This Article Free upon publication Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 1/2/98    most recent CIRCOUTCOMES.108.825786v1 Submit an eLetter Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Mosca, L. Articles by Oz, M. C. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Mosca, L. Articles by Oz, M. C. Related Collections Primary prevention Risk Factors Related Article

Original Articles

A Novel Family-Based Intervention Trial to Improve Heart Health: FIT Heart

Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial

Lori Mosca, MD, MPH, PhD; Heidi Mochari, MPH, RD; Ming Liao, BS; Allison H. Christian, EdD; Dana J. Edelman, MPH; Brooke Aggarwal, EdD and Mehmet C. Oz, MD

From the Columbia University Medical Center/New York-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY.

Correspondence to Dr Lori Mosca, Columbia University Medical Center, Preventive Cardiology Program, New York-Presbyterian Hospital, 601 West 168th St, Suite 43, New York, NY 10032. E-mail Ljm10{at}columbia.edu

Received October 1, 2008; accepted October 27, 2008.

Background— Family members of patients with cardiovascular disease (CVD) may be at increased risk due to shared genes and lifestyle. Hospitalization of a family member with CVD may represent a "motivational moment" to take preventive action.

Methods and Results— A randomized, controlled clinical trial was conducted in healthy adult family members (N=501; 66% female; 36% nonwhite; mean age, 48 years) of patients hospitalized with CVD to evaluate a special intervention (SI) with personalized risk factor screening, therapeutic lifestyle-change counseling, and progress reports to physicians versus a control intervention (CIN) on the primary outcome, mean percent change in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), and other risk factors. Validated dietary assessments and standardized risk factors were obtained at baseline and 1 year (94% follow-up). At baseline, for 93% of subjects, saturated fat comprised 7% of total caloric intake, and 79% had nonoptimal LDL-C levels (of which 50% were unaware). There was no difference in the SI versus the CIN with respect to the mean percent change in LDL-C (–1% versus –2%, respectively; P=0.64), owing to a similar significant reduction in LDL-C in both groups (–4.4 mg/dL and –4.5 mg/dL, respectively). Diet score significantly improved in the SI versus the CIN (P=0.04). High-density lipoprotein cholesterol declined significantly in the CIN but not in the SI (–3.2% [95% CI, –5.1 to –1.3] versus +0.3% [95% CI, –1.7 to +2.4]; P=0.01). At 1 year, SI subjects were more likely than controls to exercise >3 days per week (P=0.04).

Conclusion— The SI was not more effective than the CIN in reducing the primary end point, LDL-C. The screening process identified many family members of hospitalized patients with CVD who were unaware of their risk factors, and further work is needed to develop and test interventions to reduce their CVD risk.

Key Words: prevention • risk factors • trials

---

 

CLINICAL PERSPECTIVE

Related Article

A Novel Family-Based Intervention Trial to Improve Heart Health: FIT Heart: Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial

Lori Mosca, Heidi Mochari, Ming Liao, Allison H. Christian, Dana J. Edelman, Brooke Aggarwal, and Mehmet C. Oz
Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes 2008 1: 98-106. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This article has been cited by other articles:

				H. M. Krumholz Outcomes Research: Myths and Realities Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes, January 1, 2009; 2(1): 1 - 3. [Full Text] [PDF]