Turk Kardiyol Dern Ars. 2019; 47(2): 128-136 | DOI: 10.5543/tkda.2018.68782
Comparison of secondary prevention in coronary heart disease patients living in rural and urban areas
, Erhan Saraçoğlu1
, Yusuf Çekici1
, Arafat Yıldırım1
, Zülfiye Kuzu1
, Dilara Deniz Kılıç2
, Meral Kayıkçıoglu31
Department of Cardiology, Gaziantep Dr. Ersin Arslan Training and Research Hospital, Gaziantep, Turkey2
Department of Internal Medicine, Nizip State Hospital, Gaziantep, Turkey3
Department of Cardiology, Ege University Faculty of Medicine, İzmir
OBJECTIVE The aim of the present study was to assess differences between urban and rural patients with coronary heart disease (CHD) with respect to secondary prevention.
METHODS This cross-sectional study included all consecutive patients diagnosed with CHD at 2 cardiology clinics between January 2016 and January 2017. The demographic characteristics and laboratory parameters were recorded at routine control visits. The patients were divided into 2 groups according to residence based on their statements: urban (n=1752) and rural (n=456).
RESULTS The median age of the patients was 64 years (interquartile range: 12 years). A mean of 4.1±2.1 years had passed after the first (index) coronary event. It was determined that 22.2% of the patients continued to smoke. The rate of quitting was significantly higher in the urban group (20.5% vs. 11.2%; p<0.001). The presence of hypertension (64.3% vs. 56.7%), diabetes mellitus (45.6% vs. 39.2%), cerebrovascular events (9.2% vs. 3.8%), and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (11.4% vs. 5.5%) was significantly greater among the rural patients (p<0.05 for each). In all, 34.2% were obese, and the number of obese patients was significantly greater among the rural patients (46.4% vs. 31.2%; p<0.001). The number of patients performing regular exercise was significantly lower in the rural patient group (34.4% vs. 23.9%; p<0.001). Overall, 88.9% of the patients were taking antiplatelet agents, 62.1% were taking statins, 73.1% were taking beta-blockers, and 34.2% were taking ACEI/ARB. The rate of medication use was significantly greater among urban patients compared with rural patients (p<0.05 in all cases).
CONCLUSION Secondary prevention efforts among patients with CHD require additional improvement. Moreover, secondary prevention is currently less successful among the rural population than the urban population.
Coronary heart disease, rural; secondary prevention; urban.
How to cite this article
Salih Kılıç, Erhan Saraçoğlu, Yusuf Çekici, Arafat Yıldırım, Zülfiye Kuzu, Dilara Deniz Kılıç, Meral Kayıkçıoglu. Comparison of secondary prevention in coronary heart disease patients living in rural and urban areas. Turk Kardiyol Dern Ars. 2019; 47(2): 128-136
Corresponding Author: Salih Kılıç, Türkiye