IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0175947.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Prevalence of cardiovascular medication on secondary prevention after myocardial infarction in China between 1995-2015: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Min Zhao
  • Kerstin Klipstein-Grobusch
  • Xin Wang
  • Johannes B Reitsma
  • Dong Zhao
  • Diederick E Grobbee
  • Ian Graham
  • Ilonca Vaartjes

Abstract

Background: Myocardial Infarction (MI) has become a major cause of morbidity and mortality in China, but little is known about the prevalence of guideline-recommended cardiovascular medications after MI events over the last two decades. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to summarize cardiovascular medication use between 1995–2015 and to assess factors in associated with the trends in cardiovascular medications. Method: A systematic search was conducted in four databases (Pubmed, Embase, CENTRAL, and CNKI) to obtain observational studies published between 1995 and 2015, reporting on the use of cardiovascular medications in China. Risk of bias of individual studies was appraised and selected studies were pooled for estimated prevalence of cardiovascular medication. Prevalence of cardiovascular medication use for 1995 and 2015 was estimated by random effects meta-regression model. Results: From 13,940 identified publications, 35 studies, comprising 28,000 patients, were included. The pooled prevalence for aspirin, beta-blockers, statins, ACE-Inhibitors, ACE-Inhibitor/ARBs and nitrates was 92% [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.89–0.95], 63% (95% CI: 0.57–0.69), 72% (95% CI: 0.60–0.82), 49% (95% CI: 0.41–0.57), 59% (95% CI: 0.48–0.69) and 79% (95% CI: 0.74–0.91), respectively. A significant increase in beta-blocker and statin use and a decrease of nitrate use was observed over time. The estimated prevalence of beta-blockers, statins, and nitrates was 78%, 91.1%, and 59.3% in 2015, compared to 32%, 17% and 96% in 1995, respectively. Conclusion: Cardiovascular medication use after MI is far from optimal in Chinese patients, even though the prevalence of use increased over the period 1995–2015. With a rapidly increasing number of MI patients in China, a comprehensive strategy on secondary prevention is warranted. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO (CRD42015025246)

Suggested Citation

  • Min Zhao & Kerstin Klipstein-Grobusch & Xin Wang & Johannes B Reitsma & Dong Zhao & Diederick E Grobbee & Ian Graham & Ilonca Vaartjes, 2017. "Prevalence of cardiovascular medication on secondary prevention after myocardial infarction in China between 1995-2015: A systematic review and meta-analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(4), pages 1-16, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0175947
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0175947
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0175947
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0175947&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0175947?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David Moher & Alessandro Liberati & Jennifer Tetzlaff & Douglas G Altman & The PRISMA Group, 2009. "Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(7), pages 1-6, July.
    2. Viechtbauer, Wolfgang, 2010. "Conducting Meta-Analyses in R with the metafor Package," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 36(i03).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Piers Steel & Sjoerd Beugelsdijk & Herman Aguinis, 2021. "The anatomy of an award-winning meta-analysis: Recommendations for authors, reviewers, and readers of meta-analytic reviews," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 52(1), pages 23-44, February.
    2. Mahesh Shumsher Rughooputh & Rui Zeng & Ying Yao, 2015. "Protein Diet Restriction Slows Chronic Kidney Disease Progression in Non-Diabetic and in Type 1 Diabetic Patients, but Not in Type 2 Diabetic Patients: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials ," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(12), pages 1-17, December.
    3. Christopher Winchester & Kelsey E. Medeiros, 2023. "In Bounds but Out of the Box: A Meta-Analysis Clarifying the Effect of Ethicality on Creativity," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 183(3), pages 713-743, March.
    4. Kelly R Moran & Sara Y Del Valle, 2016. "A Meta-Analysis of the Association between Gender and Protective Behaviors in Response to Respiratory Epidemics and Pandemics," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(10), pages 1-25, October.
    5. Sandra Feijóo & Raquel Rodríguez-Fernández, 2021. "A Meta-Analytical Review of Gender-Based School Bullying in Spain," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(23), pages 1-13, December.
    6. Xizheng Xu & Zhiqiang Liu & Shaoying Gong & Yunpeng Wu, 2022. "The Relationship between Empathy and Attachment in Children and Adolescents: Three-Level Meta-Analyses," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(3), pages 1-18, January.
    7. Kathrin Wunsch & Janis Fiedler & Philip Bachert & Alexander Woll, 2021. "The Tridirectional Relationship among Physical Activity, Stress, and Academic Performance in University Students: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(2), pages 1-18, January.
    8. Alan da Silveira Fleck & Margaux L. Sadoine & Stéphane Buteau & Eva Suarthana & Maximilien Debia & Audrey Smargiassi, 2021. "Environmental and Occupational Short-Term Exposure to Airborne Particles and FEV 1 and FVC in Healthy Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(20), pages 1-19, October.
    9. Evangelos Danopoulos & Maureen Twiddy & Jeanette M Rotchell, 2020. "Microplastic contamination of drinking water: A systematic review," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(7), pages 1-23, July.
    10. Claudia Menne-Lothmann & Wolfgang Viechtbauer & Petra Höhn & Zuzana Kasanova & Simone P Haller & Marjan Drukker & Jim van Os & Marieke Wichers & Jennifer Y F Lau, 2014. "How to Boost Positive Interpretations? A Meta-Analysis of the Effectiveness of Cognitive Bias Modification for Interpretation," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(6), pages 1-26, June.
    11. José Felipe Orzuna-Orzuna & Juan Eduardo Godina-Rodríguez & Jonathan Raúl Garay-Martínez & Guillermo Reséndiz-González & Santiago Joaquín-Cancino & Alejandro Lara-Bueno, 2024. "Milk Yield, Composition, and Fatty Acid Profile in Milk of Dairy Cows Supplemented with Microalgae Schizochytrium sp.: A Meta-Analysis," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-13, July.
    12. Wei-Cheng Chang & Chin Lin & Cho-Hao Lee & Tzu-Ling Sung & Tao-Hsin Tung & Jorn-Hon Liu, 2017. "Vitrectomy with or without internal limiting membrane peeling for idiopathic epiretinal membrane: A meta-analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(6), pages 1-18, June.
    13. Christopher Hansen & Holger Steinmetz & Jörn Block, 2022. "How to conduct a meta-analysis in eight steps: a practical guide," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 72(1), pages 1-19, February.
    14. Shaylea Badovinac & Jodi Martin & Camille Guérin-Marion & Monica O’Neill & Rebecca Pillai Riddell & Jean-François Bureau & Rebecca Spiegel, 2018. "Associations between mother-preschooler attachment and maternal depression symptoms: A systematic review and meta-analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(10), pages 1-27, October.
    15. Fazel, Seena & Burghart, Matthias & Fanshawe, Thomas & Gil, Sharon Danielle & Monahan, John & Yu, Rongqin, 2022. "The predictive performance of criminal risk assessment tools used at sentencing: Systematic review of validation studies," Journal of Criminal Justice, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    16. Amro Qaddoura & Payam Yazdan-Ashoori & Conrad Kabali & Lehana Thabane & R Brian Haynes & Stuart J Connolly & Harriette Gillian Christine Van Spall, 2015. "Efficacy of Hospital at Home in Patients with Heart Failure: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(6), pages 1-15, June.
    17. Boshra H. Namin & Torvald Øgaard & Jo Røislien, 2021. "Workplace Incivility and Turnover Intention in Organizations: A Meta-Analytic Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(1), pages 1-19, December.
    18. Ruohuang Jiao & Wojtek Przepiorka & Vincent Buskens, 2022. "Moderators of reputation effects in peer-to-peer online markets: a meta-analytic model selection approach," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 1041-1067, May.
    19. Pedro Silva Moreira & Pedro R Almeida & Hugo Leite-Almeida & Nuno Sousa & Patrício Costa, 2016. "Impact of Chronic Stress Protocols in Learning and Memory in Rodents: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(9), pages 1-24, September.
    20. Romain Cadario & Pierre Chandon, 2020. "Which Healthy Eating Nudges Work Best? A Meta-Analysis of Field Experiments," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(3), pages 465-486, May.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0175947. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.