De-imFAR phase II project: a study protocol for a cluster randomised implementation trial to evaluate the effectiveness of de-implementation strategies to reduce low-value statin prescribing in the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease.

INTRODUCTION: This study aims to reduce potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) of statins and foster healthy lifestyle promotion in cardiovascular disease (CVD) primary prevention in low-risk patients. To this end, we will compare the effectiveness and feasibility of several de-implementation strategies developed following the structured design process of the Behaviour Change Wheel targeting key determinants of the clinical decision-making process in CVD prevention. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A cluster randomised implementation trial, with an additional control group, will be launched, involving family physicians (FPs) from 13 Integrated Healthcare Organisations (IHOs) of Osakidetza-Basque Health Service with non-zero incidence rates of PIP of statins in 2021. All FPs will be exposed to a non-reflective decision assistance strategy based on reminders and decision support tools. Additionally, FPs from two of the IHOs will be randomly assigned to one of two increasingly intensive de-implementation strategies: adding a decision information strategy based on knowledge dissemination and a reflective decision structure strategy through audit/feedback. The target population comprises women aged 45-74 years and men aged 40-74 years with moderately elevated cholesterol levels but no diagnosed CVD and low cardiovascular risk (REGICOR<7.5%), who attend at least one appointment with any of the participating FPs (May 2022-May 2023), and will be followed until May 2024. We use the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework to evaluate outcomes. The main outcome will be the change in the incidence rate of PIP of statins and healthy lifestyle counselling in the study population 12 and 24 months after FPs' exposure to the strategies. Moreover, FPs' perception of their feasibility and acceptability, and patient experience regarding the quality of care received will be evaluated. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study was approved by the Basque Country Clinical Research Ethics Committee and was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04022850). Results will be disseminated in scientific peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04022850.

Peer-led lifestyle interventions for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease in community: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Peer-led lifestyle interventions have gained recognition as effective approaches for managing and preventing chronic diseases. However, there remains a critical knowledge gap regarding the impact and effectiveness of peer-led interventions specifically in the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD). Our systematic review aims to synthesise the available evidence and evaluate the impact of peer-led lifestyle interventions, providing invaluable insights that can guide the development of peer-led strategies for preventing CVD. METHODS: Systematic database searches were conducted on Ovid Medline, Embase, Cochrane Centre for Controlled Trials, PubMed and Scopus to source peer-reviewed articles published between 2013 and 2023. Reference lists of the included publications were also manually searched. RESULTS: Fourteen unique randomised controlled trials were identified, of which three were pilot studies. Most of the interventions were conducted among individuals at moderate to high risk of CVD and lasted for a year. There is a variety of components in intervention delivery, including group discussions and individual counselling. Peer leader training mostly covered intervention delivery, communication, and research-specific skills. Systolic blood pressure showed the most promising CVD-related improvement, while mixed results were found for several other dietary and lifestyle behavioural outcomes. CONCLUSION: Peer-led lifestyle interventions have shown varying effectiveness in cardiovascular health outcomes. The competencies and roles of peer leaders were identified to guide future intervention development with a more comprehensive approach to the primary prevention of CVD.

Intensity of statin therapy and primary prevention of cardiovascular in Korean patients with dyslipidemia.

This study aimed to investigate the association between the intensity of statin therapy and the development of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and diabetes in individuals without prior diabetes who were being treated for dyslipidemia with statins for the primary prevention of CVD, using the National Health Insurance Service-Health Screening database. The database is a longitudinal cohort study of Korean men and women 40 years of age or older who underwent comprehensive biannual screening health examinations by Korean National Health Insurance Service from January 1, 2002, to December 31, 2015. We included patients in the health screening checkup cohort who underwent health checkups in 2009 and 2010.The primary outcome was the occurrence of a first major cardiovascular or cerebrovascular event, new-onset diabetes. A total of 20,322 participants without prior diabetes at baseline from 2009 to 2015 were followed up for a mean duration of 81.2 ±â€…6.6 months. The mean age of all participants at baseline was 59.2 ±â€…8.4 years and 43.0% of them were male. Their index low lipoprotein cholesterol level was 130.4 ±â€…mg/dL, the mean duration of taking statins was 337.4 ±â€…52.3 days, and 93.9% of them had been taking moderate-intensity statins. At that time, a total of 641 diabetes cases occurred, 41 from using low-intensity statins, 588 from moderate-intensity statins, and 11 from high-intensity statins. The results indicated no significant differences in the incidence of death, CVD death, or CVD among those in the strong statin group compared with the reference groups. While statin treatment for the primary prevention of CVD in patients with dyslipidemia showed a subtle difference in the incidence of diabetes, there was no difference in the occurrence of CVD or CVD death according to statin intensity.

Effect of statin use for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease among older adults: a cautionary tale concerning target trials emulation.

OBJECTIVES: Evidence concerning the effect of statins in primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) among older adults is lacking. Using Quebec population-wide administrative data, we emulated a hypothetical randomized trial including older adults >65 years on April 1, 2013, with no CVD history and no statin use in the previous year. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We included individuals who initiated statins and classified them as exposed if they were using statin at least 3 months after initiation and nonexposed otherwise. We followed them until March 31, 2018. The primary outcome was the composite endpoint of coronary events (myocardial infarction, coronary bypass, and percutaneous coronary intervention), stroke, and all-cause mortality. The intention-to-treat (ITT) effect was estimated with adjusted Cox models and per-protocol effect with inverse probability of censoring weighting. RESULTS: A total of 65,096 individuals were included (mean age = 71.0 ± 5.5, female = 55.0%) and 93.7% were exposed. Whereas we observed a reduction in the composite outcome (ITT-hazard ratio (HR) = 0.75; 95% CI: 0.68-0.83) and mortality (ITT-HR = 0.69; 95% CI: 0.61-0.77) among exposed, coronary events increased (ITT-HR = 1.46; 95% CI: 1.09-1.94). All multibias E-values were low indicating that the results were not robust to unmeasured confounding, selection, and misclassification biases simultaneously. CONCLUSION: We cannot conclude on the effectiveness of statins in primary prevention of CVD among older adults. We caution that an in-depth reflection on sources of biases and careful interpretation of results are always required in observational studies.

Meditation for the primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease.

BACKGROUND: Interventions incorporating meditation to address stress, anxiety, and depression, and improve self-management, are becoming popular for many health conditions. Stress is a risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD) and clusters with other modifiable behavioural risk factors, such as smoking. Meditation may therefore be a useful CVD prevention strategy. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effectiveness of meditation, primarily mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) and transcendental meditation (TM), for the primary and secondary prevention of CVD. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, three other databases, and two trials registers on 14 November 2021, together with reference checking, citation searching, and contact with study authors to identify additional studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of 12 weeks or more in adults at high risk of CVD and those with established CVD. We explored four comparisons: MBIs versus active comparators (alternative interventions); MBIs versus non-active comparators (no intervention, wait list, usual care); TM versus active comparators; TM versus non-active comparators. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were CVD clinical events (e.g. cardiovascular mortality), blood pressure, measures of psychological distress and well-being, and adverse events. Secondary outcomes included other CVD risk factors (e.g. blood lipid levels), quality of life, and coping abilities. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence. MAIN RESULTS: We included 81 RCTs (6971 participants), with most studies at unclear risk of bias. MBIs versus active comparators (29 RCTs, 2883 participants) Systolic (SBP) and diastolic (DBP) blood pressure were reported in six trials (388 participants) where heterogeneity was considerable (SBP: MD -6.08 mmHg, 95% CI -12.79 to 0.63, I2 = 88%; DBP: MD -5.18 mmHg, 95% CI -10.65 to 0.29, I2 = 91%; both outcomes based on low-certainty evidence). There was little or no effect of MBIs on anxiety (SMD -0.06 units, 95% CI -0.25 to 0.13; I2 = 0%; 9 trials, 438 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), or depression (SMD 0.08 units, 95% CI -0.08 to 0.24; I2 = 0%; 11 trials, 595 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Perceived stress was reduced with MBIs (SMD -0.24 units, 95% CI -0.45 to -0.03; I2 = 0%; P = 0.03; 6 trials, 357 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There was little to no effect on well-being (SMD -0.18 units, 95% CI -0.67 to 0.32; 1 trial, 63 participants; low-certainty evidence). There was little to no effect on smoking cessation (RR 1.45, 95% CI 0.78 to 2.68; I2 = 79%; 6 trials, 1087 participants; low-certainty evidence). None of the trials reported CVD clinical events or adverse events. MBIs versus non-active comparators (38 RCTs, 2905 participants) Clinical events were reported in one trial (110 participants), providing very low-certainty evidence (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.37 to 2.42). SBP and DBP were reduced in nine trials (379 participants) but heterogeneity was substantial (SBP: MD -6.62 mmHg, 95% CI -13.15 to -0.1, I2 = 87%; DBP: MD -3.35 mmHg, 95% CI -5.86 to -0.85, I2 = 61%; both outcomes based on low-certainty evidence). There was low-certainty evidence of reductions in anxiety (SMD -0.78 units, 95% CI -1.09 to -0.41; I2 = 61%; 9 trials, 533 participants; low-certainty evidence), depression (SMD -0.66 units, 95% CI -0.91 to -0.41; I2 = 67%; 15 trials, 912 participants; low-certainty evidence) and perceived stress (SMD -0.59 units, 95% CI -0.89 to -0.29; I2 = 70%; 11 trials, 708 participants; low-certainty evidence) but heterogeneity was substantial. Well-being increased (SMD 0.5 units, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.91; I2 = 47%; 2 trials, 198 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There was little to no effect on smoking cessation (RR 1.36, 95% CI 0.86 to 2.13; I2 = 0%; 2 trials, 453 participants; low-certainty evidence). One small study (18 participants) reported two adverse events in the MBI group, which were not regarded as serious by the study investigators (RR 5.0, 95% CI 0.27 to 91.52; low-certainty evidence). No subgroup effects were seen for SBP, DBP, anxiety, depression, or perceived stress by primary and secondary prevention. TM versus active comparators (8 RCTs, 830 participants) Clinical events were reported in one trial (201 participants) based on low-certainty evidence (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.49). SBP was reduced (MD -2.33 mmHg, 95% CI -3.99 to -0.68; I2 = 2%; 8 trials, 774 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), with an uncertain effect on DBP (MD -1.15 mmHg, 95% CI -2.85 to 0.55; I2 = 53%; low-certainty evidence). There was little or no effect on anxiety (SMD 0.06 units, 95% CI -0.22 to 0.33; I2 = 0%; 3 trials, 200 participants; low-certainty evidence), depression (SMD -0.12 units, 95% CI -0.31 to 0.07; I2 = 0%; 5 trials, 421 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), or perceived stress (SMD 0.04 units, 95% CI -0.49 to 0.57; I2 = 70%; 3 trials, 194 participants; very low-certainty evidence). None of the trials reported adverse events or smoking rates. No subgroup effects were seen for SBP or DBP by primary and secondary prevention. TM versus non-active comparators (2 RCTs, 186 participants) Two trials (139 participants) reported blood pressure, where reductions were seen in SBP (MD -6.34 mmHg, 95% CI -9.86 to -2.81; I2 = 0%; low-certainty evidence) and DBP (MD -5.13 mmHg, 95% CI -9.07 to -1.19; I2 = 18%; very low-certainty evidence). One trial (112 participants) reported anxiety and depression and found reductions in both (anxiety SMD -0.71 units, 95% CI -1.09 to -0.32; depression SMD -0.48 units, 95% CI -0.86 to -0.11; low-certainty evidence). None of the trials reported CVD clinical events, adverse events, or smoking rates. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Despite the large number of studies included in the review, heterogeneity was substantial for many of the outcomes, which reduced the certainty of our findings. We attempted to address this by presenting four main comparisons of MBIs or TM versus active or inactive comparators, and by subgroup analyses according to primary or secondary prevention, where there were sufficient studies. The majority of studies were small and there was unclear risk of bias for most domains. Overall, we found very little information on the effects of meditation on CVD clinical endpoints, and limited information on blood pressure and psychological outcomes, for people at risk of or with established CVD. This is a very active area of research as shown by the large number of ongoing studies, with some having been completed at the time of writing this review. The status of all ongoing studies will be formally assessed and incorporated in further updates.

Cardiovascular disease risk communication and prevention: a meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Knowledge of quantifiable cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk may improve health outcomes and trigger behavioural change in patients or clinicians. This review aimed to investigate the impact of CVD risk communication on patient-perceived CVD risk and changes in CVD risk factors. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, and PsycINFO databases were searched from inception to 6 June 2023, supplemented by citation analysis. Randomized trials that compared any CVD risk communication strategy versus usual care were included. Paired reviewers independently screened the identified records and extracted the data; disagreements were resolved by a third author. The primary outcome was the accuracy of risk perception. Secondary outcomes were clinician-reported changes in CVD risk, psychological responses, intention to modify lifestyle, and self-reported changes in risk factors and clinician prescribing of preventive medicines. RESULTS: Sixty-two trials were included. Accuracy of risk perception was higher among intervention participants (odds ratio = 2.31, 95% confidence interval = 1.63 to 3.27). A statistically significant improvement in overall CVD risk scores was found at 6-12 months (mean difference = -0.27, 95% confidence interval = -0.45 to -0.09). For primary prevention, risk communication significantly increased self-reported dietary modification (odds ratio = 1.50, 95% confidence interval = 1.21 to 1.86) with no increase in intention or actual changes in smoking cessation or physical activity. A significant impact on patients' intention to start preventive medication was found for primary and secondary prevention, with changes at follow-up for the primary prevention group. CONCLUSIONS: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, communicating CVD risk information, regardless of the method, reduced the overall risk factors and enhanced patients' self-perceived risk. Communication of CVD risk to patients should be considered in routine consultations.

Implantable cardioverter defibrillators for primary prevention in patients with ischemic and non-ischemic cardiomyopathy: A meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Ischemic and nonischemic cardiomyopathy (NICM) are one of the leading causes of sudden cardiac death (SCD). Evidence supporting Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator (ICD) for the prevention of SCD and mortality has shown conflicting results to date. OBJECTIVE: We aim to evaluate the impact of ICD therapy with conventional care for the primary prevention of death of various causes in adults with ICM and NICM. METHODS: We performed a systematic literature search on the electronic database for relevant articles from inception until 30th May 2023. Pooled odds ratios (OR) were calculated using a random effect model, and a p-value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: A total of 13 randomized controlled trials involving 7857 patients were included in the study. Pooled analysis showed that ICD therapy was associated with a significant reduction in the incidence of all-cause mortality (OR, 0.69 (95%CI:0.55-0.87), P = 0.001), with a similar trend among ICM and NICM compared with the control group. ICD therapy also reduces the incidence of SCD (OR, 0.32(95%CI: 0.24-0.43), P<0.00001) with a similar trend in ICM and NICM, as well as death due to arrhythmia (OR, 0.35(95%CI: 0.19-0.64), P<0.001). However, the incidence of cardiovascular mortality in the ICD group (OR, 0.77(95%CI: 0.58-1.02), P=0.07) was comparable to the control group. CONCLUSION: ICD therapy was associated with a reduction in the incidence of all-cause mortality, sudden cardiac death, and death due to arrhythmia among ischemic and nonischemic cardiomyopathy patients.

A multidisciplinary primary prevention intervention to increase adherence to the Mediterranean diet: a pilot study.

BACKGROUND: The role of the Mediterranean Diet (MD) in reducing cardiovascular (CV) risk is widely demonstrated and many studies have shown the effectiveness of educational interventions in primary prevention. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of a multidisciplinary educational intervention, that included nutritional, psychological and physical activity coaching, on adherence to MD and on CV risk. METHODS: In a Roman neighborhood, general practitioners enrolled 41 subjects to take part in the educational intervention from November 2018 (T0) to November 2019 (T1). Participants' anthropometric measures, haematochemical parameters and CV risk score were assessed before and after the intervention. Furthermore, their adherence to MD was evaluated through the analysis of food frequency questionnaires using Medi-Lite. RESULTS: The study found a significant reduction of 2.5 points in individual CV risk score, and an increase of 2.5 point in adherence to the MD. The stratification by gender showed statistically significant decreases in weight of 1.16 kg, BMI of 0.47, LDL cholesterol of 14.00 mg/dL, and individual CV risk score of 1.16 points among female participants. CONCLUSIONS: These results show that a multidisciplinary educational intervention model including the adoption of MD could be an effective strategy in Public Health for CV primary prevention and improvement of people's lifestyles.

A "Food Is Medicine" Approach to Disease Prevention: Limitations and Alternatives.

This Viewpoint argues that although "food is medicine" programs may help some patients prevent diet-related diseases, changing food industry behavior and ensuring that existing nutrition assistance programs are accessible and health-promoting are better strategies to make a difference.

The effect of a multi-component behavior change technique intervention on medication adherence among individuals on primary prevention statin therapy: a dose-finding protocol.

BACKGROUND: In the USA, the primary cause of death and morbidity continues to be cardiovascular disease (CVD). Numerous trials have shown that statin medication reduces the likelihood of CVD events; it is a cornerstone of CVD prevention. However, studies have also indicated that up to 60% of the estimated 26.8 million Americans prescribed primary prevention statin treatment are nonadherent during the first year. Multi-component behavioral change technique (BCT) therapies have shown moderate promise in improving medication adherence as well as other positive health behaviors (such as physical activity). However, no research has looked at the duration of multi-component BCT intervention needed to result in a clinically significant improvement in statin adherence behaviors. This study aims to determine the necessary dose of a multi-component BCT intervention (defined as duration in weeks) to promote adherence to statin medication among those on primary prevention statin treatment by utilizing the modified time-to-event continuous reassessment method (TiTE-CRM). METHODS AND DESIGN: The study will utilize the modified TiTE-CRM in 42 participants, recruited in 14 cohorts of 3 participants each. The goal of this analysis is to identify the minimum effective dose (MED) of a multi-behavior change technique (BCT) intervention required to increase adherence to statins by 20% between baseline and follow-up periods. Using the TiTE-CRM method, the dose of the behavior intervention in weeks will be assigned to each cohort based on the performance of the prior cohort. At the end of the study, the intervention dose that has been found to be associated with a 20% increase in statin adherence among 80% of participants assigned to that dose will be identified as the MED. DISCUSSION: If successful, the current trial will provide additional guidance to researchers and clinicians seeking to increase statin medication adherence using a BCT intervention by identifying the dose (i.e., the duration) of an intervention required to meaningfully increase adherence. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05273736. Registered on March 10, 2022. https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov/ct2/show/NCT05273736.

Single- Versus Dual-Chamber Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator for Primary Prevention of Sudden Cardiac Death in the United States.

Background Routine addition of an atrial lead during an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implantation for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death, in patients without pacing indications, was not shown beneficial in contemporary studies. We aimed to investigate the use and safety of single- versus dual-chamber ICD implantations in these patients. Methods and Results Using the National Inpatient Sample database, we identified patients with no pacing indications who underwent primary-prevention ICD implantation in the United States between 2015 and 2019. Sociodemographic and clinical characteristics, as well as in-hospital complications, were analyzed. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify predictors of in-hospital complications. An estimated total of 15 940 patients, underwent ICD implantation for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death during the study period, 8860 (55.6%) received a dual-chamber ICD. The mean age was 64 years, and 66% were men. In-hospital complication rates in the dual-chamber ICD and single-chamber ICD group were 12.8% and 10.7%, respectively (P<0.001), driven by increased rates of pneumothorax/hemothorax (4.6% versus 3.4%; P<0.001) and lead dislodgement (3.6% versus 2.3%; P<0.001) in the dual-chamber ICD group. Multivariable analyses confirmed atrial lead addition as an independent predictor for "any complications" (odds ratio [OR], 1.1 [95% CI, 1.0-1.2]), for pneumo/hemothorax (odds ratio, 1.1 [95% CI, 1.0-1.4]), and for lead dislodgement (odds ratio, 1.3 [95% CI, 1.1-1.6]). Conclusions Despite lack of evidence for clinical benefit, dual-chamber ICDs are implanted for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death in a majority of patients who do not have pacing indication. This practice is associated with increased risk of periprocedural complications. Avoidance of routine implantation of atrial leads will likely improve safety outcomes.

A clinician's guide to obesity prevention in the UK.

Across the UK, people's lives are being cut short because of obesity, and the lives of the most deprived members of our communities are being cut the most. The role of the medical professional in managing overweight and obesity is extensive, but, for many patients, maintaining a healthy weight needs to be supported by creating environments that help people to stay healthy in the first place. The building blocks of health are the environmental, commercial, economic and social factors that largely determine our health and wellbeing and impact our capability, opportunity and motivation to maintain healthy-weight behaviours. Although the role of the healthcare professional generally is to focus on the individual patient, clinicians can still influence these building blocks. Clinicians have the skills to create change, they often hold power in organisations with local to international impact and there are actions, big or small, that every clinician can take to improve obesity prevention. Here, we outline an environmental-behavioural framework for the primary prevention of obesity and consider the role of clinicians in catalysing change.

Patients' Perspectives Regarding Generator Exchanges of Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators.

BACKGROUND: Shared decision-making is mandated for patients receiving primary prevention implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs). Less attention has been paid to generator exchange decisions, although at the time of generator exchange, patients' risk of sudden cardiac death, risk of procedural complications, quality of life, or prognosis may have changed. This study was designed to explore how patients make ICD generator exchange decisions. METHODS: Emory Healthcare patients with primary prevention ICDs implanted from 2013 to 2021 were recruited to complete in-depth interviews exploring perspectives regarding generator exchanges. Interviews were conducted in 2021. Transcribed interviews were qualitatively coded using multilevel template analytic methods. To investigate benefit thresholds for pursuing generator exchanges, patients were presented standard-gamble type hypothetical scenarios where their ICD battery was depleted but their 5-year risk of sudden cardiac death at that time varied (10%, 5%, and 1%). RESULTS: Fifty patients were interviewed; 18 had a prior generator exchange, 16 had received ICD therapy, and 17 had improved left ventricular ejection fraction. As sudden cardiac death risk decreased from 10% to 5% to 1%, the number of participants willing to undergo a generator exchange decreased from 48 to 42 to 33, respectively. Responses suggest that doctor's recommendations are likely to substantially impact patients' decision-making. Other drivers of decision-making included past experiences with ICD therapy and device implantation, as well as risk aversion. Therapeutic inertia and misconceptions about ICD therapy were common and represent substantive barriers to effective shared decision-making in this context. CONCLUSIONS: Strong defaults may exist to continue therapy and exchange ICD generators. Updated risk stratification may facilitate shared decision-making and reduce generator exchanges in very low-risk patients, especially if these interventions are directed toward clinicians. Interventions targeting phenomena such as therapeutic inertia may be more impactful and warrant exploration in randomized trials.

Implementation of routine Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) primary prophylaxis in lung transplant recipients.

Lung transplant recipients are at an increased risk for Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI), and those who develop CDI post-transplant can have worsened outcomes including graft failure and death. We sought to describe the efficacy and safety of primary CDI prophylaxis with oral vancomycin among 86 adult lung transplant recipients. Overall, we observed a 9.3% (8/86) incidence of CDI among patients receiving prophylaxis, with the majority of infections occurring a median of 25 days after completion of prophylaxis. Furthermore, we observed a 4.7% incidence of VRE infection/colonization. Opportunities exist to optimize the duration of CDI prophylaxis to balance the benefits and risks in lung transplant recipients.

[Comparison of aspirin treatment strategies for primary prevention of cardiovascular diseases: A decision-analytic Markov modelling study].

OBJECTIVE: To compare the expected population impact of benefit and risk of aspirin treatment strategies for the primary prevention of cardiovascular diseases recommended by different guidelines in the Chinese Electronic Health Records Research in Yinzhou (CHERRY) study. METHODS: A decision-analytic Markov model was used to simulate and compare different strategies of aspirin treatment, including: Strategy ①: Aspirin treatment for Chinese adults aged 40-69 years with a high 10-year cardiovascular risk, recommended by the 2020 Chinese Guideline on the Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Diseases; Strategy ②: Aspirin treatment for Chinese adults aged 40-59 years with a high 10-year cardiovascular risk, recommended by the 2022 United States Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement on Aspirin Use to Prevent Cardiovascular Disease; Strategy ③: Aspirin treatment for Chinese adults aged 40-69 years with a high 10-year cardiovascular risk and blood pressure well-controlled (< 150/90 mmHg), recommended by the 2019 Guideline on the Assessment and Management of Cardio-vascular Risk in China. The high 10-year cardiovascular risk was defined as the 10-year predicted risk over 10% based on the 2019 World Health Organization non-laboratory model. The Markov model simulated different strategies for ten years (cycles) with parameters mainly from the CHERRY study or published literature. Quality-adjusted life year (QALY) and the number needed to treat (NNT) for each ischemic event (including myocardial infarction and ischemic stroke) were calculated to assess the effectiveness of the different strategies. The number needed to harm (NNH) for each bleeding event (including hemorrhagic stroke and gastrointestinal bleeding) was calculated to assess the safety. The NNT for each net benefit (i.e., the difference of the number of ischemic events could be prevented and the number of bleeding events would be added) was also calculated. One-way sensitivity analysis on the uncertainty of the incidence rate of cardiovascular diseases and probabilistic sensitivity analysis on the uncertainty of hazard ratios of interventions were conducted. RESULTS: A total of 212 153 Chinese adults, were included in this study. The number of people who were recommended for aspirin treatment Strategies ①-③ was 34 235, 2 813, and 25 111, respectively. The Strategy ③ could gain the most QALY of 403 [95% uncertainty interval (UI): 222-511] years. Compared with Strategy ①, Strategy ③ had similar efficiency but better safety, with the extra NNT of 4 (95%UI: 3-4) and NNH of 39 (95%UI: 19-132). The NNT per net benefit was 131 (95%UI: 102-239) for Strategy ①, 256 (95%UI: 181-737) for Strategy ②, and 132 (95%UI: 104-232) for Strategy ③, making Strategy ③ the most favorable option with a better QALY and safety, along with similar efficiency in terms of net benefit. The results were consistent in the sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSION: The aspirin treatment strategies recommended by the updated guidelines on the primary prevention of cardiovascular diseases showed a net benefit for high-risk Chinese adults from developed areas. However, to balance effectiveness and safety, aspirin is suggested to be used for primary prevention of cardiovascular diseases with consideration for blood pressure control, resulting in better intervention efficiency.

Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease at Community Clinics in the State of Sao Paulo, Brazil: Results from the Epidemiological Information Study of Communities.

Background: Primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) remains a major challenge, especially in communities of low- and middle-income countries with poor medical assistance influenced by distinct local, financial, infrastructural, and resource-related factors. Objective: This a community-based study aimed to determine the proportion and prevalence of uncontrolled cardiovascular risk factors (CRF) in Brazilian communities. Methods: The EPICO study was an observational, cross-sectional, and community clinic-based study. Subjects were living in Brazilian communities and were of both sexes and ≥18 years old, without a history of a stroke or myocardial infarction but presenting at least one of the following cardiovascular risk factors: hypertension, diabetes mellitus and hypercholesterolemia. The study was carried out in Brazil, including 322 basic health units (BHU) in 32 cities. Results: A total of 7,724 subjects with at least one CRF were evaluated, and one clinical visit was performed. Mean age was 59.2 years-old (53.7% were >60 years old). A total of 66.7% were women. Of the total, 96.2% had hypertension, 78.8% had diabetes mellitus type II, 71.1% had dyslipidemia, and 76.6% of patients were overweight/obese. Controlled hypertension (defined by <130/80 mmHg or <140/90 mmHg) was observed in 34.9% and 55.5% patients among respective criteria, the rates of controlled blood glucose in patients taking antidiabetic medications was 29.5%, and among those with documented dyslipidemia who received any lipid-lowering medication, only 13.9% had LDL-c on target. For patients presenting three CRF less than 1.9% had LDL-c < 100 mg/dL once their BP and blood glucose were on target. High education level as associated with blood pressure (BP) target of less than 130 / 80mm Hg. The glucose and LDL-c levels on target were associated with the presence of hypertension and diabetes mellitus. Conclusion: In Brazilian community clinics, regarding most patients in primary prevention, the CRF such as BP, blood glucose, and lipid levels are poorly controlled, with a majority of patients not achieving guidelines/recommendations.

Primary prevention of cardiovascular disease at community clinics in the state of Sao Paulo, Brazil: results from the epidemiological information study of communities

BACKGROUND: Primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) remains a major challenge, especially in communities of low- and middle-income countries with poor medical assistance influenced by distinct local, financial, infrastructural, and resource-related factors. OBJECTIVE: This a community-based study aimed to determine the proportion and prevalence of uncontrolled cardiovascular risk factors (CRF) in Brazilian communities. METHODS: The EPICO study was an observational, cross-sectional, and community clinic-based study. Subjects were living in Brazilian communities and were of both sexes and ≥18 years old, without a history of a stroke or myocardial infarction but presenting at least one of the following cardiovascular risk factors: hypertension, diabetes mellitus and hypercholesterolemia. The study was carried out in Brazil, including 322 basic health units (BHU) in 32 cities. RESULTS: A total of 7,724 subjects with at least one CRF were evaluated, and one clinical visit was performed. Mean age was 59.2 years-old (53.7% were >60 years old). A total of 66.7% were women. Of the total, 96.2% had hypertension, 78.8% had diabetes mellitus type II, 71.1% had dyslipidemia, and 76.6% of patients were overweight/obese. Controlled hypertension (defined by <130/80 mmHg or <140/90 mmHg) was observed in 34.9% and 55.5% patients among respective criteria, the rates of controlled blood glucose in patients taking antidiabetic medications was 29.5%, and among those with documented dyslipidemia who received any lipid-lowering medication, only 13.9% had LDL-c on target. For patients presenting three CRF less than 1.9% had LDL-c < 100 mg/dL once their BP and blood glucose were on target. High education level as associated with blood pressure (BP) target of less than 130 / 80mm Hg. The glucose and LDL-c levels on target were associated with the presence of hypertension and diabetes mellitus. CONCLUSION: In Brazilian community clinics, regarding most patients in primary prevention, the CRF such as BP, blood glucose, and lipid levels are poorly controlled, with a majority of patients not achieving guidelines/recommendations.

The effect of a multi-component behavior change technique intervention on physical activity among individuals on primary prevention statin therapy: A dose-finding trial protocol.

BACKGROUND: Statin therapy is a mainstay of cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention, but research shows that statin therapy alone is insufficient for preventing incident CVD and mortality. Combining statin medication with increased physical activity (PA) can lower mortality risk more than either statin or PA alone. However, PA levels often remain the same and may even decline following statin prescription. Additional information is needed to identify how to increase PA among statin users and determine the minimal length of an intervention (i.e., intervention dose) necessary to increase PA. OBJECTIVE: The study aims to identify the required dose of a behavior change technique (BCT) intervention to increase PA among individuals on primary prevention statin therapy who have an elevated risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD). METHODS: The study will utilize the modified time-to-event continual reassessment method (TiTE-CRM) in 42 participants. We expect insights relating to dose-efficacy models and BCTs (Behavior Change Techniques) to improve PA in adults at risk for CVD. This trial will also examine potential mechanisms of action (MoAs) for interventions to increase PA, identify any effect a PA intervention may have on medication adherence, and determine whether participants respond uniformly to their respective behavioral interventions. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This trial was approved by the Northwell Health Institutional Review Board (IRB) and all participants will complete informed consent. The trial results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. All publications resulting from this series of personalized trials will follow the CONSORT reporting guidelines. REGISTRATION DETAILS: This trial is registered on www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov (Number NCT05273723).

Postexposure Doxycycline to Prevent Bacterial Sexually Transmitted Infections.

BACKGROUND: Interventions to reduce sexually transmitted infections (STIs) among men who have sex with men (MSM) are needed. METHODS: We conducted an open-label, randomized study involving MSM and transgender women who were taking preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) against human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection (PrEP cohort) or living with HIV infection (persons living with HIV infection [PLWH] cohort) and who had had Neisseria gonorrhoeae (gonorrhea), Chlamydia trachomatis (chlamydia), or syphilis in the past year. Participants were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to take 200 mg of doxycycline within 72 hours after condomless sex (doxycycline postexposure prophylaxis) or receive standard care without doxycycline. STI testing was performed quarterly. The primary end point was the incidence of at least one STI per follow-up quarter. RESULTS: Of 501 participants (327 in the PrEP cohort and 174 in the PLWH cohort), 67% were White, 7% Black, 11% Asian or Pacific Islander, and 30% Hispanic or Latino. In the PrEP cohort, an STI was diagnosed in 61 of 570 quarterly visits (10.7%) in the doxycycline group and 82 of 257 quarterly visits (31.9%) in the standard-care group, for an absolute difference of -21.2 percentage points and a relative risk of 0.34 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.24 to 0.46; P<0.001). In the PLWH cohort, an STI was diagnosed in 36 of 305 quarterly visits (11.8%) in the doxycycline group and 39 of 128 quarterly visits (30.5%) in the standard-care group, for an absolute difference of -18.7 percentage points and a relative risk of 0.38 (95% CI, 0.24 to 0.60; P<0.001). The incidences of the three evaluated STIs were lower with doxycycline than with standard care; in the PrEP cohort, the relative risks were 0.45 (95% CI, 0.32 to 0.65) for gonorrhea, 0.12 (95% CI, 0.05 to 0.25) for chlamydia, and 0.13 (95% CI, 0.03 to 0.59) for syphilis, and in the PLWH cohort, the relative risks were 0.43 (95% CI, 0.26 to 0.71), 0.26 (95% CI, 0.12 to 0.57), and 0.23 (95% CI, 0.04 to 1.29), respectively. Five grade 3 adverse events and no serious adverse events were attributed to doxycycline. Of the participants with gonorrhea culture available, tetracycline-resistant gonorrhea occurred in 5 of 13 in the doxycycline groups and 2 of 16 in the standard-care groups. CONCLUSIONS: The combined incidence of gonorrhea, chlamydia, and syphilis was lower by two thirds with doxycycline postexposure prophylaxis than with standard care, a finding that supports its use among MSM with recent bacterial STIs. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health; DoxyPEP ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03980223.).