Publications (2)2.71 Total impact
-
Article: [Gender and ischemic heart disease].
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Physiological and pathological processes differ in men and women, depending on factors such as sex and sociological and anthropological characteristics. However, many diseases are still approached from a masculine point of view. In this respect, ischemic heart disease is one of the diseases that most clearly reflects biological differences and social inequalities. In women, the disease presents at a more advanced age, and presentation is frequently atypical with a higher prevalence of comorbidities and greater severity. Consequently, treatment and outcome differ from those in men. Additionally, women differ in their knowledge, and beliefs regarding ischemic heart disease, as well as in their attitudes at symptom onset. Therefore, clinical practice should place significant emphasis on all these aspects in order to avoid inequalities between men and women in the correct diagnosis, treatment, prevention, and rehabilitation of ischemic heart disease.Gaceta Sanitaria 02/2004; 18 Suppl 2:55-64. · 1.33 Impact Factor -
Article: [Comparison of population coronary heart disease risk estimated by the Framingham original and REGICOR calibrated functions].
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The therapeutic consequences of using the Framingham function calibrated by the REGICOR and Framingham investigators (Framingham-REGICOR) in the Spanish population are unknown. The objective of this study was to determine the differences in the classification of the population coronary risk when using the classical Framingham function (Framingham-Wilson) and that calibrated, and its consequences on the theoretical indication of lipid-lowering treatment. The classification into the < 2%, 2-4,9%, 5-9,9%, 10-19,9%, 20-39,9%, and >= 40% risk categories observed by the two functions was compared in 3.270 individuals aged 35 to 74 years with no history of ischaemic heart disease or lipid-lowering drug treatment, recruited in two population samples representative of Girona between 1994 and 2001. The number of lipid-lowering treatment candidates was estimated applying the most recent guidelines for clinical practice, according to the risk level obtained with both functions. The proportion of patients excluded owing to the fact that they already were on lipid-lowering treatment was 6.2%. The Framingham-REGICOR assigned 54.2% of women and 67.9% of men to a lower level of risk as compared to the Framingham-Wilson function. In 0.2% of women and 21.2% of men the decrease was two categories of risk. The figures in diabetic participants were 75.7 and 18.5%, respectively. When the European recommendations published in 2003 were applied, lipid-lowering treatment would have been indicated in 14.5% and in 4.4% of non-diabetic participants by the Framingham-Wilson and the Framingham-REGICOR, respectively. The calibrated Framingham-REGICOR function assigns a lower coronary risk category in more than 50% of women and almost 90% of men than the uncalibrated Framingham function. The calibrated function is more suitable for risk estimation in primary prevention than the original function in Spain.Medicina Clínica 10/2003; 121(14):521-6. · 1.38 Impact Factor
