Why the study?
Does a later time period with more favorable risk factors and aggressive treatment reduce total CHD incidence compared to an earlier historical cohort in middle-aged men?
Does a later time period with more favorable risk factors and aggressive treatment reduce total CHD incidence compared to an earlier historical cohort in middle-aged men?
The observed decline in coronary heart disease mortality over time may reflect a shift from fatal to non-fatal events rather than a true reduction in total disease incidence.
Lower CHD mortality without fewer total events suggests shift to non-fatal cases; leaves open whether modern care reduces overall incidence.
OBJECTIVES: A marked, sequential decline in coronary heart disease (CHD) mortality is established, but not its causes. Does it reflect modern treatment effects or a spinoff of primary prevention? The aim of this study was to explore this issue using a prospective cohort follow-up design. DESIGN: In 1972-1975 and 1980-1982 Cohorts 1 (n = 613) and 2 (n = 667) of identical age (males, mean 56 years) were examined, and thereafter followed closely for 14 years. CHD risk- and treatment patterns, incidence of non-fatal myocardial infarctions (MIs) and total-, cardiovascular and CHD mortality rates were studied. RESULTS: CHD risk factors were more favourable, medical treatment more aggressive and 14-years CHD mortality, as expected, lower in Cohort 2 (7.7%/4.8%, p = 0.032). However, hospital- and prospective ECG data revealed opposite trends in non-fatal cohort CHD incidence, and aggregated numbers of CHD deaths and non-fatal MI cases were 16.7%/16.0% in Cohort 1/2 (p = 0.90). CONCLUSIONS: A marked, sequential reduction in CHD mortality was followed by a reciprocal increase in non-fatal MIs. This phenomenon may prevail in low CHD-endemic areas, and may call for altered primary preventive measures for reduction in total CHD incidence.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Knut Liestøl Gunnar Erikssen (2000) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: