10
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Differences in coronary heart disease, stroke and cancer mortality rates between England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland: the role of diet and nutrition

      research-article
      1 , , 2 , 3 , 1
      BMJ Open
      BMJ Group

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Introduction

          It is unclear how much of the geographical variation in coronary heart disease (CHD), stroke and cancer mortality rates within the UK is associated with diet. The aim of this study is to estimate how many deaths from CHD, stroke and cancer would be delayed or averted if Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland adopted a diet equivalent in nutritional quality to the English diet.

          Methods

          Mortality data for CHD, stroke and 10 diet-related cancers for 2007–2009 were used to calculate the mortality gap (the difference between actual mortality and English mortality rates) for Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. Estimates of mean national consumption of 10 dietary factors were used as baseline and counterfactual inputs in a macrosimulation model (DIETRON). An uncertainty analysis was conducted using a Monte Carlo simulation with 5000 iterations.

          Results

          The mortality gap in the modelled scenario (achieving the English diet) was reduced by 81% (95% credible intervals: 62% to 108%) for Wales, 40% (33% to 51%) for Scotland and 81% (67% to 99%) for Northern Ireland, equating to approximately 3700 deaths delayed or averted annually. For CHD only, the mortality gap was reduced by 88% (69% to 118%) for Wales, 58% (47% to 72%) for Scotland, and 88% (70% to 111%) for Northern Ireland.

          Conclusion

          Improving the average diet in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland to a level already achieved in England could have a substantial impact on reducing geographical variations in chronic disease mortality rates in the UK. Much of the mortality gap between Scotland and England is explained by non-dietary risk factors.

          Article summary

          Article focus
          • Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland experience excess cardiovascular and cancer mortality compared to England.

          • How much of this excess mortality is associated with differences in diet and nutrition in the four countries of the UK?

          Key messages
          • Modelled results suggest that if Wales and Northern Ireland achieved an average diet equivalent in nutritional quality to the average diet in England, then 81% of the excess cardiovascular and cancer mortality experienced in these countries would be removed.

          • If Scotland achieved an average diet equivalent in nutritional quality to the average diet in England, then 40% of the excess cardiovascular and cancer mortality would be removed.

          • For Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, changes in diet would have the biggest impact on inequalities in coronary heart disease mortality.

          Strengths and limitations of this study
          • The macrosimulation model used for the analysis is parameterised using meta-analyses of cohort and case–control studies, and considers 10 different dietary factors and 10 mortality outcomes.

          • Uncertainty analysis, allowing parameter estimates to vary stochastically according to distributions reported in the literature, allow for an assessment of the uncertainty of the presented results.

          • The model is parameterised from meta-analyses of observational studies, and therefore it is not possible to exclude the possibility of residual confounding.

          Related collections

          Most cited references16

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Fruit and vegetable consumption and risk of coronary heart disease: a meta-analysis of cohort studies.

          The consumption of fruit and vegetables is associated with a reduced rate of coronary heart disease (CHD) in observational cohorts. The purpose of this study was to assess the strength of this association in a meta-analysis. Cohort studies were selected if they reported relative risks (RRs) and 95% CI for coronary heart disease or mortality and if they presented a quantitative assessment of fruit and vegetable intake. The pooled RRs were calculated for each additional portion of fruit and/or vegetables consumed per day, and the linearity of the associations were examined. Nine studies were eligible for inclusion in the meta-analysis that consisted of 91,379 men, 129,701 women, and 5,007 CHD events. The risk of CHD was decreased by 4% [RR (95% CI): 0.96 (0.93-0.99), P = 0.0027] for each additional portion per day of fruit and vegetable intake and by 7% [0.93 (0.89-0.96), P < 0.0001] for fruit intake. The association between vegetable intake and CHD risk was heterogeneous (P = 0.0043), more marked for cardiovascular mortality [0.74 (0.75-0.84), P < 0.0001] than for fatal and nonfatal myocardial infarction [0.95 (0.92-0.99), P = 0.0058]. Visual inspection of the funnel plot suggested a publication bias, although not statistically significant. Therefore, the reported RRs are probably overestimated. This meta-analysis of cohort studies shows that fruit and vegetable consumption is inversely associated with the risk of CHD. The causal mechanism of this association, however, remains to be demonstrated.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Dietary fiber and risk of coronary heart disease: a pooled analysis of cohort studies.

            Few epidemiologic studies of dietary fiber intake and risk of coronary heart disease have compared fiber types (cereal, fruit, and vegetable) or included sex-specific results. The purpose of this study was to conduct a pooled analysis of dietary fiber and its subtypes and risk of coronary heart disease. We analyzed the original data from 10 prospective cohort studies from the United States and Europe to estimate the association between dietary fiber intake and the risk of coronary heart disease. Over 6 to 10 years of follow-up, 5249 incident total coronary cases and 2011 coronary deaths occurred among 91058 men and 245186 women. After adjustment for demographics, body mass index, and lifestyle factors, each 10-g/d increment of energy-adjusted and measurement error-corrected total dietary fiber was associated with a 14% (relative risk [RR], 0.86; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.78-0.96) decrease in risk of all coronary events and a 27% (RR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.61-0.87) decrease in risk of coronary death. For cereal, fruit, and vegetable fiber intake (not error corrected), RRs corresponding to 10-g/d increments were 0.90 (95% CI, 0.77-1.07), 0.84 (95% CI, 0.70-0.99), and 1.00 (95% CI, 0.88-1.13), respectively, for all coronary events and 0.75 (95% CI, 0.63-0.91), 0.70 (95% CI, 0.55-0.89), and 1.00 (95% CI, 0.82-1.23), respectively, for deaths. Results were similar for men and women. Consumption of dietary fiber from cereals and fruits is inversely associated with risk of coronary heart disease.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Geographical variation in cardiovascular disease, risk factors, and their control in older women: British Women's Heart and Health Study.

              To measure the geographical variation in prevalence of cardiovascular disease, risk factors, and their control in a nationally representative sample of older British women. Baseline survey using general practitioner record review, a self completed questionnaire, research nurse interview, and physical examination in a randomly selected sample of women aged 60-79 drawn from 23 towns in England, Scotland, and Wales. Of 7,173 women invited and eligible to participate, information was obtained on 4,286 (60%). One in five women had a doctor diagnosis of any one of myocardial infarction, angina, heart failure, stroke, or peripheral vascular disease. Fifty per cent of women were hypertensive, 12% smoked, and over one quarter were obese. Fifty per cent had a total cholesterol level greater than 6.5 mmol/l, though only 3% had low high density lipoprotein concentrations. Cardiovascular disease prevalence varied by geographical region being highest in Scotland: age adjusted prevalence (95% confidence intervals) 25.0% (21.5% to 28.8%) and lowest in South England: age adjusted prevalence (95% confidence intervals) 15.4% (13.5% to 17.6%). The geographical variations in cardiovascular disease prevalence were attenuated by adjustment for risk factors and socioeconomic position; further adjustment for health service use (as indicated by aspirin or statin use) reduced the differences further. However, variation remained even after full adjustment for these factors: odds ratio (95% confidence intervals) comparing Midlands and Wales to South England 1.15 (0.82 to 1.61) and comparing Scotland to South England 1.53 (1.08 to 2.14). Of women with cardiovascular disease, 12% were current smokers, a third had uncontrolled hypertension, a third were obese, and 90% had a blood cholesterol over 5 mmol/l. Only 41% were taking antiplatelet drugs and 22% were taking a statin. Older British women have a higher prevalence of cardiovascular disease and risk factors than previously documented. The workload consequences of attempting to control risk factors and ensure optimal secondary prevention for older British women are considerable. Geographical variations in cardiovascular disease prevalence in older women are somewhat, but not fully, explained by variations in major risk factors, socioeconomic position, and health service utilisation.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMJ Open
                bmjopen
                bmjopen
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Group (BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR )
                2044-6055
                2011
                3 November 2011
                3 November 2011
                : 1
                : 1
                : e000263
                Affiliations
                [1 ]British Heart Foundation Health Promotion Research Group, Department of Public Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
                [2 ]Department of Medicine, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, UK
                [3 ]Department of Public Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
                Author notes
                Correspondence to Dr Peter Scarborough; peter.scarborough@ 123456dph.ox.ac.uk
                Article
                bmjopen-2011-000263
                10.1136/bmjopen-2011-000263
                3227806
                22080528
                699ddf05-a00e-4481-9a31-9aad9ce5495f
                © 2011, Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial License, which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non commercial and is otherwise in compliance with the license. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/ and http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/legalcode.

                History
                : 20 July 2011
                : 14 September 2011
                Categories
                Epidemiology
                Research
                1506
                1612
                1683
                1713
                1714
                1717
                1724
                Custom metadata
                press-release

                Medicine
                Medicine

                Comments

                Comment on this article