Skip to main content

Gender differences in hospital admissions for cardiovascular events and procedures in people with and without diabetes

An article published in the journal Cardiovascular Diabetology examines gender differences in hospital admissions for major cardiovascular events and procedures in people with and without diabetes.

Secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) has improved immensely during the past few decades but controversies persist about the cardiovascular benefits among women with diabetes. We investigated 11-year trends in hospital admission rates for acute myocardial infarction (AMI), stroke, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), and coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) in people with and without diabetes by gender in England.

We found that diabetes-related admission rates remained unchanged for AMI, increased for stroke by 2% and for PCI by 3%; and declined for CABG by 3% annually. Trends did not differ significantly by diabetes status. Women with diabetes had significantly lower rates of AMI and stroke compared with men with diabetes. However, gender differences in admission rates for AMI attenuated in diabetes compared with the non-diabetic group.

While diabetes tripled admission rates for AMI in men, it increased it by over four-fold among women. Furthermore, while the presence of diabetes was associated with a three-fold increase in rates for PCI and a five-fold increase in rates for CABG in men; among women, diabetes was associated with a 4.4-fold increased admission rates for PCI and 6.2-fold increased rates for CABG. Proportional changes in rates were similar in men and women for all study outcomes, leaving the relative risk of admissions largely unchanged.

We concluded that diabetes still confers a greater increase in risk of hospital admission for AMI in women relative to men. However, the absolute risk remains higher in men. These results call for intensified CVD risk factor management among people with diabetes, consideration of gender-specific treatment targets, and treatment intensity to be aligned with levels of CVD risk.

https://doi.org/10.1186/s12933-017-0580-0

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

What is the difference between primordial prevention and primary prevention?

Primordial prevention and primary prevention are both crucial strategies for promoting health, but they operate at different levels. Primordial prevention aims to address the root causes of health problems and improve the wider determinants of health. It focuses on preventing the emergence of risk factors in the first place by tackling the underlying social, economic, and environmental determinants of health. This involves broad, population-wide interventions such as: Policies that promote healthy food choices: Think about initiatives like taxing sugary drinks to discourage unhealthy consumption, or providing subsidies for fruits and vegetables to make them more accessible. Urban planning that prioritises well-being: This could include creating walkable neighborhoods with safe cycling routes, ensuring access to green spaces for recreation and relaxation, and designing communities that foster social connections. Social programs that address inequality: Initiatives aimed at reducing pov...
Post a Comment
Read more

What makes a good doctor – and who gets to decide?

What Makes a Good Doctor? This is the question that Waseem Jerjes and I explore in the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine . It is a key question that underpins the architecture of medical education, clinical practice, regulation, and professional identity. It cannot be answered by regulators, educators, or employers in isolation. It must be answered together – by doctors and patients – revisited throughout a career, and adapted as society and the profession change. Without that shared reflection, the danger is not simply disillusionment, but the erosion of the moral foundations of clinical work. As we enter an era when diagnosis will increasingly involve artificial intelligence and when performance metrics reward volume over value, reclaiming this question as a professional one is imperative. The integrity of our institutions – and of the practitioners within them – depends on reimagining excellence in inclusive, relational terms. A good doctor is not a flawless technician or a f...
Post a Comment
Read more

MPH Student Presentations on the NHS Care.Data Programme

As part of a session on primary care data in the Health Informatics module on the Imperial Master of Public Health Programme, I asked students to work in two groups to present arguments for and against the NHS Care.Data programme. Care.Data is an NHS programme that will extract data from the medical records held by general practitioners (GPs) in England. The Care.Data programme takes advantage of the very high level of use of electronic medical records by GPs in England. After extraction, data will be uploaded to the NHS Health and Social Care Information Centre (HSCIC). The data will then be used for functions such as health care planning, monitoring disease patterns and research. The programme has been controversial with proponents arguing that the programme will bring many benefits for the NHS and the population of England; and opponents arguing it is a major breach of privacy. You can view the two presentations to help inform you further about these arguments: Arguments fo...
5 comments
Read more