Search

Objective: To examine the association between pre‐eclampsia definition and pregnancy outcome. Design: Secondary analysis of Control of Hypertension in Pregnancy Study (CHIPS) trial data. Setting: International multicentre randomised controlled trial (RCT). Population: In all, 987 women with non‐severe non‐proteinuric pregnancy hypertension. Methods: We evaluated the association between pre‐eclampsia definitions and adverse pregnancy outcomes, stratified by hypertension type and blood pressure control. Main outcome measures: Main CHIPS trial outcomes: primary (perinatal loss or high‐level neonatal care for >48 hours), secondary (serious maternal complications), birthweight <10th centile, severe maternal hypertension, delivery at <34 or <37 weeks, and maternal hospitalisation before birth. Results: Of 979/987 women with informative data, 280 (28.6%) progressed to pre‐eclampsia defined restrictively by new proteinuria, and 471 (48.1%) to pre‐eclampsia defined broadly as proteinuria or one/more maternal symptoms, signs or abnormal laboratory tests. The broad (versus restrictive) definition had significantly higher sensitivities (range 62–79% versus 36–50%), lower specificities (range 53–65% versus 72–82%), and similar or higher diagnostic odds ratios and 'true‐positive' to 'false‐positive' ratios. Stratified analyses showed similar results. Addition of available fetoplacental manifestations (stillbirth or birthweight <10th centile) to the broad pre‐eclampsia definition improved sensitivity (74–87%). Conclusions: A broad (versus restrictive) pre‐eclampsia definition better identifies women who develop adverse pregnancy outcomes. These findings should be replicated in a prospective study within routine healthcare to ensure that the anticipated increase in surveillance and intervention in a larger number of women with pre‐eclampsia is associated with improved outcomes, reasonable costs and congruence with women's values. A broad (versus restrictive) pre‐eclampsia definition better identifies the risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes. A broad (versus restrictive) pre‐eclampsia definition better identifies the risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes. This article includes Author Insights, a video abstract available at https://vimeo.com/rcog/authorinsights16602 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To determine whether the difference in outcomes between 'less tight' (target diastolic blood pressure [dBP] of 100 mmHg) versus 'tight' control (target dBP of 85 mmHg) in the CHIPS Trial (ISRCTN 71416914, http://pre-empt.cfri.ca/;CHIPS) depended on the choice of labetalol or methyldopa, the two most commonly used antihypertensive agents in CHIPS.Design: Secondary analysis of CHIPS Trial data.Setting: International multicentre randomised controlled trial (94 sites, 15 countries).Population or Sample: A total of 987 women with non-severe non-proteinuric pregnancy hypertension.Methods: Logistic regression was used for comparisons of 'less tight' versus 'tight' control among women treated with labetalol (but not methydopa) versus methyldopa (but not labetalol). Analyses were adjusted for the influence of baseline factors, including use of any antihypertensive therapy at randomisation.Main Outcome Measures: Main CHIPS Trial outcomes: primary (perinatal loss or high-level neonatal care for > 48 hours), secondary (serious maternal complications), birthweight < 10th centile, severe maternal hypertension, pre-eclampsia, and delivery at < 34 or < 37 weeks.Results: Of 987 women in CHIPS, antihypertensive therapy was taken by 566 women at randomisation (labetalol 111 ['less tight'] versus 127 ['tight'] or methyldopa 126 ['less tight'] versus 117 ['tight']) and 815 women after randomisation (labetalol 186 ['less tight'] versus 247 ['tight'] and methyldopa by 98 ['less tight'] versus 126 ['tight']). Following adjustment, odds ratios for outcomes in 'less tight' versus 'tight' control were similar between antihypertensive groups according to 'at randomisation' and 'after randomisation' therapy.Conclusion: Outcomes for 'less tight' versus 'tight' control were not dependent on use of methyldopa or labetalol.Tweetable Abstract: In the CHIPS Trial, maternal and infant outcomes were not dependent on use of labetalol or methyldopa. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To compare pregnancy outcomes, accounting for allocated group, between methyldopa-treated and labetalol-treated women in the CHIPS Trial (ISRCTN 71416914) of 'less tight' versus 'tight' control of pregnancy hypertension.Design: Secondary analysis of CHIPS Trial cohort.Setting: International randomised controlled trial (94 sites, 15 countries).Population or Sample: Of 987 CHIPS recruits, 481/566 (85.0%) women treated with antihypertensive therapy at randomisation. Of 981 (99.4%) women followed to delivery, 656/745 (88.1%) treated postrandomisation.Methods: Logistic regression to compare outcomes among women who took methyldopa or labetalol, adjusted for the influence of baseline factors.Main Outcome Measures: CHIPS primary (perinatal loss or high level neonatal care for >48 hours) and secondary (serious maternal complications) outcomes, birthweight <10th centile, severe maternal hypertension, pre-eclampsia and delivery at <34 or <37 weeks.Results: Methyldopa and labetalol were used commonly at randomisation (243/987, 24.6% and 238/987, 24.6%, respectively) and post-randomisation (224/981, 22.8% and 433/981, 44.1%, respectively). Following adjusted analyses, methyldopa (versus labetalol) at randomisation was associated with fewer babies with birthweight <10th centile [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 0.48; 95% CI 0.20-0.87]. Methyldopa (versus labetalol) postrandomisation was associated with fewer CHIPS primary outcomes (aOR 0.64; 95% CI 0.40-1.00), birthweight <10th centile (aOR 0.54; 95% CI 0.32-0.92), severe hypertension (aOR 0.51; 95% CI 0.31-0.83), pre-eclampsia (aOR 0.55; 95% CI 0.36-0.85), and delivery at <34 weeks (aOR 0.53; 95% CI 0.29-0.96) or <37 weeks (aOR 0.55; 95% CI 0.35-0.85).Conclusion: These nonrandomised comparisons are subject to residual confounding, but women treated with methyldopa (versus labetalol), particularly those with pre-existing hypertension, may have had better outcomes.Tweetable Abstract: There was no evidence that women treated with methyldopa versus labetalol had worse outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: There is a circadian variation of death in nondialysis populations, with more cardiovascular events occurring in the morning. Whether this holds true in hemodialysis patients was never investigated. STUDY DESIGN: Case series. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: All prevalent (>3 months on hemodialysis therapy) and incident (

Background: Because patients with chronic heart failure (CHF) can benefit from specific treatment for coexisting obstructive and central sleep apnea (CSA), there is a need to develop accurate screening tools to identify or exclude these sleep-related breathing disturbances (SRBDs) in patients with CHF.Objectives: To evaluate, prospectively, the diagnostic value of nocturnal home oximetry in identifying SRBD in CHF patients and in distinguishing central events from obstructive events.Design: Blinded comparison of hospital and home oximetry, and polysomnographic nocturnal recordingsSetting: Cardiac heart failure and sleep clinics in three tertiary referral centers.Patients: Fifty consecutive patients who were investigated for participation in the Canadian Continuous Positive Airway Pressure Trial for Congestive Heart Failure with Central Sleep Apnea and were recruited from three different centers.Measurements and results: Patients underwent two oximetry recordings, one at home and one during a polysomnographic study. The criterion for an SRBD was the presence of > 15 apneas and hypopneas per hour of sleep during polysomnography or an oxygen desaturation index of > 10 events per hour during oximetry. The pattern of desaturation/resaturation during oximetry was also examined to distinguish obstructive events from central events. Using a 2% fall in pulse oximetric saturation as the criterion for oxygen desaturation, home oximetry had a 85% sensitivity and a 93% specificity (p < 0.001) for detecting an SRBD. However, the desaturation/resaturation pattern did not accurately distinguish between obstructive events and central events (eg, 100% sensitivity, 17% specificity for identifying CSA). The interpretation of the oximetry recording was highly consistent between scorers (p < 0.001).Conclusions: Overnight home oximetry is a sensitive and specific tool for identifying SRBDs in patients with CHF, but not for distinguishing between obstructive and central events in such patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: - To ascertain whether restriction of dietary sodium lowers blood pressure in hypertensive and normotensive individuals.Data Sources: - An English-language computerized literature search, restricted to human studies with Medical Subject Heading terms, "hypertension," "blood pressure," "vascular resistance," "sodium and dietary," "diet and sodium restricted," "sodium chloride," "clinical trial," "randomized controlled trial," and "prospective studies," was conducted. Bibliographies of review articles and personal files were also searched.Trial Selection: - Trials that had randomized allocation to control and dietary sodium intervention groups, monitored by timed sodium excretion, with outcome measures of both systolic and diastolic blood pressure were selected by blinded review of the methods section.Data Extraction: - Two observers extracted data independently, using purpose-designed forms, and discrepancies were resolved by discussion.Data Synthesis: - The 56 trials that met our inclusion criteria showed significant heterogeneity. Publication bias was also evident. The mean reduction (95% confidence interval) in daily urinary sodium excretion, a proxy measure of dietary sodium intake, was 95 mmol/d (71-119 mmol/d) in 28 trials with 1131 hypertensive subjects and 125 mmol/d (95-156 mmol/d) in 28 trials with 2374 normotensive subjects. After adjustment for measurement error of urinary sodium excretion, the decrease in blood pressure for a 100-mmol/d reduction in daily sodium excretion was 3.7 mm Hg (2.35-5.05 mm Hg) for systolic (P<.001) and 0.9 mm Hg (-0.13 to 1.85 mm Hg) for diastolic (P=.09) in the hypertensive trials, and 1.0 mm Hg (0.51-1.56 mm Hg) for systolic (P<.001) and 0.1 mm Hg (-0.32 to 0.51 mm Hg) for diastolic (P=.64) in the normotensive trials. Decreases in blood pressure were larger in trials of older hypertensive individuals and small and nonsignificant in trials of normotensive individuals whose meals were prepared and who lived outside the institutional setting.Conclusion: - Dietary sodium restriction for older hypertensive individuals might be considered, but the evidence in the normotensive population does not support current recommendations for universal dietary sodium restriction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction, sleep-disordered breathing, comprising obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) and central sleep apnoea (CSA), is associated with increased morbidity, mortality, and sleep disruption. We hypothesised that treating sleep-disordered breathing with a peak-flow triggered adaptive servo-ventilation (ASV) device would improve cardiovascular outcomes in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction., Methods: We conducted a multicentre, multinational, parallel-group, open-label, phase 3 randomised controlled trial of peak-flow triggered ASV in patients aged 18 years or older with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (left ventricular ejection fraction ≤45%) who were stabilised on optimal medical therapy with co-existing sleep-disordered breathing (apnoea-hypopnoea index [AHI] ≥15 events/h of sleep), with concealed allocation and blinded outcome assessments. The trial was carried out at 49 hospitals in nine countries. Sleep-disordered breathing was stratified into predominantly OSA with an Epworth Sleepiness Scale score of 10 or lower or predominantly CSA. Participants were randomly assigned to standard optimal treatment alone or standard optimal treatment with the addition of ASV (1:1), stratified by study site and sleep apnoea type (ie, CSA or OSA), with permuted blocks of sizes 4 and 6 in random order. Clinical evaluations were performed and Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire, Epworth Sleepiness Scale, and New York Heart Association class were assessed at months 1, 3, and 6 following randomisation and every 6 months thereafter to a maximum of 5 years. The primary endpoint was the cumulative incidence of the composite of all-cause mortality, first admission to hospital for a cardiovascular reason, new onset atrial fibrillation or flutter, and delivery of an appropriate cardioverter-defibrillator shock. All-cause mortality was a secondary endpoint. Analysis for the primary outcome was done in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01128816) and the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number Register (ISRCTN67500535), and the trial is complete., Findings: The first and last enrolments were Sept 22, 2010, and March 20, 2021. Enrolments terminated prematurely due to COVID-19-related restrictions. 1127 patients were screened, of whom 731 (65%) patients were randomly assigned to receive standard care (n=375; mean AHI 42·8 events per h of sleep [SD 20·9]) or standard care plus ASV (n=356; 43·3 events per h of sleep [20·5]). Follow-up of all patients ended at the latest on June 15, 2021, when the trial was terminated prematurely due to a recall of the ASV device due to potential disintegration of the motor sound-abatement material. Over the course of the trial, 41 (6%) of participants withdrew consent and 34 (5%) were lost to follow-up. In the ASV group, the mean AHI decreased to 2·8-3·7 events per h over the course of the trial, with associated improvements in sleep quality assessed 1 month following randomisation. Over a mean follow-up period of 3·6 years (SD 1·6), ASV had no effect on the primary composite outcome (180 events in the control group vs 166 in the ASV group; hazard ratio [HR] 0·95, 95% CI 0·77-1·18; p=0·67) or the secondary endpoint of all-cause mortality (88 deaths in the control group vs. 76 in the ASV group; 0·89, 0·66-1·21; p=0·47). For patients with OSA, the HR for all-cause mortality was 1·00 (0·68-1·46; p=0·98) and for CSA was 0·74 (0·44-1·23; p=0·25). No safety issue related to ASV use was identified., Interpretation: In patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction and sleep-disordered breathing, ASV had no effect on the primary composite outcome or mortality but eliminated sleep-disordered breathing safely., Funding: Canadian Institutes of Health Research and Philips RS North America., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests Partial funding for this trial, as well as ASV devices, were provided by Philips RS North America. These resources supported the work of all co-authors and trial sites. TDB reports receiving a speaking honorarium from Philips. JSF reports receiving a speaking honorarium and travel expenses from Philips. MA reports receiving speaking honoraria and research grant support from Philips and ResMed. RJK reports receiving speaking honoraria from Eisa and Powell-Mansfield. JMMT reports receiving speaking honoraria from Gebro, Menarini, and Chiesa and research grant support from GSK and AstraZeneca. All other authors declare no competing interests aside from grant support from Philips RS North America to conduct the clinical trial described herein., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Self-management has shown to improve the quality of life in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). Readily accessible self-management tools are essential in promoting adherence to self-care behaviors. In recognizing that digital health facilitates efficient access to self-management programs, we developed a digital counseling program, ODYSSEE Kidney Health, to promote self-care behaviors while supporting health-related quality of life., Objective: To present the design and development of ODYSSEE Kidney Health for digital counseling for patients with CKD., Design: The study involved an iterative design process based on user-centered design principles to develop the digital counseling program, ODYSSEE Kidney Health., Setting: A sample of 10 to 15 participants were purposively sampled from nephrology clinics at the University Health Network, Toronto, Canada., Methods: Participants underwent 2 phases in the development process. In each phase, participants were presented with a component of the program, asked to perform goal-oriented tasks, and participate in the "think-aloud" process. Semi-structured interviews followed the first phase to identify feedback about the overall program. Thematic analysis of the interviews identified themes from the usability testing. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize patient demographic data., Results: We enrolled 11 participants (n = 7 males, n = 4 females, ages 30-82). The main themes generated anchored on (1) impact on nephrology care, (2) technical features, and (3) CKD content. Overall, participants reported positive satisfaction toward the navigation, layout, and content of the program. They cited the value of the program in their daily CKD care., Limitations: Study limitations included using a single center to recruit participants, most of the participants having prior technology use, and using one module as a representative of the entire digital platform., Conclusion: The acceptability of a digital counseling program for patients with CKD relies on taking the patients' perspective using a user-centered design process. It is vital in ensuring adoption and adherence to self-management interventions aimed at sustaining behavioral change., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting Interests: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article., (© The Author(s) 2022.)

Background: Despite the growing prevalence of people with complex conditions and evidence of the positive impact of telemonitoring for single conditions, little research exists on telemonitoring for this population., Objective: This randomized controlled trial and embedded qualitative study aims to evaluate the impact on and experiences of patients and health care providers (HCPs) using a telemonitoring system with decision support to manage patients with complex conditions, including those with multiple chronic conditions, compared with the standard of care., Methods: A pragmatic, unblinded, 6-month randomized controlled trial sought to recruit 146 patients with ≥1 diagnosis of heart failure (HF), uncontrolled hypertension (HT), and insulin-requiring diabetes mellitus (DM) from outpatient specialty settings in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Participants were randomized into the control and telemonitoring groups, with the latter being instructed to take readings relevant to their conditions. The telemonitoring system contained an algorithm that generated decision support in the form of actionable self-care directives to patients and alerts to HCPs. The primary outcome was health status (36-Item Short Form Health Survey questionnaire). Secondary outcomes included anxiety and depression, self-efficacy in chronic disease management, and self-reported health service use. HF-related quality of life and self-care measures were also collected from patients followed for HF. Within- and between-group change scores were analyzed for statistical significance (P<.05). A convenience sample of HCPs and patients in the intervention group was interviewed about their experiences., Results: A total of 96 patients were recruited and randomized. Recruitment was terminated early because of implementation challenges and the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. No significant within- and between-group differences were found for the main primary and secondary outcomes. However, a within-group analysis of patients with HF found improvements in self-care maintenance (P=.04) and physical quality of life (P=.046). Opinions expressed by the 5 HCPs and 13 patients who were interviewed differed based on the monitored conditions. Although patients with HF reported benefitting from actionable self-care guidance and meaningful interactions with their HCPs, patient and HCP users of the DM and HT modules did not think telemonitoring improved the clinical management of those conditions to the same degree. These differing experiences were largely attributed to the siloed nature of specialty care and the design of the decision support, whereby fluctuations in the status of HT and DM typically required less urgent interventions compared with patients with HF., Conclusions: We recommend that future research conceive telemonitoring as a program and that self-management and clinical decision support are necessary but not sufficient components of such programs for patients with complex conditions and lower acuity. We conclude that telemonitoring for patients with complex conditions or within multidisciplinary care settings may be best operationalized through nurse-led models of care., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03127852; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03127852., International Registered Report Identifier (irrid): RR2-10.2196/resprot.8367., (©Patrick Ware, Amika Shah, Heather Joan Ross, Alexander Gordon Logan, Phillip Segal, Joseph Antony Cafazzo, Katarzyna Szacun-Shimizu, Myles Resnick, Tessy Vattaparambil, Emily Seto. Originally published in the Journal of Medical Internet Research (https://www.jmir.org), 26.01.2022.)

During the COVID-19 pandemic, telemedicine has emerged worldwide as an indispensable resource to improve the surveillance of patients, curb the spread of disease, facilitate timely identification and management of ill people, but, most importantly, guarantee the continuity of care of frail patients with multiple chronic diseases. Although during COVID-19 telemedicine has thrived, and its adoption has moved forward in many countries, important gaps still remain. Major issues to be addressed to enable large scale implementation of telemedicine include: (1) establishing adequate policies to legislate telemedicine, license healthcare operators, protect patients' privacy, and implement reimbursement plans; (2) creating and disseminating practical guidelines for the routine clinical use of telemedicine in different contexts; (3) increasing in the level of integration of telemedicine with traditional healthcare services; (4) improving healthcare professionals' and patients' awareness of and willingness to use telemedicine; and (5) overcoming inequalities among countries and population subgroups due to technological, infrastructural, and economic barriers. If all these requirements are met in the near future, remote management of patients will become an indispensable resource for the healthcare systems worldwide and will ultimately improve the management of patients and the quality of care., Competing Interests: Conflicts of interest Stefano Omboni is scientific consultant of Biotechmed Ltd., an Italian telemedicine company. Raj Padwal is CEO of mmHg Inc., a digital health software development company and provider of cloud-based home and ambulatory BP telemonitoring. Richard McManus is working with Omron to develop and evaluate the Hypertension Plus Telemonitoring system. Aletta Schutte received consultant fees from Abbott, and speaker honoraria from Servier, Sanofi, Takeda, Novartis, and Sun Pharmaceuticals, and is Immediate Past President of the International Society of Hypertension. Other authors declared that there are no conflicts of interest.

Objective: To examine the association between pre-eclampsia definition and pregnancy outcome., Design: Secondary analysis of Control of Hypertension in Pregnancy Study (CHIPS) trial data., Setting: International multicentre randomised controlled trial (RCT)., Population: In all, 987 women with non-severe non-proteinuric pregnancy hypertension., Methods: We evaluated the association between pre-eclampsia definitions and adverse pregnancy outcomes, stratified by hypertension type and blood pressure control., Main Outcome Measures: Main CHIPS trial outcomes: primary (perinatal loss or high-level neonatal care for >48 hours), secondary (serious maternal complications), birthweight <10th centile, severe maternal hypertension, delivery at <34 or <37 weeks, and maternal hospitalisation before birth., Results: Of 979/987 women with informative data, 280 (28.6%) progressed to pre-eclampsia defined restrictively by new proteinuria, and 471 (48.1%) to pre-eclampsia defined broadly as proteinuria or one/more maternal symptoms, signs or abnormal laboratory tests. The broad (versus restrictive) definition had significantly higher sensitivities (range 62-79% versus 36-50%), lower specificities (range 53-65% versus 72-82%), and similar or higher diagnostic odds ratios and 'true-positive' to 'false-positive' ratios. Stratified analyses showed similar results. Addition of available fetoplacental manifestations (stillbirth or birthweight <10th centile) to the broad pre-eclampsia definition improved sensitivity (74-87%)., Conclusions: A broad (versus restrictive) pre-eclampsia definition better identifies women who develop adverse pregnancy outcomes. These findings should be replicated in a prospective study within routine healthcare to ensure that the anticipated increase in surveillance and intervention in a larger number of women with pre-eclampsia is associated with improved outcomes, reasonable costs and congruence with women's values., Tweetable Abstract: A broad (versus restrictive) pre-eclampsia definition better identifies the risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes., (© 2020 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

[Figure: see text].

Background and Objectives: Patients with CKD are at risk for adverse drug reactions, but effective community-based preventive programs remain elusive. In this study, we compared the effectiveness of two digital applications designed to improve outpatient medication safety., Design, Setting, Participants, & Measurements: In a 1-year randomized controlled trial, 182 outpatients with advanced CKD were randomly assigned to receive a smartphone preloaded with either eKidneyCare ( n =89) or MyMedRec ( n =93). The experimental intervention, eKidneyCare, includes a medication feature that prompted patients to review medications monthly and report changes, additions, or medication problems to clinicians for reconciliation and early intervention. The active comparator was MyMedRec, a commercially available, standalone application for storing medication and other health information that can be shared with patients' providers. The primary outcome was the rate of medication discrepancy, defined as differences between the patient's reported history and the clinic's medication record, at exit., Results: At exit, the eKidneyCare group had fewer total medication discrepancies compared with MyMedRec (median, 0.45; interquartile range, 0.33-0.63 versus 0.67; interquartile range, 0.40-1.00; P =0.001), and the change from baseline was 0.13±0.27 in eKidneyCare and 0.30±0.41 in MyMedRec ( P =0.007). eKidneyCare use also reduced the severity of clinically relevant medication discrepancies in all categories, including those with the potential to cause serious harm (estimated rate ratio, 0.40; 95% confidence interval, 0.27 to 0.63). Usage data revealed that 72% of patients randomized to eKidneyCare completed one or more medication reviews per month, whereas only 30% of patients in the MyMedRec group (adjusted for dropouts) kept their medication profile on their phone., Conclusions: In patients who are high risk and have CKD, eKidneyCare significantly reduced the rate and severity of medication discrepancies, the proximal cause of medication errors, compared with the active comparator. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRY NAME AND REGISTRATION NUMBER: www.ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT:02905474., (Copyright © 2021 by the American Society of Nephrology.)

Telemedicine allows the remote exchange of medical data between patients and healthcare professionals. It is used to increase patients' access to care and provide effective healthcare services at a distance. During the recent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, telemedicine has thrived and emerged worldwide as an indispensable resource to improve the management of isolated patients due to lockdown or shielding, including those with hypertension. The best proposed healthcare model for telemedicine in hypertension management should include remote monitoring and transmission of vital signs (notably blood pressure) and medication adherence plus education on lifestyle and risk factors, with video consultation as an option. The use of mixed automated feedback services with supervision of a multidisciplinary clinical team (physician, nurse, or pharmacist) is the ideal approach. The indications include screening for suspected hypertension, management of older adults, medically underserved people, high-risk hypertensive patients, patients with multiple diseases, and those isolated due to pandemics or national emergencies.

Hypertension Canada's 2020 guidelines for the prevention, diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment of hypertension in adults and children provide comprehensive, evidence-based guidance for health care professionals and patients. Hypertension Canada develops the guidelines using rigourous methodology, carefully mitigating the risk of bias in our process. All draft recommendations undergo critical review by expert methodologists without conflict to ensure quality. Our guideline panel is diverse, including multiple health professional groups (nurses, pharmacy, academics, and physicians), and worked in concert with experts in primary care and implementation to ensure optimal usability. The 2020 guidelines include new guidance on the management of resistant hypertension and the management of hypertension in women planning pregnancy., (Copyright © 2020 Canadian Cardiovascular Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To examine the relationship between pregnancy outcomes and BP level and variability., Design: Secondary analysis of CHIPS trial data (Control of Hypertension In Pregnancy Study, NCT01192412)., Setting: International., Population or Sample: Women with chronic or gestational hypertension., Methods: BP measurement was standardised in outpatient clinics. Adjusted (including for allocated group) mixed effects logistic regression was used to assess relationships between major CHIPS outcomes and both BP level (mean of clinic readings) and visit-to-visit within-participant BP variability (standard deviation and average real variability of absolute successive difference of BP values). BP values 7-28 days prior to outcomes (or birth for perinatal outcomes) were excluded in sensitivity analyses., Main Outcome Measures: Major CHIPS outcomes., Results: Among 961 (97.4%) women, higher BP level was associated with more adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes (usually at p < 0.001) except for serious maternal complications. Among 913 (92.5%) women with at least two post-randomisation outpatient visits, higher BP variability was associated with increased odds of severe hypertension and pre-eclampsia (usually at p < 0.01). Sensitivity analyses suggested reverse causality for these maternal outcomes, but greater diastolic BP variability may have been associated with fewer adverse perinatal outcomes., Conclusions: Higher BP is an adverse prognostic marker, regardless of target BP. While the association between higher BP variability and severe hypertension and pre-eclampsia may be related to higher BP at diagnosis, our results suggest a possible advantage of BP variability for the fetus, through undefined mechanisms., Tweetable Abstract: Higher blood pressure (BP) is associated with more adverse pregnancy outcomes, but higher BP variability may be good for the baby., (Copyright © 2019 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

The international CHIPS Trial (Control of Hypertension In Pregnancy Study) enrolled 987 women with chronic (75%) or gestational (25%) hypertension. Pre-eclampsia developed in 48%; women remained on their allocated BP control and delivered an average of two weeks later. 'Less tight' control (target diastolic BP 100 mmHg) achieved BP that was 6/5mmHg higher (p < 0.001) than 'tight' control (target diastolic 85 mmHg, BP achieved 133/85 mmHg). 'Less tight' (vs. 'tight') control resulted in similar adverse perinatal outcomes (31.5% vs. 30.7%; p = 0.84) that balanced birthweight < 10th percentile (16.1% vs. 19.8%; p = 0.14) against preterm birth (35.6% vs. 31.5%; p = 0.18). 12-month follow-up revealed no compelling evidence for developmental programming of child growth. However, 'less tight' (vs. 'tight') control resulted in more severe maternal hypertension (40.6% vs. 27.5%; p < 0.001), and more women with platelets < 100 × 10 9 /L (4.3% vs. 1.6%; p = 0.02) or symptomatic elevated liver enzymes (4.3% vs. 1.8%; p = 0.03), with no difference in serious maternal complications (3.7% vs. 2.0%; p = 0.17). Labetalol was the drug of choice. Methyldopa did not result in inferior outcomes. Post-hoc, severe hypertension, independent of pre-eclampsia, was associated with heightened increased risk of adverse outcomes, and in 'less tight' control, of serious maternal complications. At no gestational age at initiation of BP control was 'less tight' superior to 'tight'. Women in both groups were equally satisfied with care. 'Less tight' control tended to be more expensive by CAD$6000 (p =0.07) based on neonatal care costs. Collectively, CHIPS publications have provided evidence that women with non-severe pregnancy hypertension should receive 'tight' BP control achieved by a simple algorithm., (Copyright © 2019 International Society for the Study of Hypertension in Pregnancy. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

We present Hypertension Canada's inaugural evidence-based Canadian recommendations for the management of hypertension in pregnancy. Hypertension in pregnancy is common, affecting approximately 7% of pregnancies in Canada, and requires effective management to reduce maternal, fetal, and newborn complications. Because of this importance, these guidelines were developed in partnership with the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada with the main common objective of improving the management of women with hypertension in pregnancy. Guidelines for the diagnosis, assessment, prevention, and treatment of hypertension in adults and children are published separately. In this first Hypertension Canada guidelines for hypertension in pregnancy, 7 recommendations for the management of nonsevere and severe hypertension in pregnancy are presented. For nonsevere hypertension in pregnancy (systolic blood pressure 140-159 mm Hg and/or diastolic blood pressure 80-109 mm Hg), we provide guidance for the threshold for initiation of antihypertensive therapy, blood pressure targets, as well as first- and second-line antihypertensive medications. Severe hypertension (systolic blood pressure ≥ 160 mm Hg and/or diastolic blood pressure ≥ 110 mm Hg) requires urgent antihypertensive therapy to reduce maternal, fetal, and newborn adverse outcomes. The specific evidence and rationale underlying each of these guidelines are discussed., (Copyright © 2018 Canadian Cardiovascular Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Hypertension Canada provides annually updated, evidence-based guidelines for the diagnosis, assessment, prevention, and treatment of hypertension in adults and children. This year, the adult and pediatric guidelines are combined in one document. The new 2018 pregnancy-specific hypertension guidelines are published separately. For 2018, 5 new guidelines are introduced, and 1 existing guideline on the blood pressure thresholds and targets in the setting of thrombolysis for acute ischemic stroke is revised. The use of validated wrist devices for the estimation of blood pressure in individuals with large arm circumference is now included. Guidance is provided for the follow-up measurements of blood pressure, with the use of standardized methods and electronic (oscillometric) upper arm devices in individuals with hypertension, and either ambulatory blood pressure monitoring or home blood pressure monitoring in individuals with white coat effect. We specify that all individuals with hypertension should have an assessment of global cardiovascular risk to promote health behaviours that lower blood pressure. Finally, an angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor combination should be used in place of either an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker in individuals with heart failure (with ejection fraction < 40%) who are symptomatic despite appropriate doses of guideline-directed heart failure therapies. The specific evidence and rationale underlying each of these guidelines are discussed., (Copyright © 2018 Canadian Cardiovascular Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Apps promoting patient self-management may improve health outcomes. However, methods to secure stored information on mobile devices may adversely affect usability. We tested the reliability and usability of common user authentication techniques in younger and older adults., Methodology: Usability testing was conducted in two age groups, 18 to 30 years and 50 years and older. After completing a demographic questionnaire, each participant tested four authentication options in random order: four-digit personal identification number (PIN), graphical password (GRAPHICAL), Android pattern-lock (PATTERN), and a swipe-style Android fingerprint scanner (FINGERPRINT). Participants rated each option using the Systems Usability Scale (SUS)., Results: A total of 59 older and 43 younger participants completed the study. Overall, PATTERN was the fastest option (3.44s), and PIN had the fewest errors per attempt (0.02). Participants were able to login using PIN, PATTERN, and GRAPHICAL at least 98% of the time. FINGERPRINT was the slowest (26.97s), had an average of 1.46 errors per attempt, and had a successful login rate of 85%. Overall, PIN and PATTERN had higher SUS scores than FINGERPRINT and GRAPHICAL. Compared to younger participants, older participants were also less likely to find PATTERN to be tiring, annoying or time consuming and less likely to consider PIN to be time consuming. Younger participants were more likely to rate GRAPHICAL as annoying, time consuming and tiring than older participants., Conclusions: On mobile devices, PIN and pattern-lock outperformed graphical passwords and swipe-style fingerprints. All participants took longer to authenticate using the swipe-style fingerprint compared to other options. Older participants also took two to three seconds longer to authenticate using the PIN, pattern and graphical passwords though this did not appear to affect perceived usability.

Background: The rising prevalence of chronic illnesses hinders the sustainability of the health care system because of the high cost of frequent hospitalizations of patients with complex chronic conditions. Clinical trials have demonstrated that telemonitoring can improve health outcomes, but they have generally been limited to single conditions such as diabetes, hypertension, or heart failure. Few studies have examined the impact of telemonitoring on complex patients with multiple chronic conditions, although these patients may benefit the most from this technology., Objective: The aim of this study is to investigate the impact of a smartphone-based telemonitoring system on the clinical care and health outcomes of complex patients across several chronic conditions., Methods: A mixed-methods, 6-month randomized controlled trial (RCT) of a smartphone-based telemonitoring system is being conducted in specialty clinics. The study will include patients who have been diagnosed with one or more of any of the following conditions: heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, chronic kidney disease, uncontrolled hypertension, or insulin-requiring diabetes. The primary outcome will be the health status of patients as measured with SF-36. Patients will be randomly assigned to either the control group receiving usual care (n=73) or the group using the smartphone-based telemonitoring system in addition to usual care (n=73)., Results: Participants are currently being recruited for the trial. Data collection is anticipated to be completed by the fall of 2018., Conclusions: This RCT will be among the first trials to provide evidence of the impact of telemonitoring on costs and health outcomes of complex patients who may have multiple chronic conditions., Trial Registration: International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN): 41238563; http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN41238563 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6ug2Sk0af) and Clinicaltrials.gov NCT03127852; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03127852 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6uvjNosBC)., (©Emily Seto, Patrick Ware, Alexander G Logan, Joseph A Cafazzo, Kenneth R Chapman, Phillip Segal, Heather J Ross. Originally published in JMIR Research Protocols (http://www.researchprotocols.org), 21.11.2017.)

Study Objectives: In heart failure (HF), we observed two patterns of hyperpnea during Cheyne-Stokes respiration with central sleep apnea (CSR-CSA): a positive pattern where end-expiratory lung volume remains at or above functional residual capacity, and a negative pattern where it falls below functional residual capacity. We hypothesized the negative pattern is associated with worse HF., Methods: Patients with HF underwent polysomnography. During CSR-CSA, hyperpnea, apnea-hyperpnea cycle, and lung to finger circulation times (LFCT) were measured. Plasma N-terminal prohormone of brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) concentration and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) were assessed., Results: Of 33 patients with CSR-CSA (31 men, mean age 68 years), 9 had a negative hyperpnea pattern. There was no difference in age, body mass index, and apnea-hypopnea index between groups. Patients with a negative pattern had longer hyperpnea time (39.5 ± 6.4 versus 25.8 ± 5.9 seconds, P < .01), longer cycle time (67.8 ± 15.9 versus 51.7 ± 9.9 seconds, P < .01), higher NT-proBNP concentrations (2740 [6769] versus 570 [864] pg/ml, P = .01), and worse New York Heart Association class ( P = .02) than those with a positive pattern. LFCT and LVEF did not differ between groups., Conclusions: Patients with HF and a negative CSR-CSA pattern have evidence of worse cardiac function than those with a positive pattern. Greater positive expiratory pressure during hyperpnea is likely generated during the negative pattern and might support stroke volume in patients with worse cardiac function., Commentary: A commentary on this article appears in this issue on page 1227., Clinical Trial Registration: The trial is registered with Current Controlled Trials (www.controlled-trials.com; ISRCTN67500535) and Clinical Trials (www.clinicaltrials.gov; NCT01128816)., (© 2017 American Academy of Sleep Medicine)

Hypertension Canada provides annually updated, evidence-based guidelines for the diagnosis, assessment, prevention, and treatment of hypertension. This year, we introduce 10 new guidelines. Three previous guidelines have been revised and 5 have been removed. Previous age and frailty distinctions have been removed as considerations for when to initiate antihypertensive therapy. In the presence of macrovascular target organ damage, or in those with independent cardiovascular risk factors, antihypertensive therapy should be considered for all individuals with elevated average systolic nonautomated office blood pressure (non-AOBP) readings ≥ 140 mm Hg. For individuals with diastolic hypertension (with or without systolic hypertension), fixed-dose single-pill combinations are now recommended as an initial treatment option. Preference is given to pills containing an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker in combination with either a calcium channel blocker or diuretic. Whenever a diuretic is selected as monotherapy, longer-acting agents are preferred. In patients with established ischemic heart disease, caution should be exercised in lowering diastolic non-AOBP to ≤ 60 mm Hg, especially in the presence of left ventricular hypertrophy. After a hemorrhagic stroke, in the first 24 hours, systolic non-AOBP lowering to < 140 mm Hg is not recommended. Finally, guidance is now provided for screening, initial diagnosis, assessment, and treatment of renovascular hypertension arising from fibromuscular dysplasia. The specific evidence and rationale underlying each of these guidelines are discussed., (Copyright © 2017 Canadian Cardiovascular Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Both types of sleep-disordered breathing (SDB), obstructive and central sleep apnoea (OSA and CSA, respectively), are common in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). In such patients, SDB is associated with increased cardiovascular morbidity and mortality but it remains uncertain whether treating SDB by adaptive servo-ventilation (ASV) in such patients reduces morbidity and mortality., Aim: ADVENT-HF is designed to assess the effects of treating SDB with ASV on morbidity and mortality in patients with HFrEF., Methods: ADVENT-HF is a multicentre, multinational, randomized, parallel-group, open-label trial with blinded assessment of endpoints of standard medical therapy for HFrEF alone vs. with the addition of ASV in patients with HFrEF and SDB. Patients with a history of HFrEF undergo echocardiography and polysomnography. Those with a left ventricular ejection fraction ≤45% and SDB (apnoea-hypopnoea index ≥15) are eligible. SDB is stratified into OSA with ≥50% of events obstructive or CSA with >50% of events central. Those with OSA must not have excessive daytime sleepiness (Epworth score of ≤10). Patients are then randomized to receive or not receive ASV. The primary outcome is the composite of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular hospital admissions, new-onset atrial fibrillation requiring anti-coagulation but not hospitalization, and delivery of an appropriate discharge from an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator not resulting in hospitalization during a maximum follow-up time of 5 years., Conclusion: The ADVENT-HF trial will help to determine whether treating SDB by ASV in patients with HFrEF improves morbidity and mortality., (© 2017 The Authors. European Journal of Heart Failure © 2017 European Society of Cardiology.)

Background: The study aim was to determine whether phasic left atrial (LA) function of patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction differs between those with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) and central sleep apnea (CSA)., Methods: Participation in the Adaptive Servo Ventilation for Therapy of Sleep Apnea in Heart Failure (ADVENT-HF) trial requires 2-dimensional echocardiographic documentation of left ventricular ejection fraction ≤ 45% and a polysomnographic apnea hypopnea index (AHI) ≥ 15 events per hour. Of initial enrollees, we identified 132 patients in sinus rhythm (82 with predominantly OSA and 50 with CSA). To determine LA reservoir (expansion index; EI), conduit (passive emptying index; PEI), and booster function (active emptying index), we blindly quantified maximum and minimum LA volume and LA volume before atrial contraction., Results: Each of EI (P = 0.004), PEI (P < 0.001), and active emptying index (P = 0.045) was less in participants with CSA compared with those with OSA, whereas average left ventricular ejection fraction and LA and left ventricular volumes were similar. Multivariable analysis identified an independent relationship between central AHI and LA EI (P = 0.040) and PEI (P = 0.005). In contrast, the obstructive AHI was unrelated to any LA phasic index, and slopes relating central AHI to EI and PEI differed significantly from corresponding relationships with obstructive AHI (P = 0.018; P = 0.006)., Conclusions: In these ADVENT-HF patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, all 3 components of LA phasic function (reservoir, conduit, and contractile) were significantly reduced in those with CSA compared with participants with OSA. The severity of CSA, but not OSA associated inversely and independently with LA reservoir and conduit function. Impaired LA phasic function might be consequent to or could exacerbate CSA., (Copyright © 2016 Canadian Cardiovascular Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

To determine whether clinical outcomes differed by occurrence of severe hypertension in the international CHIPS trial (Control of Hypertension in Pregnancy Study), adjusting for the interventions of "less tight" (target diastolic blood pressure [dBP] 100 mm Hg) versus "tight" control (target dBP 85 mm Hg). In this post-hoc analysis of CHIPS data from 987 women with nonsevere nonproteinuric preexisting or gestational hypertension, mixed effects logistic regression was used to compare the following outcomes according to occurrence of severe hypertension, adjusting for allocated group and the influence of baseline factors: CHIPS primary (perinatal loss or high-level neonatal care for >48 hours) and secondary outcomes (serious maternal complications), birth weight <10th percentile, preeclampsia, delivery at <34 or <37 weeks, platelets <100×10 9 /L, elevated liver enzymes with symptoms, maternal length of stay ≥10 days, and maternal readmission before 6 weeks postpartum. Three hundred and thirty-four (34.1%) women in CHIPS developed severe hypertension that was associated with all outcomes examined except for maternal readmission (P=0.20): CHIPS primary outcome, birth weight <10th percentile, preeclampsia, preterm delivery, elevated liver enzymes (all P<0.001), platelets <100×10 9 /L (P=0.006), and prolonged hospital stay (P=0.03). The association between severe hypertension and serious maternal complications was seen only in less tight control (P=0.02). Adjustment for preeclampsia (464, 47.3%) did not negate the relationship between severe hypertension and the CHIPS primary outcome (P<0.001), birth weight <10th percentile (P=0.005), delivery at <37 (P<0.001) or <34 weeks (P<0.001), or elevated liver enzymes with symptoms (P=0.02). Severe hypertension is a risk marker for adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes, independent of BP control or preeclampsia co-occurrence., Clinical Trial Registration: URL: http://pre-empt.cfri.ca/. Unique identifier: ISRCTN 71416914. URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/. Unique identifier: NCT01192412., (© 2016 The Authors.)

Objective: To compare women's views about blood pressure (BP) control in CHIPS (Control of Hypertension In Pregnancy Study) (NCT01192412)., Design: Quantitative and qualitative analysis of questionnaire responses., Setting: International randomised trial (94 sites, 15 countries)., Population/sample: 911 (92.9%) women randomised to 'tight' (target diastolic blood pressure, 85mmHg) or 'less tight' (target diastolic blood pressure, 100mmHg) who completed questionnaires., Methods: A questionnaire was administered at ∼6-12 weeks postpartum regarding post-discharge morbidity and views about trial participation. Questionnaires were administered by the site co-ordinator, and contact was made by phone, home or clinic visit; rarely, data was collected from medical records. Quantitative analyses were Chi-square or Fisher's exact test for categorical variables, mixed effects multinomial logistic regression to adjust for confounders, and p<0.001 for statistical significance. NVivo software was used for thematic analysis of women's views., Main Outcome Measures: Satisfaction, measured as willingness to have the same treatment in another pregnancy or recommend that treatment to a friend., Results: Among the 533 women in 'tight' (N=265) vs. 'less tight' (N=268) control who provided comments for qualitative analysis, women in 'tight' (vs. 'less tight') control made fewer positive comments about the amount of medication taken (5 vs. 28 women, respectively) and intensity of BP monitoring (7 vs. 17, respectively). However, this did not translate into less willingness to either have the same treatment in another pregnancy (434, 95.8% vs. 423, 92.4%, respectively; p=0.14) or recommend that treatment to a friend (435, 96.0% and 428, 93.4%, respectively; p=0.17). Importantly, although satisfaction remained high among women with an adverse outcome, those in 'tight' control who suffered an adverse outcome (vs. those who did not) were not consistently less satisfied, whereas this was not the case among women in 'less tight' control among whom satisfaction was consistently lower for the CHIPS primary outcome (p<0.001), severe hypertension (p≤0.01), and pre-eclampsia (p<0.001)., Conclusions: Women in 'tight' (vs. 'less tight') control were equally satisfied with their care, and more so in the face of adverse perinatal or maternal outcomes., (Copyright © 2016 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Unlabelled: The CHIPS randomized controlled trial (Control of Hypertension in Pregnancy Study) found no difference in the primary perinatal or secondary maternal outcomes between planned "less tight" (target diastolic 100 mm Hg) and "tight" (target diastolic 85 mm Hg) blood pressure management strategies among women with chronic or gestational hypertension. This study examined which of these management strategies is more or less costly from a third-party payer perspective. A total of 981 women with singleton pregnancies and nonsevere, nonproteinuric chronic or gestational hypertension were randomized at 14 to 33 weeks to less tight or tight control. Resources used were collected from 94 centers in 15 countries and costed as if the trial took place in each of 3 Canadian provinces as a cost-sensitivity analysis. Eleven hospital ward and 24 health service costs were obtained from a similar trial and provincial government health insurance schedules of medical benefits. The mean total cost per woman-infant dyad was higher in less tight versus tight control, but the difference in mean total cost (DM) was not statistically significant in any province: Ontario ($30 191.62 versus $24 469.06; DM $5723, 95% confidence interval, -$296 to $12 272; P=0.0725); British Columbia ($30 593.69 versus $24 776.51; DM $5817; 95% confidence interval, -$385 to $12 349; P=0.0725); or Alberta ($31 510.72 versus $25 510.49; DM $6000.23; 95% confidence interval, -$154 to $12 781; P=0.0637). Tight control may benefit women without increasing risk to neonates (as shown in the main CHIPS trial), without additional (and possibly lower) cost to the healthcare system., Clinical Trial Registration: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01192412., (© 2016 The Authors.)