Hypertension
-
Elevated blood pressure increases the risk of experiencing cardiovascular events like myocardial infarction and stroke. Current observational data suggest that body mass index may have a causal role in the etiology of hypertension, but this may be influenced by confounding and reverse causation. Through the use of instrumental variable methods, we aim to estimate the strength of the unconfounded and unbiased association between body mass index/adiposity and blood pressure. ⋯ Avoiding the epidemiological problems of confounding, bias, and reverse causation, we confirmed observational associations between body mass index and blood pressure. In analyses including those taking antihypertensive drugs, but for whom appropriate adjustment had been made, systolic blood pressure was seen to increase by 3.85 mm Hg (95% CI: 1.88 to 5.83 mm Hg) for each 10% increase in body mass index (P=0.0002), with diastolic blood pressure showing an increase of 1.79 mm Hg (95% CI: 0.68 to 2.90 mm Hg) for each 10% increase in body mass index (P=0.002). Observed associations are large and illustrate the considerable benefits in terms of reductions in blood pressure-related morbidity that could be achieved through a reduction in body mass index.
-
The prediction of cardiovascular risk profile trends in low-income countries and timely action to modulate their transitions are among the greatest global health challenges. In 2005 we evaluated a nationally representative sample of the Mozambican population (n=3323; 25 to 64 years old) following the Stepwise Approach to Chronic Disease Risk Factor Surveillance. Prevalence of hypertension (systolic blood pressure > or =140 mm Hg and/or diastolic blood pressure > or =90 mm Hg and/or antihypertensive drug therapy), awareness (having been informed of the hypertensive status by a health professional in the previous year), treatment among the aware (use of antihypertensive medication in the previous fortnight), and control among those treated (blood pressure <140/90 mm Hg) were 33.1% (women: 31.2%; men: 35.7%), 14.8% (women: 18.4%; men: 10.6%), 51.9% (women: 61.1%; men: 33.3%), and 39.9% (women: 42.9%; men: 28.7%), respectively. ⋯ Control was less frequent in urban women (OR: 0.2; 95% CI: 0.0 to 1.0) and more frequent in urban men (OR: 78.1; 95% CI: 2.2 to 2716.6). Our results illustrate the changing paradigms of "diseases of affluence" and the dynamic character of epidemiological transition. The urban/rural differences across sexes support a trend toward smaller differences, emphasizing the need for strategies to improve prevention, correct diagnosis, and access to effective treatment.