Abstract Background Nothing is known about ischemic heart disease (IHD) in the Germans who emigrated to Brazil during the last century. Objective We sought to compare age at diagnosis and IHD manifestations between German immigrants and their first-generation descendants in the region of Blumenau, Brazil. Methods We reviewed medical records of hospitals in Blumenau. Comparison of the groups in the evaluation times was made by analysis of variance (ANOVA) with repeated measures, and comparison of two factors was made by two-way ANOVA. The level of significance was set at p <0.05. Results Study population comprised 68 patients who were born in Germany (group G) and 99 descendants (group D). Twenty-nine patients of group D had two German parents and 70 had one. Mean age at diagnosis was 66.8 ± 10.6 years, with a significant difference between the groups, four years higher in Group G than group D (69.0 ± 8.8 vs 65.4 ± 11.5 years old) (p = 0.025). There was no significant difference in risk factors or coronary angiography data between the groups. HDL cholesterol levels were significantly higher in group G than in group D (48.4 ± 11.1 mg/dL vs 43.3 ± 11.2 mg/dL, p = 0.005). Conclusion At the time of first IHD diagnosis, mean age of the group G was significantly higher than group D, with no differences between groups in sex, risk factors, LDL levels, or clinical and angiographic manifestations. An earlier manifestation of the disease could be part of lifestyle changes in descendants, in this population that mantained eating habits characterized by high saturated fat consumption.

OBJECTIVE: The participation of humans in clinical cardiology trials remains essential, but little is known regarding participant perceptions of such studies. We examined the factors that motivated participation in such studies, as well as those that led to participant frustration. METHODS: Patients who had participated in hypertension and coronary arterial disease (phases II, III, and IV) clinical trials were invited to answer a questionnaire. They were divided into two groups: Group I, which included participants in placebo-controlled clinical trials after randomization, and Group II, which included participants in clinical trials in which the tested treatment was compared to another drug after randomization and in which a placebo was used in the washout period. RESULTS: Eighty patients (47 patients in Group I and 33 patients in Group II) with different socio-demographic characteristics were interviewed. Approximately 60% of the patients were motivated to participate in the trial with the expectation of personal benefit. Nine participants (11.2%) expressed the desire to withdraw, which was due to their perception of risk during the testing in the clinical trial (Group I) and to the necessity of repeated returns to the institution (Group II). However, the patients did not withdraw due to fear of termination of hospital treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Although this study had a small patient sample, the possibility of receiving a benefit from the new tested treatment was consistently reported as a motivation to participate in the trials.