Background: Cardiovascular disease (CVD) remains the primary cause for death and disability in Pakistan, yet consistent data estimating its impact is limited. Method: Utilizing the Global Burden of Disease tool, we analyzed CVD metrics like prevalence, incidence, DALYs, mortality, and associated risk factors spanning from 1990-2019, categorized by age, gender, year, and region. Results are shown in both absolute numbers and age-standardized rates (ASR) per 100,000 person-years. Results: From 1990-2019, the annual percentage change (APC) witnessed a rise in prevalence by 106% (from 4.1 to 8.6 million), deaths by 98% (from 172,525 to 341,108), and DALYs by 119% (from 4.5 to 9.8 million). When assessed through age-standardized rates (ASR), incidence rates grew by 8% (from 852 to 918), deaths by 9% (from 329 to 357), and DALYs by 9% (from 7326 to 7988). In 2019, ischemic heart disease dominated as the top cause of CVD deaths, constituting 53.76% (183,409 out of 341,108). Over the past 30 years, Balochistan emerged as the most adversely affected state. The age bracket of 70-74 saw the maximum CVD fatalities at 41,848, while the 60-64 age group recorded the highest incidence at 135,376. Men experienced a more pronounced CVD impact than women over these three decades. High blood pressure stood out as the primary cause of CVD-related deaths in Pakistan, trailed by elevated LDL cholesterol levels. Conclusion: CVD accounted for 22.74% deaths amongst all cause of deaths in Pakistan in 2019. From a clinician's perspective, the escalating prevalence and incidence of CVD emphasize the need for early detection, intervention, and tailored treatments, especially in high-risk demographics like older males. From a public health standpoint, these findings underscore the urgency to implement broad-based preventive strategies, focusing on modifiable risk factors such as high blood pressure and LDL cholesterol, and to bolster healthcare infrastructure, particularly in severely affected regions like Balochistan.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hassan et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: