Research article
Cardiovascular disease risk reduction in the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2004.03.008Get rights and content

Abstract

Background

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk-reduction practices are suboptimal in populations at high risk for CVD, and this problem may be worse in women than in men.

Methods

In 2003, CVD risk-reduction practices were compared between men and women after stratification by CVD risk status (high, intermediate, low) in a cross-sectional analysis of the 1999 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS), a random-digit telephone survey of state population-based samples of the civilian non-institutionalized population of adults. This analysis included persons aged >40 years who answered questions regarding lipid and blood pressure screening, recommendations for lifestyle modification, that is, exercise and reduced fat intake, and aspirin use. Risk status was defined according to Adult Treatment Panel III definitions.

Results

In the 97,387 adults included in this analysis, high CVD risk was associated with lipid and blood pressure screening, lifestyle modification, and aspirin use in both men and women compared to intermediate-risk and low-risk (p <0.001). Among high-risk adults, men and women reported similar frequency of blood pressure and cholesterol measurement and physician advice on lifestyle modification; among intermediate- and low-risk adults, women reported slightly more frequent screening and lifestyle modification than men (p <0.001). In all CVD risk categories, women reported significantly less aspirin use than in men (p <0.001).

Conclusions

Among people at high risk for CVD, women report lifestyle modification more often than men, while men report use of aspirin more often than women. These findings may assist with targeting interventions to reduce CVD risk to the unique needs of men and women.

Introduction

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the primary cause of mortality and morbidity in the United States.1 Mortality and morbidity can be reduced by therapies for CVD risk factors, such as hypertension2 and dyslipidemia,3 or through the use of aspirin.4 Consequently, multiple medical societies, including the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force,5, 6, 7 American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology,8, 9, 10, 11, 12 and American Diabetes Association13 have endorsed guidelines addressing these risk factors. These CVD risk-reduction practices vary with the amount of CVD risk, or CVD risk status. For high-risk patients, or patients with a previous history of CVD or diabetes, CVD risk-reduction practices involve at least annual measurement of lipids, blood pressure, and discussion of aspirin therapy, along with lifestyle recommendations for diet and exercise. For patients at intermediate or low risk for CVD events, CVD risk-reduction practices are based on the actual degree of CVD risk.

Unfortunately, multiple population-based studies indicate that CVD risk-reduction practices are suboptimal, even in populations at high CVD risk.14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 This problem may be worse in women.20 Women may undergo diagnostic testing21 and revascularization for coronary disease22 at lower rates compared to men, and it is possible that the mechanisms that produce gender disparities in these areas could lead to gender disparities in other CVD risk-reduction practices as well. Such mechanisms include different patterns of comorbid illness23, 24 between women and men and resulting indications for therapy, and under-recognition of CVD risk by women25 and their clinicians.26

However, the association between gender and appropriate CVD risk-reduction practices is unclear. Several studies suggest that women may receive more or similar intensive screening and treatment for CVD risk factors than men,27, 28, 29 while other studies suggest that women receive less.30, 31, 32, 33 There are several possible explanations for the conflicting results. First, CVD risk-reduction practices could vary between healthcare systems, and gender-associated differences could exist in one system and not another. Second, gender comparisons need to adjust for CVD risk status, since CVD risk-reduction practices are based on CVD risk. Unadjusted comparisons may have obscured any gender differences in some studies, especially those in people at lower CVD risk who did not have a diagnosis of a CVD event or diabetes to “trigger” appropriate risk-reduction practices. Third, since women may be more frequent users of the healthcare system,34 gender differences in CVD risk-reduction practices may occur more frequently for practices that focus on behavior outside the office such as aspirin use, compared to preventive clinical services delivered within the healthcare system. Finally, healthcare practices evolve with time and it is possible that any disparities documented in the early 1990s may have since narrowed.35

Therefore, given the somewhat conflicting results of previous studies examining gender differences in CVD risk-reduction practices, the association between gender and several CVD risk-reduction practices in 97,387 participants in the 1999 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) was examined.36 The primary hypothesis was that after adjustment for CVD risk status, men would report greater frequency of CVD risk-reduction practices than women. In other words, after adjustment for CVD risk status, men would report lipid and blood pressure monitoring, receipt of physician advice to exercise and eat less fat and cholesterol, aspirin use, and exercising and eating less fat and cholesterol more often than women.

Section snippets

Data sources and collection procedures

The BRFSS is a federally funded survey designed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and implemented in collaboration with state health departments. Random-digit-dial methods were used to derive a probability sample of households with telephones to collect data on health-related behaviors and risk factors for non-institutionalized civilians aged ≥18 years.

The BRFSS has a set of core questions asked by all of the states (called “core”), and a set of optional questions used by

Results

Of the 97,387 participants, 38,839 were men and 58,548 were women. Characteristics of men and women are illustrated in Table 1. Women were slightly older, more often African American, less educated, and had lower incomes than men. Women also reported a greater number of days of poor physical health and more recent checkups than men. A greater proportion of men were at high CVD risk (Table 1).

Table 2 shows the unadjusted prevalences of CVD risk-reduction practices in men and women, stratified by

Discussion

In this analysis, the frequency of CVD risk-reduction practices increased with CVD risk. However, not all CVD risk-reduction practices were performed optimally. While cholesterol and blood pressure measurements were performed for the majority of people at high risk for CVD, only about three quarters of people at high risk reported lifestyle modification, and only about half used aspirin. In addition, despite literature suggesting that women may experience fewer and less frequent CVD

Acknowledgements

CK received funding via an American Diabetes Association Junior Faculty Award.

References (58)

  • Executive summary of the third report of the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) Expert Panel on Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol in Adults (Adult Treatment Panel III)

    JAMA

    (2001)
  • Collaborative overview of randomised trials of antiplatelet therapyprevention of death, myocardial infarction, and stroke by prolonged antiplatelet therapy in various categories of patients

    BMJ

    (1994)
  • Screening for high blood pressurerecommendations and rationale

    Am J Prev Med

    (2003)
  • Screening for lipid disordersrecommendations and rationale

    Am J Prev Med

    (2001)
  • Aspirin for the primary prevention of cardiovascular eventsrecommendations and rationale

    Ann Intern Med

    (2001)
  • S.J. Smith et al.

    AHA/ACC Scientific StatementAHA/ACC guidelines for preventing heart attack and death in patient with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease: 2001 update: a statement for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association and the American College of Cardiology

    Circulation

    (2001)
  • T. Pearson et al.

    AHA guidelines for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease and stroke. 2002 UpdateConsensus Panel Guide to Comprehensive Risk Reduction for Adult Patients without Coronary or Other Atherosclerotic Vascular Diseases. American Heart Association Science Advisory and Coordinating Committee

    Circulation

    (2002)
  • P. Thompson et al.

    Exercise and physical activity in the prevention and treatment of atherosclerotic cardiovascular diseasea statement from the Council of Clinical Cardiology (Subcommittee on Exercise, Rehabilitation, and Prevention) and the Council on Nutrition, Physical Activity, and Metabolism (Subcommitee on Physical Activity)

    Circulation

    (2003)
  • R. Krauss et al.

    AHA dietary guidelines. Revision 2000a statement for healthcare professionals from the Nutrition Committee of the American Heart Association

    Circulation

    (2000)
  • L. Mosca et al.

    Guide to preventive cardiology for women

    Circulation

    (1999)
  • J. Colwell

    Aspirin for primary prevention of cardiovascular events in diabetes

    Diabetes Care

    (2003)
  • A. Qureshi et al.

    Ineffective secondary prevention in survivors of cardiovascular events in the U.S. populationreport from the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey

    Arch Intern Med

    (2001)
  • J. Saadine et al.

    A diabetes report card for the United Statesquality of care in the 1990s

    Ann Intern Med

    (2002)
  • R. Stafford

    Aspirin use is low among United States outpatients with coronary artery disease

    Circulation

    (2000)
  • L. Egede et al.

    Modifiable cardiovascular risk factors in adults with diabetesprevalence and missed opportunities for physician counseling

    Arch Intern Med

    (2002)
  • D. Hyman et al.

    Characteristics of patients with uncontrolled hypertension in the United States

    N Engl J Med

    (2001)
  • Kim C, Hofer T, Kerr E. Review of evidence and explanations for suboptimal screening and treatment of dyslipidemia in...
  • K. Schulman et al.

    The effect of race and sex on physicians' recommendations for cardiac catheterization

    N Engl J Med

    (1999)
  • J. Ayanian et al.

    Differences in the use of procedures between women and men hospitalized for coronary heart disease

    N Engl J Med

    (1991)
  • Cited by (49)

    • Clinical gout

      2015, Rheumatology: Sixth Edition
    • Correlates of Self-Care Behaviors among Low-Income Elderly Women with Hypertension in South Korea

      2014, JOGNN - Journal of Obstetric, Gynecologic, and Neonatal Nursing
    • Role of ASA in the primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular events

      2012, Best Practice and Research: Clinical Gastroenterology
      Citation Excerpt :

      In the 1980s, the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved aspirin in patients with prior myocardial infarction (MI) or unstable angina (UA) [4] and for men with prior transient ischaemic attacks (TIAs) [5]. In a US survey of 97.387 people aged >40 years, 34.8% of men and 26.2% of women used aspirin every day or every other day [6]. Nowadays, aspirin continues to attract heated debates on a number of issues including the balance of benefits and risks in primary vs. secondary prevention in cardiovascular diseases, the optimal dose to maximize efficacy and minimize toxicity; the possibility that some patients may be resistant to its antiplatelet effects.

    • Use of Antithrombotic Agents Among U.S. Stroke Survivors, 2000-2006

      2010, American Journal of Preventive Medicine
      Citation Excerpt :

      Since 1999, professional guidelines1–3 have recommended the use of the following antithrombotic agents to prevent recurrent ischemic stroke: aspirin (an antiplatelet agent available over-the-counter without a prescription), prescription antiplatelet agents, or prescription anticoagulant agent. Large surveys4–15 of the U.S. population have reported the use of aspirin for secondary prevention, but most surveys combine people with stroke and those with coronary artery disease and only rarely do they report the use of antithrombotic agents other than aspirin.8 Stroke survivors who use prescription antithrombotic medications may be advised not to take aspirin.16

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text