NEARLY 20,000 people in Scotland will take part in a clinical trial to determine the best treatment for people who have had a heart attack.
The research is being funded by a £630,000 British Heart Foundation (BHF) grant to BHF Professor of Cardiology David Newby and his team at Edinburgh University.
At the end of the five-year trial, scientists will be able to say how long people should be prescribed blood-thinning medicines after a heart attack.
BHF says that every 20 minutes someone goes to hospital in Scotland because of a heart attack and there are more than 25,000 such hospital visits each year.
In the weeks and months after a heart attack, people are at high risk of having another. To combat this risk, doctors prescribe two anti-platelet medicines – commonly known as blood-thinning drugs. However, these treatments increase the risk of bleeding.
There is disagreement over how long patients should take these drugs. Current European guidelines recommend treatment for 12 months, but some experts believe this is too long.
The Edinburgh study will involve nearly 20,000 people in Scotland who have had a heart attack. Half of participants will be prescribed the blood-thinning medicines for 12 months, and half for just three months. Using electronic health records, the team will track how the participants are. The results of the trial could change clinical practice in the UK and beyond.
Newby said: “We really need to know how long to give these drugs as it has implications for health benefits, hazards of side-effects and overall cost of the treatment.
“We are delighted that all cardiologists across Scotland have come together to perform this trial and look forward to working in partnership with our patients to address this simple but critical question.”
James Cant, director at BHF Scotland said: “We need to find out how best to treat people who suffer a heart attack to ensure they don’t return to hospital and I’m delighted to say the BHF is funding pioneering research in Scotland’s capital that could influence medical decisions in the future at home and abroad.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here