You are here

  • Home
  • Archive
  • Volume 3, Issue 8
  • A comparison of Australian rural and metropolitan cardiovascular risk and mortality: the Greater Green Triangle and North West Adelaide population surveys

Article Text

Article menu

This article has a correction. Please see:

Download PDFPDF

XML
Public health
Research
A comparison of Australian rural and metropolitan cardiovascular risk and mortality: the Greater Green Triangle and North West Adelaide population surveys
  1. Philip Tideman1,
  2. Anne W Taylor2,
  3. Edward Janus3,
  4. Ben Philpot4,
  5. Robyn Clark5,
  6. Elizabeth Peach4,
  7. Tiina Laatikainen4,6,7,
  8. Erkki Vartiainen4,6,
  9. Rosy Tirimacco8,
  10. Alicia Montgomerie2,
  11. Janet Grant2,
  12. Vincent Versace4,
  13. James A Dunbar4
  1. 1Integrated Cardiovascular Clinical Network, Country Health SA Local Health Network, Flinders Medical Centre, Adelaide, Australia
  2. 2Population Research and Outcome Studies, The University of Adelaide, Australia
  3. 3Department of Medicine, NorthWest Academic Centre, The University of Melbourne, Western Hospital, Melbourne, Australia
  4. 4Greater Green Triangle University Department of Rural Health, Flinders and Deakin Universities, Warrnambool, Victoria, Australia
  5. 5Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia
  6. 6National Institute for Health and Welfare, Helsinki, Finland
  7. 7Institute of Public Health and Clinical Nutrition, University of Eastern Finland, Kuopio, Finland
  8. 8Integrated Cardiovascular Clinical Network, Country Health SA Local Health Network, Adelaide, Australia
  1. Correspondence to Prof James A Dunbar; director{at}greaterhealth.org

Abstract

Objectives Cardiovascular (CVD) mortality disparities between rural/regional and urban-dwelling residents of Australia are persistent. Unavailability of biomedical CVD risk factor data has, until now, limited efforts to understand the causes of the disparity. This study aimed to further investigate such disparities.

Design Comparison of (1) CVD risk measures between a regional (Greater Green Triangle Risk Factor Study (GGT RFS, cross-sectional study, 2004–2006) and an urban population (North West Adelaide Health Study (NWAHS, longitudinal cohort study, 2004–2006); (2) Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) CVD mortality rates between these and other Australian regions; and (3) ABS CVD mortality rates by an area-level indicator of socioeconomic status, the Index of Relative Socioeconomic Disadvantage (IRSD).

Setting Greater Green Triangle (GGT, Limestone Coast, Wimmera and Corangamite Shires) of South-Western Victoria and North-West Adelaide (NWA).

Participants 1563 GGT RFS and 3036 NWAHS stage 2 participants (aged 25–74) provided some information (self-administered questionnaire +/− anthropometric and biomedical measurements).

Primary and secondary outcome measures Age-group specific measures of absolute CVD risk, ABS CVD mortality rates by study group and Australian Standard Geographical Classification (ASGC) region.

Results Few significant differences in CVD risk between the study regions, with absolute CVD risk ranging from approximately 5% to 30% in the 35–39 and 70–74 age groups, respectively. Similar mean 2003–2007 (crude) mortality rates in GGT (98, 95% CI 87 to 111), NWA (103, 95% CI 96 to 110) and regional Australia (92, 95% CI 91 to 94). NWA mortality rates exceeded that of other city areas (70, 95% CI 69 to 71). Lower measures of socioeconomic status were associated with worse CVD outcomes regardless of geographic location.

Conclusions Metropolitan areas do not always have better CVD risk factor profiles and outcomes than rural/regional areas. Needs assessments are required for different settings to elucidate relative contributions of the multiple determinants of risk and appropriate cardiac healthcare strategies to improve outcomes.

  • Epidemiology
  • Public Health

This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 3.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/

https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2013-003203

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    View Full Text

    Linked Articles

    • Correction
      Correction
      British Medical Journal Publishing Group
      BMJ Open 2014; 4 - Published Online First: 12 Mar 2014. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2013-003203corr1