Why the study?
Coronary artery disease has shown an alarming increase in the developing world, especially South Asia, prompting investigation of four conventional risk factors in tertiary care hospitals in Nepal.
Conventional modifiable risk factors, particularly smoking and hypertension, are highly prevalent among CAD patients in Nepal, emphasizing the need for targeted preventive strategies.
May guide regional CAD prevention in Nepal; leaves open validation in larger controlled studies.
Coronary artery disease (CAD) has shown a remarkable decline in the developed world in past few years, but has shown an alarming increase in the developing world especially South Asia. The aim of the study was to investigate four conventional risk factors: Hypertension, diabetes mellitus, dyslipidemia and smoking in patients with coronary heart disease in tertiary care hospitals of Pokhara valley, Nepal. 100 patients with CAD who were admitted in the wards and coronary care unit (CCU) participated in the study. Their demographic information was noted. Height, weight and blood pressure were recorded with standard methods. Blood glucose and lipid profile were estimated after 12 hours of fasting overnight. Risk factors were determined using the measurements, laboratory values and also from the past history of the same illness and medications if any. SPSS-16 was used for statistical analysis. Mean age of the patients was 64.61±11.363 years with minimum age 40 and maximum 94 years. Overall distribution of risk factors in descending order was smoking (55%), hypertension (50%), dyslipidemia (49%) and diabetes mellitus (32%). Distribution of risk factors was maximum in the age group 55-69 years. This study shows that most of the patients with coronary heart disease have conventional risk factors and they play a major role in the development of the disease. Beside the four modifiable risk factors, our study also shows that age and gender can be major contributors of the disease which can’t be modified.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Adhikari et al. (2019) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: