Search

Introduction: The aim of this paper is to investigate what factors are associated to cardiovascular disease and what differences exists between Asians living in the UK (from the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing) and the Asians living in India (from the Longitudinal Ageing Study in India). Methods: Logistic regression was used to investigate how demographic and physical performance factors were associated with cardiovascular disease using data from Wave 6 of the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing and Wave 1 of the Longitudinal Study of Ageing in India, with the main variable of interest being country of residence, Asians in England or Asians in India. Results: A total of 83,997 participants were included in the analyses. In the primary analysis, 73,396 participants from LASI were compared to 171 Asians in ELSA. After adjusting for age, blood pressure, resting heart rate, sex, waist circumference, gait, handgrip strength and standing balance, there was a statistically significant difference for the outcome of CVD between Whites ELSA (reference) and the participants of LASI (odds ratio = 0.77; 95% confidence interval = 0.60 to 0.99). There were no significant differences in CVD between the LASI participants, Asian ELSA, and the Non-White but not Asian ELSA groups. Discussion: No difference was found between Asians that live in India compared to ethnic minorities living in England, including Asians, after adjusting for confounders, but was found between Whites in ELSA compared to LASI participants. A key limitation was the massive disparity in sample sizes between the ELSA subgroups and LASI. Further work is required where comparable sample sizes and longitudinal analyses allow trends to be identified and to investigate the factors associated with the difference in CVD between two similar ethnicities living in distinct locations. Conclusion: After adjusting for risk factors, there was no difference in CVD between localised Asians and the ethnic minorities in the UK, but there was a difference between the majority ethnicities in the respective countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To provide quantitative evidence for systematically prioritising individuals for full formal cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk assessment using primary care records with a novel tool (eHEART) with age- and sex- specific risk thresholds. Methods and analysis: eHEART was derived using landmark Cox models for incident CVD with repeated measures of conventional CVD risk predictors in 1,642,498 individuals from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink. Using 119,137 individuals from UK Biobank, we modelled the implications of initiating guideline-recommended statin therapy using eHEART with age- and sex-specific prioritisation thresholds corresponding to 5% false negative rates to prioritise adults aged 40–69 years in a population in England for invitation to a formal CVD risk assessment. Results: Formal CVD risk assessment on all adults would identify 76% and 49% of future CVD events amongst men and women respectively, and 93 (95% CI: 90, 95) men and 279 (95% CI: 259, 297) women would need to be screened (NNS) to prevent one CVD event. In contrast, if eHEART was first used to prioritise individuals for formal CVD risk assessment, we would identify 73% and 47% of future events amongst men and women respectively, and a NNS of 75 (95% CI: 72, 77) men and 162 (95% CI: 150, 172) women. Replacing the age- and sex-specific prioritisation thresholds with a 10% threshold identify around 10% less events. Conclusions: The use of prioritisation tools with age- and sex-specific thresholds could lead to more efficient CVD assessment programmes with only small reductions in effectiveness at preventing new CVD events. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]