4.1 Article

Prevalence of Angina Pectoris in Pelotas (south of Brazil)

Journal

ARQUIVOS BRASILEIROS DE CARDIOLOGIA
Volume 95, Issue 2, Pages 179-185

Publisher

ARQUIVOS BRASILEIROS CARDIOLOGIA
DOI: 10.1590/S0066-782X2010005000075

Keywords

Angina; prevalence; population; cross-sectional studies

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Ischemic heart disease is the leading cause of death in the world and angina is its cardinal manifestation. Objective: To determine the prevalence of angina and possible angina and its distribution by main demographic and socioeconomic characteristics among adults 40 years of age or older. Methods: This is a population-based, cross-sectional study featuring residents of the urban area in Pelotas, a city located in the south of Brazil, from October through December 2007. A two-stage cluster sampling - census tracts and households - was used. The prevalence of angina and possible angina was defined according to the Rose questionnaire. These conditions were assessed by demographic and socioeconomic characteristics: age, sex, skin color, economic status, and schooling. Data were collected using standardized questionnaires in interviews with the individuals in their homes. The non-respondent rate was 6.8%. Results: The prevalence of angina among the 1,680 individuals taking part in the study was 8.2% (95% Cl: 6.7 - 9.6), while that of possible angina came to 12.3% (95% Cl: 10.6 - 14.0). The prevalence of angina and possible angina was higher among women, black/brown-skinned individuals, low economic class individuals and subjects with the low schooling. The prevalence of angina was higher among older individuals, while possible angina was found not to be associated with age. Conclusion: The prevalence of angina and possible angina was found to be high, affecting approximately 20% of the population in Pelotas. (Arq Bras Cardiol 2010; 95(21: 179-785)

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available