4.7 Article

Association between chronic pain and acute coronary syndrome in the older population: a nationwide population-based cohort study

期刊

BMC GERIATRICS
卷 23, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s12877-023-04368-1

关键词

Acute coronary syndrome; Chronic pain; Older

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study found that older patients with CP had a higher risk of ACS compared to those without CP in the older population. The risk of ACS increased with longer follow-up periods.
Background Chronic pain (CP) may increase the risk of acute coronary syndrome (ACS); however, this issue in the older population remains unclear. Therefore, this study was conducted to clarify it.Methods We used the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database to identify older patients with CP between 2001 and 2005 as the study cohort. Comparison cohort was the older patients without CP by matching age, sex, and index date at 1:1 ratio with the study cohort in the same period. We also included common underlying comorbidities in the analyses. The risk of ACS was compared between the two cohorts by following up until 2015.Results A total of 17241 older patients with CP and 17241 older patients without CP were included in this study. In both cohorts, the mean age (+/- standard deviation) and female percentage were 73.5 +/- 5.7) years and 55.4%, respectively. Spinal disorders (31.9%) and osteoarthritis (27.0%) were the most common causes of CP. Older patients with CP had an increased risk for ACS compared to those without CP after adjusting for all underlying comorbidities (adjusted sub-distribution hazard ratio [sHR] 1.18; 95% confidence interval: 1.07-1.30). The increasement of risk of ACS was more when the follow-up period was longer (adjusted sHR of < 3 years: 1.8 vs. <2 years: 1.75 vs. <1 year: 1.55).Conclusions CP was associated with an increased risk of ACS in the older population, and the association was more prominent when the follow-up period was longer. Early detection and intervention for CP are suggested in this population.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据