Search

The secondary prevention (SP) of coronary heart disease (CHD) has become a major public health and economic burden worldwide. In the United States, the prevalence of CHD has risen to 18 million, the incidence of recurrent myocardial infarctions (MI) remains high, and related healthcare costs are projected to double by 2035. In the last decade, practice guidelines and performance measures for the SP of CHD have increasingly emphasized evidence-based lifestyle (LS) interventions, including healthy dietary patterns, regular exercise, smoking cessation, weight management, depression screening, and enrollment in cardiac rehabilitation. However, data show large gaps in adherence to healthy LS behaviors and low rates of enrollment in cardiac rehabilitation in patients with established CHD. These gaps may be related, since behavior change interventions have not been well integrated into traditional ambulatory care models in the United States. The chronic care model, an evidence-based practice framework that incorporates clinical decision support, self-management support, team-care delivery and other strategies for delivering chronic care is well suited for both chronic CHD management and prevention interventions, including those related to behavior change. This article reviews the evidence base for LS interventions for the SP of CHD, discusses current gaps in adherence, and presents strategies for closing these gaps via evidence-based and emerging interventions that are conceptually aligned with the elements of the chronic care model.

The exercise treadmill test (ETT) in women has been limited by a low positive predictive value (PPV) for coronary artery disease (CAD). However, the reliability of previous studies was unsatisfactory because of the inclusion of younger women with a low prevalence of CAD. To further evaluate the diagnostic properties of the ETT in women, we evaluated a group of women with chest pain who had a positive ETT result and subsequent coronary angiography. Of the 111 women, 56 had significant CAD on angiogram, yielding a PPV of 51% for the group. However, inclusion in the analysis of several pretest attributes and specific exercise test responses improved the PPV of the ETT. Age had a major effect, with the youngest group (35 to 50 years old) having a PPV of 36% compared to 68% in the oldest group (65 years old). Several specific exercise responses (ST-segment depression2 mm and delayed ST-segment recovery3.0 minutes) further separated true from false positives across all age groups, increasing the PPV to approximately 80%. Onset of ischemia at a relatively low cardiac workload of80% maximum predicted heart rate was not a significant predictor. In conclusion, the standard ETT should remain the test of choice in ambulatory women with chest pain and no significant abnormalities on baseline electrocardiogram especially in those65 years of age.