is a rapidly growing literature showing that measurements taken by patients at home are often lower than readings taken in the office and closer to the average BP recorded by 24-hour ambulatory monitors, which is the BP that best predicts cardiovascular risk. Because of the larger numbers of readings that can be taken by HBPM than in the office and the elimination of the white-coat effect (the increase of BP during an office visit), home readings are more reproducible than office readings and show better correlations with measures of target organ damage. In addition, prospective studies that have used multiple home readings to express the true BP have found that home BP predicts risk better than office BP (Class IIa; Level of Evidence A). This call-to-action article makes the following recommendations: (1) It is recommended that HBPM should become a routine component of BP measurement in the majority of patients with known or suspected hypertension; (2) Patients should be advised to purchase oscillometric monitors that measure BP on the upper arm with an appropriate cuff size and that have been shown to be accurate according to standard international protocols. They should be shown how to use them by their healthcare providers; (3) Two to 3 readings should be taken while the subject is resting in the seated position, both in the morning and at night, over a period of 1 week. A total of >or=12 readings are recommended for making clinical decisions; (4) HBPM is indicated in patients with newly diagnosed or suspected hypertension, in whom it may distinguish between white-coat and sustained hypertension. If the results are equivocal, ambulatory BP monitoring may help to establish the diagnosis; (5) In patients with prehypertension, HBPM may be useful for detecting masked hypertension; (6) HBPM is recommended for evaluating the response to any type of antihypertensive treatment and may improve adherence; (7) The target HBPM goal for treatment is <135/85 mm Hg or <130/80 mm Hg in high-risk patients; (8) HBPM is useful in the elderly, in whom both BP variability and the white-coat effect are increased; (9) HBPM is of value in patients with diabetes, in whom tight BP control is of paramount importance; (10) Other populations in whom HBPM may be beneficial include pregnant women, children, and patients with kidney disease; and (11) HBPM has the potential to improve the quality of care while reducing costs and should be reimbursed.

Effects of exercise training on health status in patients with chronic heart failure: HF-ACTION randomized controlled trial.

CONTEXT Findings from previous studies of the effects of exercise training on patient-reported health status have been inconsistent. OBJECTIVE To test the effects of exercise training on health status among patients with heart failure. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS Multicenter, randomized controlled trial among 2331 medically stable outpatients with heart failure with left ventricular ejection fraction of 35% or less. Patients were randomized from April 2003 through February 2007. INTERVENTIONS Usual care plus aerobic exercise training (n = 1172), consisting of 36 supervised sessions followed by home-based training, vs usual care alone (n = 1159). Randomization was stratified by heart failure etiology, which was a covariate in all models. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) overall summary scale and key subscales at baseline, every 3 months for 12 months, and annually thereafter for up to 4 years. The KCCQ is scored from 0 to 100 with higher scores corresponding to better health status. Treatment group effects were estimated using linear mixed models according to the intention-to-treat principle. RESULTS Median follow-up was 2.5 years. At 3 months, usual care plus exercise training led to greater improvement in the KCCQ overall summary score (mean, 5.21; 95% confidence interval, 4.42 to 6.00) compared with usual care alone (3.28; 95% confidence interval, 2.48 to 4.09). The additional 1.93-point increase (95% confidence interval, 0.84 to 3.01) in the exercise training group was statistically significant (P < .001). After 3 months, there were no further significant changes in KCCQ score for either group (P = .85 for the difference between slopes), resulting in a sustained, greater improvement overall for the exercise group (P < .001). Results were similar on the KCCQ subscales, and no subgroup interactions were detected. CONCLUSIONS Exercise training conferred modest but statistically significant improvements in self-reported health status compared with usual care without training. Improvements occurred early and persisted over time. TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00047437.

The Multilevel Compliance Challenge: Recommendations for a Call to Action A Statement for Healthcare Professionals

Despite the universally accepted importance of compliance, strategies known for more than two decades to be effective are not routinely incorporated into clinical practice. For the benefits of primary and secondary prevention to be realized in diverse population groups and settings, emphasis must be placed on implementing strategies at the patient, provider, and organization levels. Current knowledge of compliance strategies, if integrated into a multilevel approach, offers enormous promise for decreasing risk and improving patient outcomes.

Practice Guideline2013 AHA/ACC Guideline on Lifestyle Management to Reduce Cardiovascular Risk: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines☆

This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

Cigarette Smoking, Cardiovascular Disease, and Stroke A Statement for Healthcare Professionals From the American Heart Association

As many as 30% of all coronary heart disease (CHD) deaths in the United States each year are attributable to cigarette smoking, with the risk being strongly dose-related.1 2 Smoking also nearly doubles the risk of ischemic stroke.3 Smoking acts synergistically with other risk factors, substantially increasing the risk of CHD.4 Smokers are also at increased risk for peripheral vascular disease, cancer, chronic lung disease, and many other chronic diseases. Cigarette smoking is the single most alterable risk factor contributing to premature morbidity and mortality in the United States, accounting for approximately 430 000 deaths annually.5 Numerous prospective investigations have demonstrated a substantial decrease in CHD mortality for former smokers compared with continuing smokers.6 This diminution in risk occurs relatively soon after cessation of smoking, and increasing intervals since the last cigarette smoked are associated with progressively lower mortality rates from CHD.7 Similar rapid decreases in risk with smoking cessation are also seen for ischemic stroke.8 9 Benefits from quitting are seen in former smokers even after many years of heavy smoking.2 Investigations also have demonstrated benefits from cessation for smokers who have already developed smoking-related diseases or symptoms. Persons with diagnosed CHD experience as much as a 50% reduction in risk of reinfarction, sudden cardiac death, and total mortality if they quit smoking after the initial infarction.10 11 Furthermore, the patient who has recently developed a clinical illness is very motivated to change, and several studies have shown that intervention in this “teachable moment” can be very effective. Thus, the provision of smoking cessation advice is associated with a 50% long-term (more than 1 year) smoking cessation rate in patients who have been hospitalized with a coronary event, and even modest telephone-based counseling can increase this percentage to ≥70% in …

Secondary Prevention of Coronary Heart Disease in the Elderly (With Emphasis on Patients ≥75 Years of Age) An American Heart Association Scientific Statement From the Council on Clinical Cardiology Subcommittee on Exercise, Cardiac Rehabilitation, and Prevention

The overall aging of the American population and improving survival of patients with coronary heart disease (CHD) has created a large population of older adults (≥65 years of age) eligible for secondary prevention. The prevalence of chronic ischemic heart disease in men and women ≥65 years of age in the United States in 1995 was 83 per 1000 men and 90 per 1000 women. Among those ≥75 years of age, the prevalences were 217 per 1000 for men and 129 per 1000 for women.1 Increasing evidence has accumulated over the past 2 decades that elderly individuals with CHD can benefit greatly from exercise training and other aspects of secondary prevention.2 Traditionally, components of secondary prevention programming (including exercise; smoking cessation; management of dyslipidemia, hypertension, diabetes, and weight; and interventions directed at depression, social isolation, return to work, and other psychosocial issues) have been provided by the clinician in the office setting or through cardiac rehabilitation programs. Cardiac rehabilitation programs are particularly well suited to the provision of secondary prevention services, but unfortunately, many older patients who would derive benefit from these interventions do not participate because of lack of referral or a variety of societal and other barriers.3 It is the purpose of this Scientific Statement to provide an update on the benefits of specific secondary prevention risk factor interventions in this age group and, where possible, to delineate benefits in the older elderly (≥75 years of age). An increased awareness on the part of physicians, nurses, third-party payers, and patients and their families of the benefits of secondary prevention programs to older adults will provide a basis for referral and aid in the implementation of such programming. The clinical manifestations of CHD in older patients represent the effects of the disease superimposed on the physiological effects …