The cost of treating heart disease and stroke in the United States is expected to triple in the next 20 years, to $818 billion.
According to the American Heart Association this $545 billion increase in costs for treating heart disease and stroke is largely due to the aging of the population.
"The burden of heart disease and stroke on the U.S. health care system and American families will be substantial," said Jesse Slome, executive director of the American Association for Critical Illness Insurance.
The projected increase in costs will be based on the current rate of heart disease adjusted for changes in the overall age of Americans and the anticipated racial mix of patients.
Experts noted that these estimates do not take into account the additional costs for those who have more than one condition, or new treatments that might come along, To curb this rise in costs, the panel said that effective prevention strategies are needed if we are to limit the growing burden of cardiovascular disease.
American Heart Association CEO Nancy Brown said in a news release that "unhealthy behaviors and unhealthy environments have contributed to a tidal wave of risk factors among many Americans. Early intervention and evidence-based public policies are absolute musts to significantly reduce alarming rates of obesity, hypertension, tobacco use and cholesterol levels."
Right now, 36.9 percent of Americans have some type of heart disease, including high blood pressure, coronary heart disease, heart failure, stroke and other conditions. By 2030, that number will rise to 40.5 percent of the population, or about 116 million people, according to the report.
The biggest increases are thought to be in stroke, up 24.9 percent, and heart failure, up 25 percent.
Between 2010 and 2030, the cost of caring for patients with heart disease will go from $273 billion to $818 billion, the panel predicted.
In addition, heart disease will cost billions more in lost productivity, increasing from about $172 billion in 2010 to $276 billion in 2030. These losses include days missed from work or home tasks because of illness, plus lost earnings due to premature death.
There are also a number of low-cost, high-value cardiovascular protective therapies that are available but are underutilized in routine clinical care that could also help to reduce the burden of cardiovascular disease.
These include keeping blood pressure and cholesterol under control, not smoking and maintaining a healthy lifestyle, which means eating a healthy diet, getting exercise and keeping your weight down. These strategies have been proven to substantially reduce the risk of heart disease.
For more information on affordable critical illness insurance protection which can provide a tax-free lump sum cash payment upon diagnosis of a heart attack or stroke, viasit the American Association for Critical Illness Insurance's website http://www.crititcalillnessinsuranceinfo.org
Showing posts with label American Heart Association. Show all posts
Showing posts with label American Heart Association. Show all posts
Wednesday, January 26, 2011
Monday, December 14, 2009
Many Stroke Survivors Don't Take Lifesaving Meds
About one-fifth of ischemic stroke survivors don't take medications that can reduce their risk of another stroke.
According to research, about 19 percent of patients didn't take prescribed blood thinners. Each year about 600,000 Americans experience their first stroke and 185,000 have a recurrent stroke according to the American Association for Critical Illness Insurance.
Stroke is the third leading cause of death in the United States. Over 143,579 people die each year from stroke in the United States and stroke is a leading cause of serious long-term disability. Nearly three-quarters of all strokes occur in people over the age of 65. The risk of having a stroke more than doubles each decade after the age of 55 the Association notes.
Ischemic stroke is caused by blocked blood flow in the brain. Several types of medications can reduce the risk of another ischemic stroke. These include blood thinners - also known as antithrombotic medications, of which aspirin is the most common.
This seven-year study conducted by the University of California, Los Angeles, examined 4,168 ischemic stroke survivors. Researchers found that about 19 percent of patients didn't take blood thinners. Men, older patients and non-Hispanic patients were more likely to take blood thinners.
The study will be published in the January issue of the American Journal of Preventive Medicine.
According to research, about 19 percent of patients didn't take prescribed blood thinners. Each year about 600,000 Americans experience their first stroke and 185,000 have a recurrent stroke according to the American Association for Critical Illness Insurance.
Stroke is the third leading cause of death in the United States. Over 143,579 people die each year from stroke in the United States and stroke is a leading cause of serious long-term disability. Nearly three-quarters of all strokes occur in people over the age of 65. The risk of having a stroke more than doubles each decade after the age of 55 the Association notes.
Ischemic stroke is caused by blocked blood flow in the brain. Several types of medications can reduce the risk of another ischemic stroke. These include blood thinners - also known as antithrombotic medications, of which aspirin is the most common.
This seven-year study conducted by the University of California, Los Angeles, examined 4,168 ischemic stroke survivors. Researchers found that about 19 percent of patients didn't take blood thinners. Men, older patients and non-Hispanic patients were more likely to take blood thinners.
The study will be published in the January issue of the American Journal of Preventive Medicine.
Saturday, November 21, 2009
Moderate Drinking May Help Your Heart
A Spanish study has found that long-term moderate drinking decreased the risk of heart disease by up to one-third in men and to a lesser degree in women.
The type of alcohol -- beer, wine or spirits -- made no difference, the researchers reported in the Nov. 19 online issue of Heart. The Spanish analysis used 10-year data on over 40,000 men and women who were participants in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer study.
But for men, there was a point at which the coronary benefits of alcohol declined, and risk began to rise again. The rate of coronary heart disease for non-drinking women in the study was 56 per 100,000. For women listed as low drinkers, averaging less than 5 grams a day, it was 42. For women who were moderate drinkers (5 to 30 grams a day), it was 36; for high drinkers (30 to 90 grams a day) it was 12; and for heavy drinkers (more than 90 grams a day) it was 12.
The rates for men were 398 per 100,000 for those who never drank, 318 for low drinkers, 255 for moderate drinkers, 278 for high drinkers and 334 for heavy drinkers, the researchers reported.
The report showing that the source of alcohol made no difference does help puncture one explanation for what has come to be called the "French paradox," the low level of heart disease seen in that country despite consumption of what Americans would describe as an unhealthy, fat-rich diet. Some experts have attributed the paradox to the beneficial effects of red wine.
A number of well-done studies have shown that people who drink have higher levels of HDL cholesterol. HDL cholesterol is the "good" kind that prevents formation of artery-blocking plaque deposits.
The American Heart Association recommendation is that "if you drink, do so in moderation." That means one to two drinks a day for a man, one drink a day for a woman, with a drink defined as 12 ounces of beer, 4 ounces of wine or 1 ounce of 100-proof spirits.
Every 34 seconds an American will suffer a heart attack according to the American Association for Critical Illness Insurance.
SOURCES: Eric B. Rimm, Sc.D., associate professor, epidemiology and nutrition, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston; Kenneth Mukamal, M.D., internist, Beth Israel Deaconess Hospital, associate professor, medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston; Nov. 19, 2009, Heart, online.
The type of alcohol -- beer, wine or spirits -- made no difference, the researchers reported in the Nov. 19 online issue of Heart. The Spanish analysis used 10-year data on over 40,000 men and women who were participants in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer study.
But for men, there was a point at which the coronary benefits of alcohol declined, and risk began to rise again. The rate of coronary heart disease for non-drinking women in the study was 56 per 100,000. For women listed as low drinkers, averaging less than 5 grams a day, it was 42. For women who were moderate drinkers (5 to 30 grams a day), it was 36; for high drinkers (30 to 90 grams a day) it was 12; and for heavy drinkers (more than 90 grams a day) it was 12.
The rates for men were 398 per 100,000 for those who never drank, 318 for low drinkers, 255 for moderate drinkers, 278 for high drinkers and 334 for heavy drinkers, the researchers reported.
The report showing that the source of alcohol made no difference does help puncture one explanation for what has come to be called the "French paradox," the low level of heart disease seen in that country despite consumption of what Americans would describe as an unhealthy, fat-rich diet. Some experts have attributed the paradox to the beneficial effects of red wine.
A number of well-done studies have shown that people who drink have higher levels of HDL cholesterol. HDL cholesterol is the "good" kind that prevents formation of artery-blocking plaque deposits.
The American Heart Association recommendation is that "if you drink, do so in moderation." That means one to two drinks a day for a man, one drink a day for a woman, with a drink defined as 12 ounces of beer, 4 ounces of wine or 1 ounce of 100-proof spirits.
Every 34 seconds an American will suffer a heart attack according to the American Association for Critical Illness Insurance.
SOURCES: Eric B. Rimm, Sc.D., associate professor, epidemiology and nutrition, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston; Kenneth Mukamal, M.D., internist, Beth Israel Deaconess Hospital, associate professor, medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston; Nov. 19, 2009, Heart, online.
Friday, November 20, 2009
Diuretics Still Best Treatment for High Blood Pressure
Diuretics are confirmed as the best first-line treatment in older men and women with high blood pressure according to new research.
Medical researchers reported the findings of a study at the annual meeting of the American Heart Association this week. They reported that the thiazide-type diuretic chlorthalidone outshone three other treatments -- a calcium channel blocker, an ACE inhibitor and an alpha-receptor blocker -- in most areas. This was especially effective in lowering the incidence of stroke and heart failure.
An estimated 80 million American adults have one or more types of cardiovascular disease according to the American Association for Critical Illness Insurance. Some 785,000 will have a new coronary attack this year according to the industry trade group.
The findings the medical experts note are largely unchanged. They note that the main message is that treating hypertension [high blood pressure] is very necessary and that treating hypertension with chlorthalidone resulted in a significant reduction in heart failure and stroke.
The original trial, begun in 1994, involved more than 42,000 patients with hypertension and at least one other risk factor for cardiovascular disease. The participants were randomly assigned to take one of the following anti-hypertensive drugs: chlorthalidone (the diuretic), amlodipine besylate (the calcium channel blocker), doxazosin mesylate (the alpha blocker) or lisinopril (an ACE inhibitor).
The five-year follow-up, which ended in 2002, was intended to see if new differences emerged with long-term use of the medications, especially regarding coronary heart disease, total mortality, heart failure and aggregate cardiovascular disease.
This is the largest hypertension trial to date, one researcher noted. Earlier results had also found that diuretics were as good or better than other blood pressure-lowering drugs for treating hypertension in patients with metabolic syndrome (a collection of factors that put people at risk of heart disease), especially black patients.
Medical researchers reported the findings of a study at the annual meeting of the American Heart Association this week. They reported that the thiazide-type diuretic chlorthalidone outshone three other treatments -- a calcium channel blocker, an ACE inhibitor and an alpha-receptor blocker -- in most areas. This was especially effective in lowering the incidence of stroke and heart failure.
An estimated 80 million American adults have one or more types of cardiovascular disease according to the American Association for Critical Illness Insurance. Some 785,000 will have a new coronary attack this year according to the industry trade group.
The findings the medical experts note are largely unchanged. They note that the main message is that treating hypertension [high blood pressure] is very necessary and that treating hypertension with chlorthalidone resulted in a significant reduction in heart failure and stroke.
The original trial, begun in 1994, involved more than 42,000 patients with hypertension and at least one other risk factor for cardiovascular disease. The participants were randomly assigned to take one of the following anti-hypertensive drugs: chlorthalidone (the diuretic), amlodipine besylate (the calcium channel blocker), doxazosin mesylate (the alpha blocker) or lisinopril (an ACE inhibitor).
The five-year follow-up, which ended in 2002, was intended to see if new differences emerged with long-term use of the medications, especially regarding coronary heart disease, total mortality, heart failure and aggregate cardiovascular disease.
This is the largest hypertension trial to date, one researcher noted. Earlier results had also found that diuretics were as good or better than other blood pressure-lowering drugs for treating hypertension in patients with metabolic syndrome (a collection of factors that put people at risk of heart disease), especially black patients.
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Rapid Cooling May Help When Heart Attack Hits
Rapid cooling of heart attack patients may boost their chance of survival without brain damage.
Swedish researchers examined the use of a device called RhinoChill, which cools the brains of heart attack patients during ongoing cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR).
The median time between cardiac arrest onset and the start of cooling was 23 minutes. On arrival at hospital, the average body temperature of cooled patients was 93.56 degrees F, compared with 95.9 degrees for standard care patients.
The study found that 46.7 percent of patients in the cooling group survived to hospital discharge, compared with 31 percent of patients who received standard care. In addition, some 36.7 percent of those in the cooling group and 21.4 percent of those in the standard care group were in good neurological condition when discharged from the hospital.
Patients who received a combination of early CPR -- started within six minutes of collapse -- and cooling had the best outcomes. The researchers noted that the earlier you can do the cooling, the better. When resuscitation efforts were delayed, there was no significant difference in survival.
The study was to be presented Nov. 15 at an American Heart Association's annual meeting in Orlando, Fla.
According to the American Association for Critical Illness Insurance, some785,000 Americans will have a new cornary attack this year.
Swedish researchers examined the use of a device called RhinoChill, which cools the brains of heart attack patients during ongoing cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR).
The median time between cardiac arrest onset and the start of cooling was 23 minutes. On arrival at hospital, the average body temperature of cooled patients was 93.56 degrees F, compared with 95.9 degrees for standard care patients.
The study found that 46.7 percent of patients in the cooling group survived to hospital discharge, compared with 31 percent of patients who received standard care. In addition, some 36.7 percent of those in the cooling group and 21.4 percent of those in the standard care group were in good neurological condition when discharged from the hospital.
Patients who received a combination of early CPR -- started within six minutes of collapse -- and cooling had the best outcomes. The researchers noted that the earlier you can do the cooling, the better. When resuscitation efforts were delayed, there was no significant difference in survival.
The study was to be presented Nov. 15 at an American Heart Association's annual meeting in Orlando, Fla.
According to the American Association for Critical Illness Insurance, some785,000 Americans will have a new cornary attack this year.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
