Cross-sectional study reveals sex- and age-specific cardiovascular risk disparities in a peri-urban population, highlighting the need for tailored public health interventions.
Background Non-communicable diseases (NCDs) are chronic, non-transmissible conditions, with cardiovascular diseases (CVDs), cancer, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) accounting for 80% of NCD-related deaths. Their prevalence and associated risk factors vary across populations based on lifestyle, environment, ethnicity, and gender. Urbanization influences physical activity levels and increases exposure to tobacco, alcohol, and processed foods. This study examined selected NCD risk factors among males (n=50) and females (n=50) in the peri-urban community of KwaDlangezwa. Methods A cross-sectional study was conducted using the WHO STEPwise approach. Data collection followed three steps: (1) sociodemographic and health behaviour assessments, (2) anthropometric measurements, and (3) blood parameter evaluations. Statistical analyses included descriptive statistics and Fisher's exact test for categorical associations. Variables assessed included body mass (BM), waist-to-hip ratio (WHR), blood pressure (BP), total cholesterol (TC), and glucose levels. Results Significant gender differences emerged: males had higher systolic blood pressure (126.28 ± 15.01 mmHg vs. 114.32 ± 22.02 mmHg, p=0.000) and WHR (0.80 ± 0.07 vs. 0.74 ± 0.06, p=0.000), while females exhibited higher total cholesterol (3.26 ± 0.65 mmol/L vs. 2.90 ± 0.53 mmol/L, p=0.000). Key risk factors included overweight/obesity (38%), hypertension (12%), and high waist circumference (21%), with overweight more prevalent among females (46% vs. 30%) and younger individuals (≤25 years, 50.87%, p=0.00). Conclusion These findings underscore the urgent need for gender- and age-sensitive public health interventions aimed at reducing modifiable physiological risk factors, particularly overweight, abdominal obesity, and hypertension, in peri-urban communities.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Breukelman et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: