Paper Details

  1. Home
  2. Paper Details

Long-term mortality after 5-year multifactorial primary prevention of cardiovascular diseases in middle-aged men.

Author: MiettinenT A, NaukkarinenV A, SalomaaV V, SarnaS J, StrandbergT E, VanhanenH T

Clinical TrialA clinical trial is a planned study conducted on humans to evaluate the efficacy and safety of pharmaceuticals, medical devices, and treatment methods. It aims to explore the possibilities of new treatments and improve the health of patients.
Journal ArticleAn article published in an academic or professional journal that reports original research or scholarly analysis.
Randomized Controlled TrialA clinical trial that randomly assigns participants to treatment and control groups to evaluate the effects of an intervention.
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov'tResearch funding provided by government agencies outside the United States.

Overview

Multifactorial prevention of cardiovascular disease reduced coronary heart disease risk by 46% in the intervention group at the end of the 5-year trial, but the effect was not sustained in the 5 years following the trial. There was an unexpected increase in total mortality in the intervention group, particularly from cardiac causes.
Paper Details　
Original Abstract of the Article :
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the long-term effects of multifactorial primary prevention of cardiovascular diseases (CVD). DESIGN: The 5-year randomized, controlled trial was performed between 1974 and 1980. The subjects and their risk factors were reevaluated in 1985. Posttrial mortality follow-up was...See full text at original site
Dr.Camel IconDr.Camel's Paper Summary Blogラクダ博士について

ラクダ博士は、Health Journal が論文の内容を分かりやすく解説するために作成した架空のキャラクターです。
難解な医学論文を、専門知識のない方にも理解しやすいように、噛み砕いて説明することを目指しています。

* ラクダ博士による解説は、あくまで論文の要点をまとめたものであり、原論文の完全な代替となるものではありません。詳細な内容については、必ず原論文をご参照ください。
* ラクダ博士は架空のキャラクターであり、実際の医学研究者や医療従事者とは一切関係がありません。
* 解説の内容は Health Journal が独自に解釈・作成したものであり、原論文の著者または出版社の見解を反映するものではありません。


引用元：
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1870247

データ提供：米国国立医学図書館（NLM）

Long-Term Mortality After Multifactorial Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease

The field of [cardiovascular disease prevention] is focused on [reducing the risk of heart disease]. This study investigates the [long-term effects] of a [multifactorial primary prevention program] implemented in [middle-aged men]. The researchers used a [randomized controlled trial] design, comparing the [mortality rates] of participants receiving [intensive intervention] to those in a [control group]. While the intervention group showed a [significant reduction in coronary heart disease risk] during the initial 5 years, the long-term follow-up revealed [unexpectedly higher mortality rates] in the intervention group. This study highlights the [complexities of long-term risk management] in cardiovascular disease prevention.

The Challenges of Long-Term Prevention: Lessons from the Desert

This study provides a cautionary tale about the [potential challenges] of [long-term cardiovascular disease prevention]. It's like navigating a desert: while you might find a temporary oasis (initial reduction in risk), you need to constantly adapt and adjust your strategies to avoid getting lost in the long run (increased mortality).

Navigating the Desert of Cardiovascular Health: A Long-Term Perspective

This research emphasizes the [importance of considering the long-term implications] of preventive interventions. It's crucial to [develop strategies that can sustain benefits] over time, like finding a consistent source of water in the desert.

Dr. Camel's Conclusion

This study highlights the complexities of long-term cardiovascular disease prevention. It's like navigating a vast desert, where the path to optimal health requires continuous adaptation and vigilance to avoid unforeseen challenges.

Date :
  1. Date Completed 1991-09-18
  2. Date Revised 2016-10-17
Further Info :

Pubmed ID

1870247

DOI: Digital Object Identifier

1870247

SNS
PICO Info
in preparation
Languages

English

Positive IndicatorAn AI analysis index that serves as a benchmark for how positive the results of the study are. Note that it is a benchmark and requires careful interpretation and consideration of different perspectives.

This site uses cookies. Visit our privacy policy page or click the link in any footer for more information and to change your preferences.