4.4 Article

Evidence of a Heart Failure Belt in the Southeastern United States

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY
卷 107, 期 6, 页码 935-937

出版社

EXCERPTA MEDICA INC-ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2010.11.012

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute [R01-HL085561, R01-HL097047]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The southeastern region of the United States is known as the stroke belt because of excess stroke mortality in this region compared to the rest of the country. However, whether a similar geographic variation in heart failure mortality exists is unknown. Using the Center for Disease Control and Prevention Wide-ranging Online Data for Epidemiologic Research publicly available compressed mortality data files and 2000 United States population as the standard, we estimated age-adjusted heart failure and stroke mortality rates per 100,000 for patients of all ages, men and women, and all races during 1979 through 1998 in the United States and mapped rates at the state level. Age-adjusted heart failure mortality rate for the 6 contiguous southeastern states (Alabama, Arkansas, Mississippi, Oklahoma, Louisiana, and Georgia) was 31.0/100,000, which was 69% higher than the national rate of 18.3/100,000. This geographic disparity was similar in African-Americans (32.9/100,000 in the southeast vs 21.7/100,000 nationally) and whites (30.8/100,000 in the southeast vs 18.1/100,000 nationally). These findings suggest that, in addition to the stroke belt, the southeastern region of the United States may also be burdened by a heart failure belt. To better understand the causes of excess stroke mortality in the stroke belt, the National Institutes of Health has funded the Reasons for Geographic and Racial Differences in Stroke (REGARDS) study (n = 30,239, > 1/2 from the southeastern region), which provides a unique opportunity to study the underlying causes of excess heart failure mortality in the heart failure belt. Published by Elsevier Inc. (Am J Cardiol 2011;107:935-937)

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

4.4
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