TY - JOUR
T1 - Bipolar disorder and cardiovascular risk in rural versus urban populations in colombia
T2 - A comparative clinical and epidemiological evaluation
AU - Forero, Juan Pablo
AU - Ferrera, Alexander
AU - Castaño, Jose Daniel
AU - Ardila, Sergio
AU - Mesa, Tanya
AU - Hosgood, Dean
AU - Ferro, Eugenio
N1 - Funding Information:
Medical student researchers have received travel funding for retrieval of Data in Colombia from the Kuperman International Health Endowment Fund at Albert Einstein College of Medicine.This study was a collaboration between Albert Einstein College of Medicine (Bronx, NY, USA), Instituto Colombiano del Sistema Nervioso (ICSN) – Clinica Montserrat (Bogota DC, Colombia), and Hospital San Bernardo (Filadelfia, Caldas, Colombia). First, we thank Ms. Jill Raufman and Dr. Dean Hosgood at the Global Health Department for helping make travel for students possible. Secondly, we want to thank the staff at Clinica Montserrat in Bogota for accepting our petition to collaborate and further facilitating our study. Finally, we thank the providers and staff at the Hospital San Bernardo of Filadelfia for their participation and help in making our study possible.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 The Author(s). This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC-BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. See http://creativecommons.org/ licenses/by/4.0/.
PY - 2021
Y1 - 2021
N2 - Background: Various multifactorial elements may contribute toward the urban and rural disparities in cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk, particularly among patients with psychiatric diseases. Objective: To investigate whether rural patients diagnosed and treated for Bipolar Disorder (BD) have different risk profiles and outcomes of CVD compared to urban (BD) patients. Methods: We conducted a case-control study that included 125 BD patients (cases) from rural Filadelfia, Colombia and 250 BD patients (controls) treated in Bogotá, Colombia. Cases and controls were 2:1, matched by age and sex. We applied the Framingham Heart Study (FHS) risk calculator to assess risk. Differences by rural/urban status (i.e., case-control status) were assessed by chi-square, paired t-tests, and logistic regression. Findings: Rural BD patients were found to have lower education (p = 1.0 × 10–4), alcohol consumption (p = 3.0 × 10–4), smoking (p = 0.015), psychiatric (p = 1.0 × 10–4) and CV family history (p = 0.0042) compared to urban BD patients. Rural BD patients were 81% more likely to have a more favorable CVD risk profile (OR: 0.19, 95% CI [0.06–0.62]) than urban BD patients, despite rural BD patients having increased CVD morbidity (p = 1.0 × 10–2). Conclusion: Based on increase in morbidity but lower predictive risk in the rural population, our study suggests that the FHS-CVD calculator may not be optimal to assess CVD risk in this population.
AB - Background: Various multifactorial elements may contribute toward the urban and rural disparities in cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk, particularly among patients with psychiatric diseases. Objective: To investigate whether rural patients diagnosed and treated for Bipolar Disorder (BD) have different risk profiles and outcomes of CVD compared to urban (BD) patients. Methods: We conducted a case-control study that included 125 BD patients (cases) from rural Filadelfia, Colombia and 250 BD patients (controls) treated in Bogotá, Colombia. Cases and controls were 2:1, matched by age and sex. We applied the Framingham Heart Study (FHS) risk calculator to assess risk. Differences by rural/urban status (i.e., case-control status) were assessed by chi-square, paired t-tests, and logistic regression. Findings: Rural BD patients were found to have lower education (p = 1.0 × 10–4), alcohol consumption (p = 3.0 × 10–4), smoking (p = 0.015), psychiatric (p = 1.0 × 10–4) and CV family history (p = 0.0042) compared to urban BD patients. Rural BD patients were 81% more likely to have a more favorable CVD risk profile (OR: 0.19, 95% CI [0.06–0.62]) than urban BD patients, despite rural BD patients having increased CVD morbidity (p = 1.0 × 10–2). Conclusion: Based on increase in morbidity but lower predictive risk in the rural population, our study suggests that the FHS-CVD calculator may not be optimal to assess CVD risk in this population.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85119935408&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85119935408&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.5334/aogh.3479
DO - 10.5334/aogh.3479
M3 - Article
C2 - 34824993
AN - SCOPUS:85119935408
SN - 0027-2507
VL - 87
JO - Annals of global health
JF - Annals of global health
IS - 1
M1 - 112
ER -