Cited by 20Cardiovascular Health and Risk FactorsHealth Promotion and Cardiovascular PreventionCardiac Health and Mental Health

Nondietary cardiovascular health metrics with patient experience and loss of productivity among US adults without cardiovascular disease: the medical expenditure panel survey 2006 to 2015

Open access
Tibuakuu, Martin, Okunrintemi, Victor, Savji, Nazir, Stone, Neil J., Virani, Salim S., Blankstein, Ron, Thamman, Ritu, Blumenthal, Roger S. +1 more·2020·Journal of the American Heart Association

Abstract

Background: The American Heart Association 2020 Impact Goals aimed to promote population health through emphasis on cardiovascular health (CVH). We examined the association between nondietary CVH metrics and patient‐reported outcomes among a nationally representative sample of US adults without cardiovascular disease. Methods and Results: We included adults aged ≥18 years who participated in the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey between 2006 and 2015. CVH metrics were scored 1 point for each of the following: not smoking, being physically active, normal body mass index, no hypertension, no diabetes mellitus, and no dyslipidemia, or 0 points if otherwise. Diet was not assessed in Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. Patient‐reported outcomes were obtained by telephone survey and included questions pertaining to patient experience and health‐related quality of life. Regression models were used to compare patient‐reported outcomes based on CVH, adjusting for sociodemographic factors and comorbidities. There were 177 421 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey participants (mean age, 45 [17] years) representing ~187 million US adults without cardiovascular disease. About 12% (~21 million US adults) had poor CVH. Compared with individuals with optimal CVH, those with poor CVH had higher odds of reporting poor patient‐provider communication (odds ratio, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.05–1.24), poor healthcare satisfaction (odds ratio, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.08–1.22), poor perception of health (odds ratio, 5.89; 95% CI, 5.35–6.49), at least 2 disability days off work (odds ratio, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.30–1.48), and lower health‐related quality of life scores. Conclusions: Among US adults without cardiovascular disease, meeting a lower number of ideal CVH metrics is associated with poor patient‐reported healthcare experience, poor perception of health, and lower health‐related quality of life. Preventive measures aimed at optimizing ideal CVH metrics may improve patient‐reported outcomes among this population.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1161/jaha.120.016744

Cites

39 of 39 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 40 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [1]Lloyd‐Jones DM, Hong Y, Labarthe D, Mozaffarian D, Appel LJ, Van Horn L, Greenlund K, Daniels S, Nichol G, Tomaselli GF, et al. Defining and setting national goals for cardiovascular health promotion and disease reduction. Circulation. 2010; 586– 613. 20089546

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tibuakuu, M., Okunrintemi, V., Savji, N., Stone, N. J., Virani, S. S., Blankstein, R., Thamman, R., Blumenthal, R. S., & Michos, E. D.
Affiliations
  • Johns Hopkins University (US)
  • East Carolina University (US)
  • Northwestern University (US)
  • Michael E. DeBakey VA Medical Center (US)
  • Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
  • University of Pittsburgh (US)
Corresponding author
Michos, Erin D.
Venue
Journal of the American Heart Association
Published
2020-10-06
Volume
9
Issue
19
Pages
e016744-e016744
ISSN
2047-9980 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3091540642
Cited by
20
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 5 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 2
FWCI
1.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc-nd
Locations
  • Journal of the American Heart Association (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • eCommons - AKU (Aga Khan University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiovascular Health and Risk Factors
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Health Promotion and Cardiovascular Prevention
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac Health and Mental Health
Keywords
cardiovascular health, patient-reported outcomes, health-related quality of life, patient-provider communication, health care satisfaction, health perception, labor productivity, smoking, physical activity, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, dyslipidemia, body mass index, cardiovascular disease prevention
MeSH terms
Patient Reported Outcome Measures, Heart Disease Risk Factors, Health Expenditures, Female, Health Surveys, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Quality of Life, Self Concept, United States, Quality Indicators, Health Care, Diagnostic Self Evaluation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review