Search

Medication prescribing practice changed following the publications of the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT) in 2002 and the Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation and Treatment of High Blood Pressure (JNC 7) in 2003. Few data are available on changes in hypertension control rates for patients initiating antihypertensive treatment before and after these publications. The authors compared systolic and diastolic blood pressure (SBP and DBP) levels and hypertension control (SBP <140 mm Hg and DBP <90 mm Hg) rates in patients initiating antihypertensive treatment in a large managed care organization during 2 time periods: July 1, 2001, to June 30, 2002 (n=322); and July 1, 2003, to June 30, 2004 (n=323). The blood pressure reduction associated with antihypertensive medication initiation was similar in 2001-2002 and 2003-2004 (-11.9 and -10.5 mm Hg, respectively, P=.251 for SBP; -6.9 and -5.9 mm Hg, respectively, P=.160 for DBP). The mean SBP and DBP prior to treatment were significantly lower in 2003-2004 vs 2001-2002 (145.4 vs 151.3 mm Hg, P<.001 for SBP; 87.6 vs 90.1 mm Hg, P<.002 for DBP). Hypertension control rates increased from 38.0% to 50.2% (P=.005) from 2001-2002 to 2003-2004. Lower pretreatment SBP and DBP explained hypertension control improvement over time. In this real-world clinic population, antihypertensive treatment was initiated at lower blood pressure levels following publication of ALLHAT and JNC 7, resulting in substantial improvements in hypertension control rates., (© 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

A randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, multicenter trial assigned 32,804 participants aged 55 years and older with hypertension and ≥ 1 other coronary heart disease risk factors to receive chlorthalidone (n=15,002), amlodipine (n=8898), or lisinopril (n=8904) for 4 to 8 years, when double-blinded therapy was discontinued. Passive surveillance continued for a total follow-up of 8 to 13 years using national administrative databases to ascertain deaths and hospitalizations. During the post-trial period, fatal outcomes and nonfatal outcomes were available for 98% and 65% of participants, respectively, due to lack of access to administrative databases for the remainder. This paper assesses whether mortality and morbidity differences persisted or new differences developed during the extended follow-up. Primary outcome was cardiovascular mortality and secondary outcomes were mortality, stroke, coronary heart disease, heart failure, cardiovascular disease, and end-stage renal disease. For the post-trial period, data are not available on medications or blood pressure levels. No significant differences (P<.05) appeared in cardiovascular mortality for amlodipine (hazard ratio [HR], 1.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.93-1.06) or lisinopril (HR, 0.97; CI, 0.90-1.03), each compared with chlorthalidone. The only significant differences in secondary outcomes were for heart failure, which was higher with amlodipine (HR, 1.12; CI, 1.02-1.22), and stroke mortality, which was higher with lisinopril (HR, 1.20; CI, 1.01-1.41), each compared with chlorthalidone. Similar to the previously reported in-trial result, there was a significant treatment-by-race interaction for cardiovascular disease for lisinopril vs chlorthalidone. Black participants had higher risk than non-black participants taking lisinopril compared with chlorthalidone. After accounting for multiple comparisons, none of these results were significant. These findings suggest that neither calcium channel blockers nor angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors are superior to diuretics for the long-term prevention of major cardiovascular complications of hypertension., (© 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2009;11:466-474. (c)2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.Lower heart failure (HF) rates in individuals taking chlorthalidone vs amlodipine, lisinopril, or doxazosin were unanticipated in the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT). HF differences appeared early, leading to questions about the possible influence of pre-enrollment antihypertensive drugs. A post hoc study evaluated hospitalized HF events. During year 1479 individuals had HF, with pre-entry antihypertensive medication data obtained on 301 patients (63%). Case-only analysis examined interactive effects (interaction odds ratio [OR, ratio of ORs]) of previous medication and ALLHAT treatment on HF outcomes, eg, did treatment effect differ by pre-entry antihypertensive class? Among cases, 39%, 37%, 17%, and 47% were taking pre-entry diuretics, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, beta-blockers, and calcium channel blockers, respectively. Interaction OR for year 1 HF for amlodipine vs chlorthalidone for patients taking vs not taking diuretics pre-entry was 1.08 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.53-2.21; P=.83); for lisinopril vs chlorthalidone, 1.33 (95% CI, 0.65-2.74; P=.44); and for doxazosin vs chlorthalidone, 1.13 (95% CI, 0.57-2.25; P=.73). Controlling for other pre-entry antihypertensives yielded similar results. There was no significant evidence that pre-entry drug type explained observed hospitalized HF differences by ALLHAT treatment.

The authors recruited a group of physicians from among the investigators participating in the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT) with a greater (more successful) or lesser (less successful) proportion of trial patients meeting blood pressure (BP) control goals. The authors utilized qualitative focus group methods to identify similarities and differences in practice behaviors. Successful and less successful physicians had similarities in knowledge and practice behaviors regarding awareness of treatment guidelines, approaches to diagnosis, use of pharmacologic management, and the opinion that systolic BP guidelines should consider a patient's age. However, there were discernible differences between the two physician groups in their views on doctor-patient relationships: physicians from the less successful group were more paternalistic with their patients, while physicians from the more successful group were more likely to use a patient-centered clinical approach to BP awareness and management.

Context: Blood pressure control (<140/90 mm Hg) rates for hypertension fall far short of the US national goal of 50% or more. Achievable control rates in varied practice settings and geographic regions and factors that predict improved blood pressure control are not well identified., Objective: To determine the success and predictors of blood pressure control in a large hypertension trial involving a multiethnic population in diverse practice settings., Design: The Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial is a randomized, double-blind, active-controlled clinical trial with a mean follow-up of 4.9 years. Participant enrollment began in February 1994 and follow-up was completed in March 2002., Setting: A total of 623 centers in the United States, Canada, and the Caribbean., Participants: A total of 33,357 participants (aged > or =55 years) with hypertension and at least one other coronary heart disease risk factor., Interventions: Participants were randomly assigned to receive (double-blind) chlorthalidone, 12.5-25 mg/d (n=15,255), amlodipine 2.5-10 mg/d (n=9048), or lisinopril 10-40 mg/d (n=9054) after other medication was discontinued. Doses were increased within these ranges and additional drugs from other classes were added as needed to achieve blood pressure control (<140/90 mm Hg)., Main Outcome Measures: The outcome measures for this report are systolic and diastolic blood pressure, the proportion of participants achieving blood pressure control (<140/90 mm Hg), and the number of drugs required to achieve control in all three groups combined., Results: Mean age was 67 years, 47% were women, 35% black, 36% diabetic; 90% were on antihypertensive drug treatment at entry. At the first of two pre-randomization visits, blood pressure was <140/90 mm Hg in only 27.4% of participants. After 5 years of follow-up, the percent controlled improved to 66%. Systolic blood pressure was <140 mm Hg in 67% of participants, diastolic blood pressure was <90 mm Hg in 92%, the mean number of drugs prescribed was 2.0+/-1.0, and the percent on > or =2 drugs was 63%. Blood pressure control varied by geographic regions, practice settings, and demographic and clinical characteristics of participants., Conclusions: These data demonstrate that blood pressure may be controlled in two thirds of a multiethnic hypertensive population in diverse practice settings. Systolic blood pressure is more difficult to control than diastolic blood pressure, and at least two antihypertensive medications are required for most patients to achieve blood pressure control. It is likely that the majority of people with hypertension could achieve a blood pressure <140/90 mm Hg with the antihypertensive medications available today., (Copyright 2002 Le Jacq Communications, Inc.)