Rowena J Dolor

Effectiveness-Based Guidelines for the Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease in Women—2011 Update: A Guideline From the American Heart Association

Substantial progress has been made in the awareness, treatment, and prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in women since the first women-specific clinical recommendations for the prevention of CVD were published by the American Heart Association (AHA) in 1999.1 The myth that heart disease is a “mans disease” has been debunked; the rate of public awareness of CVD as the leading cause of death among US women has increased from 30% in 1997 to 54% in 2009.2 The age-adjusted death rate resulting from coronary heart disease (CHD) in females, which accounts for about half of all CVD deaths in women, was 95.7 per 100 000 females in 2007, a third of what it was in 1980.3,4 Approximately 50% of this decline in CHD deaths has been attributed to reducing major risk factors and the other half to treatment of CHD including secondary preventive therapies.4 Major randomized controlled clinical trials such as the Womens Health Initiative have changed the practice of CVD prevention in women over the past decade.5 The investment in combating this major public health issue for women has been significant, as have the scientific and medical achievements. Despite the gains that have been made, considerable challenges remain. In 2007, CVD still caused ≈1 death per minute among women in the United States.6 These represent 421 918 deaths, more womens lives than were claimed by cancer, chronic lower respiratory disease, Alzheimer disease, and accidents combined.6 Reversing a trend of the past 4 decades, CHD death rates in US women 35 to 54 years of age now actually appear to be increasing, likely because of the effects of the obesity epidemic.4 CVD rates in the United States are significantly higher for black females compared with their white counterparts (286.1/100 000 versus …

Outcomes of Anatomical versus Functional Testing for Coronary Artery Disease

BACKGROUND Many patients have symptoms suggestive of coronary artery disease (CAD) and are often evaluated with the use of diagnostic testing, although there are limited data from randomized trials to guide care. METHODS We randomly assigned 10,003 symptomatic patients to a strategy of initial anatomical testing with the use of coronary computed tomographic angiography (CTA) or to functional testing (exercise electrocardiography, nuclear stress testing, or stress echocardiography). The composite primary end point was death, myocardial infarction, hospitalization for unstable angina, or major procedural complication. Secondary end points included invasive cardiac catheterization that did not show obstructive CAD and radiation exposure. RESULTS The mean age of the patients was 60.8±8.3 years, 52.7% were women, and 87.7% had chest pain or dyspnea on exertion. The mean pretest likelihood of obstructive CAD was 53.3±21.4%. Over a median follow-up period of 25 months, a primary end-point event occurred in 164 of 4996 patients in the CTA group (3.3%) and in 151 of 5007 (3.0%) in the functional-testing group (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.04; 95% confidence interval, 0.83 to 1.29; P=0.75). CTA was associated with fewer catheterizations showing no obstructive CAD than was functional testing (3.4% vs. 4.3%, P=0.02), although more patients in the CTA group underwent catheterization within 90 days after randomization (12.2% vs. 8.1%). The median cumulative radiation exposure per patient was lower in the CTA group than in the functional-testing group (10.0 mSv vs. 11.3 mSv), but 32.6% of the patients in the functional-testing group had no exposure, so the overall exposure was higher in the CTA group (mean, 12.0 mSv vs. 10.1 mSv; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS In symptomatic patients with suspected CAD who required noninvasive testing, a strategy of initial CTA, as compared with functional testing, did not improve clinical outcomes over a median follow-up of 2 years. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; PROMISE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01174550.).

ACCF/ASE/AHA/ASNC/HFSA/HRS/SCAI/SCCM/SCCT/SCMR 2011 Appropriate Use Criteria for Echocardiography

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1128 Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1128

Twelve-Year Follow-Up of American Women’s Awareness of Cardiovascular Disease Risk and Barriers to Heart Health

Background—Awareness of cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk has been linked to taking preventive action in women. The purpose of this study was to assess contemporary awareness of CVD risk and barriers to prevention in a nationally representative sample of women and to evaluate trends since 1997 from similar triennial surveys. Methods and Results—A standardized survey about awareness of CVD risk was completed in 2009 by 1142 women ≥25 years of age, contacted through random digit dialing oversampled for racial/ethnic minorities, and by 1158 women contacted online. There was a significant increase in the proportion of women aware that CVD is the leading cause of death since 1997 (P for trend=<0.0001). Awareness among telephone participants was greater in 2009 compared with 1997 (54% versus 30%, P<0.0001) but not different from 2006 (57%). In multivariate analysis, African American and Hispanic women were significantly less aware than white women, although the gap has narrowed since 1997. Only 53% of women said they would call 9-1-1 if they thought they were having symptoms of a heart attack. The majority of women cited therapies to prevent CVD that are not evidence-based. Common barriers to prevention were family/caretaking responsibilities (51%) and confusion in the media (42%). Community-level changes women thought would be helpful were access to healthy foods (91%), public recreation facilities (80%), and nutrition information in restaurants (79%). Conclusions—Awareness of CVD as the leading cause of death among women has nearly doubled since 1997 but is stabilizing and continues to lag in racial/ethnic minorities. Numerous misperceptions and barriers to prevention persist and women strongly favored environmental approaches to facilitate preventive action.

Representation of Women in Randomized Clinical Trials of Cardiovascular Disease Prevention

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of mortality in women. Differences in pathophysiology, diagnosis, and treatment of women with cardiovascular disease compared with men have become a major focus during the past decades. Guideline of CVD prevention in women drew heavily on the results of randomized clinical trials (RCT). However, data from RCT in women was limited, leading to concerns of women been underrepresented in clinical trials from which guidelines were generated. During the past several years, researchers, physicians, and regulators have made substantial efforts to improve understanding of the sex difference in CVD and to recognize the importance of heart disease in women. The purpose of this review is to evaluate contemporary sex differences in CVD disease management, current representation of women in RCT, and examine factors that may improve women’s representation and quality of care in CVD prevention in women.

Effect of Home Testing of International Normalized Ratio on Clinical Events

BACKGROUND Warfarin anticoagulation reduces thromboembolic complications in patients with atrial fibrillation or mechanical heart valves, but effective management is complex, and the international normalized ratio (INR) is often outside the target range. As compared with venous plasma testing, point-of-care INR measuring devices allow greater testing frequency and patient involvement and may improve clinical outcomes. METHODS We randomly assigned 2922 patients who were taking warfarin because of mechanical heart valves or atrial fibrillation and who were competent in the use of point-of-care INR devices to either weekly self-testing at home or monthly high-quality testing in a clinic. The primary end point was the time to a first major event (stroke, major bleeding episode, or death). RESULTS The patients were followed for 2.0 to 4.75 years, for a total of 8730 patient-years of follow-up. The time to the first primary event was not significantly longer in the self-testing group than in the clinic-testing group (hazard ratio, 0.88; 95% confidence interval, 0.75 to 1.04; P=0.14). The two groups had similar rates of clinical outcomes except that the self-testing group reported more minor bleeding episodes. Over the entire follow-up period, the self-testing group had a small but significant improvement in the percentage of time during which the INR was within the target range (absolute difference between groups, 3.8 percentage points; P<0.001). At 2 years of follow-up, the self-testing group also had a small but significant improvement in patient satisfaction with anticoagulation therapy (P=0.002) and quality of life (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS As compared with monthly high-quality clinic testing, weekly self-testing did not delay the time to a first stroke, major bleeding episode, or death to the extent suggested by prior studies. These results do not support the superiority of self-testing over clinic testing in reducing the risk of stroke, major bleeding episode, and death among patients taking warfarin therapy. (Funded by the Department of Veterans Affairs Cooperative Studies Program; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00032591.).

Two self-management interventions to improve hypertension control: a randomized trial.

In this trial, 636 patients with hypertension were randomly assigned to receive usual care; a telephone-delivered, nurse-administered behavioral self-management intervention; home blood pressure se...

Clinical Practice Guideline: Acute Otitis Externa

OBJECTIVE: This guideline provides evidence-based recommendations to manage diffuse acute otitis externa (AOE), defined as generalized inflammation of the external ear canal, which may also involve the pinna or tympanic membrane. The primary purpose is to promote appropriate use of oral and topical antimicrobials and to highlight the need for adequate pain relief. STUDY DESIGN: In creating this guideline, the American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery Foundation (AAO-HNSF) selected a development group representing the fields of otolaryngology-head and neck surgery, pediatrics, family medicine, infectious disease, internal medicine, emergency medicine, and medical informatics. The guideline was created with the use of an explicit, a priori, evidence-based protocol. RESULTS: The group made a strong recommendation that management of AOE should include an assessment of pain, and the clinician should recommend analgesic treatment based on the severity of pain. The group made recommendations that clinicians should: 1) distinguish diffuse AOE from other causes of otalgia, otorrhea, and inflammation of the ear canal; 2) assess the patient with diffuse AOE for factors that modify management (nonintact tympanic membrane, tympanostomy tube, diabetes, immunocompromised state, prior radiotherapy); and 3) use topical preparations for initial therapy of diffuse, uncomplicated AOE; systemic antimicrobial therapy should not be used unless there is extension outside of the ear canal or the presence of specific host factors that would indicate a need for systemic therapy. The group made additional recommendations that: 4) the choice of topical antimicrobial therapy of diffuse AOE should be based on efficacy, low incidence of adverse events, likelihood of adherence to therapy, and cost; 5) clinicians should inform patients how to administer topical drops, and when the ear canal is obstructed, delivery of topical preparations should be enhanced by aural toilet, placing a wick, or both; 6) when the patient has a tympanostomy tube or known perforation of the tympanic membrane, the clinician should prescribe a nonototoxic topical preparation; and 7) if the patient fails to respond to the initial therapeutic option within 48 to 72 hours, the clinician should reassess the patient to confirm the diagnosis of diffuse AOE and to exclude other causes of illness. And finally, the panel compiled a list of research needs based on limitations of the evidence reviewed. CONCLUSION: This clinical practice guideline is not intended as a sole source of guidance in evaluating patients with AOE. Rather, it is designed to assist clinicians by providing an evidence-based framework for decision-making strategies. It is not intended to replace clinical judgment or establish a protocol for all individuals with this condition and may not provide the only appropriate approach to the diagnosis and management of this problem. SIGNIFICANCE: This is the first, explicit, evidence-based clinical practice guideline on acute otitis externa, and the first clinical practice guideline produced independently by the AAO-HNSF.

Hypertension Improvement Project. Randomized Trial of Quality Improvement for Physicians and Lifestyle Modification for Patients

Despite widely publicized hypertension treatment guidelines for physicians and lifestyle recommendations for patients, blood pressure control rates remain low. In community-based primary care clinics, we performed a nested, 2×2 randomized, controlled trial of physician intervention versus control and/or patient intervention versus control. Physician intervention included internet-based training, self-monitoring, and quarterly feedback reports. Patient intervention included 20 weekly group sessions followed by 12 monthly telephone counseling contacts and focused on weight loss, Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension dietary pattern, exercise, and reduced sodium intake. The primary outcome was change in systolic blood pressure at 6 months. Eight primary care practices (32 physicians) were randomized to physician intervention or control groups. Within those practices, 574 patients were randomized to patient intervention or control groups. Patient mean age was 60 years, 61% were women, and 37% were black. Blood pressure data were available for 91% of patients at 6 months. The main effect of physician intervention on systolic blood pressure at 6 months, adjusted for baseline pressure, was 0.3 mm Hg (95% CI: −1.5 to 2.2; P=0.72). The main effect of the patient intervention was −2.6 mm Hg (95% CI: −4.4 to −0.7; P=0.01). The interaction of the 2 interventions was significant (P=0.03); the largest impact was observed with the combination of physician and patient intervention (−9.7±12.7 mm Hg). Differences between treatment groups did not persist at 18 months. Combined physician and patient interventions lowers blood pressure; future research should focus on enhancing effectiveness and sustainability of these interventions.

Physician Empathy and Listening: Associations with Patient Satisfaction and Autonomy

Purpose: Motivational Interviewing (MI) is used to help patients change their behaviors. We sought to determine if physician use of specific MI techniques increases patient satisfaction with the physician and perceived autonomy. Methods: We audio-recorded preventive and chronic care encounters between 40 primary care physicians and 320 of their overweight or obese patients. We coded use of MI techniques (eg, empathy, reflective listening). We assessed patient satisfaction and how much the patient felt the physician supported him or her to change. Generalized estimating equation models with logit links were used to examine associations between MI techniques and patient perceived autonomy and satisfaction. Results: Patients whose physicians were rated as more empathic had higher rates of high satisfaction than patients whose physicians were less empathic (29% vs 11%; P = .004). Patients whose physicians made any reflective statements had higher rates of high autonomy support than those whose physicians did not (46% vs 30%; P = .006). Conclusions: When physicians used reflective statements, patients were more likely to perceive high autonomy support. When physicians were empathic, patients were more likely to report high satisfaction with the physician. These results suggest that physician training in MI techniques could potentially improve patient perceptions and outcomes.