Cardiovascular Health Among Non‐Hispanic Asian Americans: NHANES, 2011–2016. Issue 13 (2nd July 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Fang, Jing; Zhang, Zefeng; Ayala, Carma; Thompson‐Paul, Angela M.; Loustalot, Fleetwood
• Is Part Of: Journal of the American Heart Association. Volume 8:Issue 13(2019)
• Page Start: n/a
• Page End: n/a
• Publication Date: 2019-07-02
• Subjects: cardiovascular health -- non‐Hispanic Asian American -- race and ethnicity -- surveillance; Heart -- Diseases -- Periodicals; Cardiovascular system -- Diseases -- Periodicals; Cerebrovascular disease -- Periodicals; Cardiology -- Periodicals; 616.1
• DOI: 10.1161/JAHA.118.011324
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2047-9980

Abstract

Abstract : Background: Asian Americans are the fastest growing population in the United States, but little is known about their cardiovascular health (CVH). The objective of this study was to assess CVH among non‐Hispanic Asian Americans (NHAAs) and to compare these estimates to those of non‐Hispanic white (NHW) participants. Methods and Results: Merging NHANES (National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey) data from 2011 to 2016, we examined 7 metrics (smoking, weight, physical activity, diet, blood cholesterol, blood glucose, and blood pressure) to assess CVH among 5278 NHW and 1486 NHAA participants aged ≥20 years. We assessed (1) the percentage meeting 6 to 7 metrics (ideal CVH), (2) the percentage meeting only 0 to 2 metrics (poor CVH), and (3) the overall mean CVH score. We compared these estimates between NHAAs and NHWs and among foreign‐born NHAAs by birthplace and number of years living in the United States. The adjusted prevalence of ideal CVH was 8.7% among NHAAs and 5.9% among NHWs ( P <0.001). NHAAs were significantly more likely to have ideal CVH (adjusted prevalence ratio: 1.42; 95% CI, 1.29–1.55) compared with NHWs. Among NHAAs, there was no significant difference in ideal CVH between US‐ and foreign‐born participants, nor by number of years living in the United States. With lower body mass index thresholds (<23, normal weight) for NHAAs, there were no statistically significant differences in the adjusted prevalence of ideal CVH (6.5% versus 5.9%, P =0.216) between NHAAs and NHWs. Conclusions: NHAAs had a higher prevalence of overall ideal CVH compared with NHWs. However, when using a lower body mass index threshold for NHAAs, there was no difference in ideal CVH between the groups.