Search

Young adults (aged 18 to 39 years) have the lowest hypertension control rates compared with older adults. Shorter follow-up encounter intervals are associated with faster hypertension control rates in older adults; however, optimal intervals are unknown for young adults. The study objective was to evaluate the relationship between ambulatory blood pressure encounter intervals (average number of provider visits with blood pressures over time) and hypertension control rates among young adults with incident hypertension. A retrospective analysis was conducted of patients aged 18 to 39 years (n = 2990) with incident hypertension using Kaplan-Meier survival and Cox proportional hazards analyses over 24 months. Shorter encounter intervals were associated with higher hypertension control: 6 months (13%). Young adults with shorter encounter intervals also had lower medication initiation, supporting the effectiveness of lifestyle modifications. Sustainable interventions for timely young adult follow-up are essential to improve hypertension control in this hard-to-reach population.

Abstract Accurate assessment of blood pressure (BP) is the cornerstone of hypertension management. The objectives of this study were to quantify the effect of medical personnel presence during BP measurement by automated oscillometric BP (AOBP) and to compare resting office BP by AOBP to daytime average BP by 24‐h ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM). This study is a prospective randomized cross‐over trial, conducted in a referral population. Patients underwent measurements of casual and resting office BP by AOBP. Resting BP was measured as either unattended (patient alone in the room during resting and measurements) or as partially attended (nurse present in the room during measurements) immediately prior to and after 24‐h ABPM. The primary outcome was the effect of unattended 5‐min rest preceding AOBP assessment as the difference between casual and resting BP measured by the Omron HEM 907XL. Ninety patients consented and 78 completed the study. The mean difference between the casual and Omron unattended systolic BP was 7.0 mm Hg (95% confidence interval [CI] 4.5, 9.5). There was no significant difference between partially attended and unattended resting office systolic BP. Resting office BP (attended and partially attended) underestimated daytime systolic BP load from 24‐h ABPM. The presence or absence of medical personnel does not impact casual office BP which is higher than resting office AOBP. The requirement for unattended rest may be dropped if logistically challenging. Casual and resting office BP readings by AOBP do not capture the complexity of information provided by the 24‐h ABPM.

Accurate assessment of blood pressure (BP) is the cornerstone of hypertension management. The objectives of this study were to quantify the effect of medical personnel presence during BP measurement by automated oscillometric BP (AOBP) and to compare resting office BP by AOBP to daytime average BP by 24-h ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM). This study is a prospective randomized cross-over trial, conducted in a referral population. Patients underwent measurements of casual and resting office BP by AOBP. Resting BP was measured as either unattended (patient alone in the room during resting and measurements) or as partially attended (nurse present in the room during measurements) immediately prior to and after 24-h ABPM. The primary outcome was the effect of unattended 5-min rest preceding AOBP assessment as the difference between casual and resting BP measured by the Omron HEM 907XL. Ninety patients consented and 78 completed the study. The mean difference between the casual and Omron unattended systolic BP was 7.0 mm Hg (95% confidence interval [CI] 4.5, 9.5). There was no significant difference between partially attended and unattended resting office systolic BP. Resting office BP (attended and partially attended) underestimated daytime systolic BP load from 24-h ABPM. The presence or absence of medical personnel does not impact casual office BP which is higher than resting office AOBP. The requirement for unattended rest may be dropped if logistically challenging. Casual and resting office BP readings by AOBP do not capture the complexity of information provided by the 24-h ABPM. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: As part of the HEARTS in the Americas initiative, Chilean primary healthcare centers have implemented novel hypertension management strategies, including new diagnostic approaches. This study evaluated the concordance between attended automated office blood pressure (AOBP) measurements with an oscillometric device and ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM).Methods: This was an observational cohort study to evaluate and compare attended AOBP and ABPM for the diagnosis of hypertension in adults in a primary healthcare setting.Results: The study evaluated 309 participants (54.2 ± 15.7 years; 50.5% male) from four primary healthcare centers in Santiago, Chile. Attended AOBP measurements were obtained at the clinic on two separate days, followed by ABPM. AOBP values indicated that 69.6% of patients had a systolic blood pressure (SBP) of ≥140 mm Hg and 34.6% had a diastolic blood pressure (DBP) of ≥90 mm Hg. A total of 83.5% had hypertension, 45.3% had high SBP, and 56.0% had high DBP. ABPM values indicated that 65.0% of patients had hypertension. The combined AOBP and ABPM analysis showed that 57.0% of patients had sustained hypertension, 26.5% had white coat hypertension, 8.1% had masked hypertension, and 8.4% were normotensive. The concordance between AOBP and ABPM (κ coefficient) was low (κ = 0.133; 95% confidence interval 0.028-0.237). The comparison of AOBP and ABPM measurements (Bland-Altman plots and bias calculations) showed an important bias in BP as measured using the AOBP method, especially for SBP (13.7 ± 11.6, 95% confidence interval -9.1 to 36.5).Conclusions: Attended AOBP alone may not be sufficient for adequate classification, diagnosis, and management of hypertension in Chile or other countries with similar demographics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Pulse pressure naturally increases over time as individuals' age due to arteriosclerosis and diffuse vascular stiffening. However, the differential for widened pulse pressure is broad and includes causes of hyperdynamic circulation and high‐output heart failure, such as aortic regurgitation and hyperthyroidism. In the absence of an underlying cause, wide pulse pressure is a sign of deteriorating cardiovascular health and carries increased risk for mortality, disease progression, and adverse clinical outcomes in chronic diseases including cardiovascular disease and chronic kidney disease. Current emphasis of antihypertensive treatment on systolic and diastolic blood pressure does not always address pulse pressure, thus subjecting many patients to an independent risk factor for poor outcomes. Pulse pressure control is more successfully achieved with thiazide diuretics and long‐acting nitrates when compared to other antihypertensive agents, but further research is needed to quantify the additional benefits of pulse pressure control over conventional blood pressure therapy. This case review provides an overview of the pathogenesis, pathologic causes, and treatment of widened pulse pressure and evaluates current evidence for pulse pressure as a predictor of clinical outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Hypertension affects approximately one-third of the US adults. This study investigated antihypertensive utilization patterns among hypertensive patients who were prescribed treatment, yet still experienced uncontrolled hypertension. Data from the Decision Resources Group Real World Evidence Data Repository US database (2015-2016) were used to construct a cohort of uncontrolled hypertension patients to observe antihypertensive utilization patterns. Results for 5059 patients, with an average age of 57.8 (SD = 13.7), who had, on average 2.4 agents prescribed. Approximately half (51.9%) were female, and most were White (86.8%). More than one-third (N = 1877; 37.1%) of patients were diagnosed with diabetes mellitus (DM) or chronic kidney disease (CKD) that could independently contribute to increased cardiovascular complications. Overall, the most common treatments prescribed, as percent of agents and as percent of patients, respectively, were diuretics (24.9%; 59.6%), followed by angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) (23.8%; 56.9%), beta-blockers (BBs) (18.7%; 44.8%), calcium channel blockers (CCBs) (15.4%; 36.8%), and angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) (13.5%; 32.3%). Approximately one-tenth (10.5%) of the prescriptions were written for fixed-dose combination therapies. Among patients diagnosed with DM and CKD (N = 200), the order of the most common agents was the same as the overall cohort. Only 5.6% of prescriptions written for these patients were fixed-dose combination therapy. Based on clinical guidelines, which suggest using ACEIs, ARBs, or CCBs as first-line therapy, and fixed-dose combination therapy to increase adherence, this indicates over-prescribing of BBs and under-prescribing of fixed-dose combination therapy. These findings illustrate the need to further investigate challenges faced by patients and providers in treatment decision-making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Hypertension is the leading risk factor for death globally. A significant percentage of patients admitted to hospital have undiagnosed hypertension, yet recognition of elevated blood pressure (BP) in hospital and referral for post-discharge assessment are poor. Physician perception that elevated inhospital BP is attributable to anxiety, pain, or white coat syndrome may underlie an expectation that BP will normalize following discharge. However, these patients frequently remain hypertensive. The authors conducted a systematic review to evaluate the extent to which elevated inhospital BP can predict the presence of hypertension in previously undiagnosed adults. The authors included cohort studies in which hospital patients whose BP exceeded the study threshold underwent further post-discharge BP assessment following discharge. Twelve studies were identified as eligible for inclusion; a total of 2627 participants met review eligibility criteria, and follow-up BP data were available for 1240 (47.2%). Median percentage of patients remaining hypertensive following discharge was 43.6% (range: 14.2-76.5). Across 7 studies which identified people with possible hypertension using an index test threshold of 140/90, the pooled proportion subsequently identified with hypertension at follow-up was 43.4% (95% CI: 25.1%-61.8%). This review indicates that screening for hypertension in the emergency hospital environment consistently identifies groups of patients with undiagnosed hypertension. Unscheduled hospital attendance therefore offers an important public health opportunity to identify patients with undiagnosed hypertension. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Automated office blood pressure measurement (AOBPM) is recommended for diagnosing hypertension; however, optimal treatment targets using this method are not established. Discrepancies between automated and office measurements of blood pressure have been described, producing uncertainty regarding the use of AOBPM in clinical practice. The Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT) results improved our understanding of target AOBPM systolic blood pressure (SBP) levels; however, diastolic blood pressure (DBP) targets remain unknown. Therefore, we sought to determine the optimal on-treatment DBP range. The analysis was performed on the participants of the SPRINT trial who had hypertension and prior cardiovascular disease. We analyzed the data of 1470 participants (mean age 70.3 ± 9.3 years, 24.1% female) selected from the SPRINT trial database of National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute. The mean achieved SBP and DBP were 127.9 ± 10.7 and 68.3 ± 9.4 mm Hg, respectively. Most of the participants (57.4%) had a DBP lower than 70 mm Hg, while only 11.7% had DPB ≥80 mm Hg. Clinical composite endpoint was defined as myocardial infarction, acute coronary syndrome not resulting in myocardial infarction, stroke, acute decompensated heart failure or death from cardiovascular causes. There were 159 (10.8%) clinical endpoint events. The participants with on-treatment AOBPM DBP range of 68.6-78.6 mm Hg showed the lowest hazard risk of a clinical composite endpoint. These results correspond to the office DBP range of 70-80 mm Hg recommended in ESC guidelines. This is the first attempt to determine the range of optimal DBP values using population-based AOBPM in patients with prior cardiovascular disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

HIV-positive adults with hypertension have increased risk of mortality but HIV clinics often do not provide hypertension care. The authors integrated hypertension management into existing HIV services at a large clinic in Haiti. Of 1729 documented HIV-positive adults presenting for care at the GHESKIO HIV clinic between March and July 2016, 551 screened positive for hypertension, with systolic blood pressure ≥140 mmHg and/or diastolic blood pressure ≥90 mmHg. A convenience sample of 100 patients from this group received integrated hypertension and HIV care for 6 months. At time of identification, patients were screened for proteinuria and initiated on antihypertensive medication. Hypertension and HIV visits coincided; medications were free. Outcomes were retention in care and change in blood pressure over 6 months. Average blood pressure over 6 months was described using linear mixed-effects model. Of 100 HIV-positive adults with hypertension referred for integrated care, three were ineligible due to comorbidities. Among 97 participants, 82% (N = 80) remained in care at 6 months from time of positive hypertension identification. 96% (N = 93) were on antiretroviral therapy with median CD4+ count of 442 cells/µL (IQR 257-640). Estimated average blood pressure over 6 months decreased from systolic 160 mmHg (CI 156, 165) to 146 mmHg (CI 141, 150), P-value <0.0001, and diastolic 105 mmHg (CI 102, 108) to 93 mmHg (CI 89, 96), P-value <0.0001. HIV and hypertension management were successfully integrated at a HIV clinic in Haiti. Integrated management is essential to combat the growing burden of cardiovascular disease among HIV-positive adults. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Application of the 2017 ACC/AHA Hypertension Guideline expands the number of US adults requiring blood pressure (BP) management. The authors use 2011-2014 NHANES data to describe the population groups most affected by the new guideline, compared with the previous JNC-7 guideline, and describe the previous interaction with the health care sector among those adults recommended new or intensified pharmacologic treatment and/or lifestyle modification. The 2017 Hypertension Guideline reclassifies 32.3 million US adults as newly hypertensive and recommends BP-related treatment of 133.7 million adults, including 57.8 million with uncontrolled BP recommended to initiate or intensify pharmacologic treatment and 50.5 million newly recommended lifestyle modification alone. An estimated 13.1 million (22.7%) adults recommended to initiate or intensify pharmacologic treatment, and 20.6 million (40.8%) adults newly recommended lifestyle modification alone report not having established health care linkages. Among the adults newly recommended lifestyle modification alone, the odds of reclassification from no recommended intervention, under JNC-7, to recommended lifestyle modification alone were lower for adults with established linkages to care (aOR: 0.78 [95% CI: 0.67-0.91]) compared to those without, decreased with increasing age, were greater for men (1.72 [1.52-1.94]) compared to women and were greater for obese adults (1.23 [1.00-1.53]) compared with normal or underweight adults. Application of the 2017 Hypertension Guideline increases the number and alters the distribution of US adults in need of initiating or intensifying BP treatment. This includes identifying millions of US adults who previously had limited interaction with health care and are now recommended new or intensified pharmacologic treatment and/or lifestyle modification. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In clinical practice, ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) tends to be used solely for diagnosing hypertension, especially to identify white-coat and masked hypertension. However, ABPM can provide additional information to guide the management and drug treatment of hypertension. In this brief review, the general principles governing the use of ABPM in clinical practice, such as the devices and software, recording requirements, the thresholds for the day, night and 24-hour periods and how often to repeat ABPM are summarized. The use of ABPM for diagnosing, determining the efficacy of treatment, and assessing the long-term control of hypertension are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Patients' adherence to antihypertensive medications is key to controlling high blood pressure. Evidence-based strategies to improve adherence exist, but their use, individually and in combination, has not been described. 2015-2016 DocStyles data were analyzed to describe health care professionals' and their practices' use of 10 strategies to improve antihypertensive medication adherence across 3 categories: prescribing, education, and tracking/encouragement. Among 1590 respondents, a mean of using 5 strategies was reported, with individual strategy use ranging from 17.2% (providing patients adherence-related rewards) to 69.4% (prescribing once-daily regimens). Those with higher odds of using ≥7 strategies and strategies across all 3 categories included: (1) nurse practitioners compared to family practitioners/internists and (2) health care professionals in practices with standardized hypertension treatment protocols who routinely recommend home blood pressure monitor use compared to respondents without those characteristics. Despite using an array of evidence-based adherence-promoting strategies, additional opportunities exist for health care professionals to provide adherence support among hypertensive patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This retrospective cohort study compared blood pressure (BP) control (BP <140/90 mm Hg) and all-cause mortality between US- and foreign-born blacks. We used data from a clinical data warehouse of 41 868 patients with hypertension who received care in a New York City public healthcare system between 2004 and 2009, defining BP control as the last recorded BP measurement and mean BP control. Poisson regression demonstrated that Caribbean-born blacks had lower BP control for the last BP measurement compared with US- and West African-born blacks, respectively (49% vs 54% and 57%; P<.001). This pattern was similar for mean BP control. Caribbean- and West African-born blacks showed reduced hazard ratios of mortality (0.46 [95% CI, 0.42-0.50] and 0.28 [95% CI, 0.18-0.41], respectively) compared with US-born blacks, even after adjustment for BP. BP control rates and mortality were heterogeneous in this sample. Caribbean-born blacks showed worse control than US-born blacks. However, US-born blacks experienced increased hazard of mortality. This suggests the need to account for the variations within blacks in hypertension management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Previous studies suggest that up to 60% of all patients with hypertension receive inappropriate treatment. Current 2013 European Society of Hypertension/European Society of Cardiology (ESH/ESC) guidelines recommend taking cardiovascular risk factors into account when assessing treatment for patients with hypertension. The authors hypothesize that this approach will reduce the proportion of patients receiving inappropriate treatment. In this cross-sectional study using electronic medical records of Swiss primary care patients, the authors estimate the proportion of patients receiving inappropriate treatment using two approaches: (1) based on a blood pressure threshold of 140/90 mm Hg; and (2) based on cardiovascular risk factors. A total of 22 434 patients with hypertension were identified. Based on these approaches, 72.7% and 44.6% of patients, respectively, qualified for drug treatment. In addition, 23.0% and 10.8% of patients, respectively, received inappropriate treatment. Application of the 2013 ESH/ESC guidelines reduced the proportion of patients receiving inappropriate treatment by 50%. This shows the major impact of risk adjustment and highlights the need for a patient-centered approach in hypertension treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The OMRON HEM-907XL is a commercial oscillometric blood pressure (BP) monitor that was used in the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT), in which 28% of participants had chronic kidney disease (CKD). This study examined the accuracy of the monitor in nondialytic patients with CKD. Eighty-seven patients met inclusion criteria. The authors used a modified Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation (AAMI) protocol, with one observer recording measurements from the monitor and two blinded physicians obtaining simultaneous aneroid values by auscultation. Using AAMI method 1, there was a 2.5±9.5 mm Hg difference in OMRON and aneroid systolic BP, and a -1.6±6.5 mm Hg difference in diastolic BP. Using AAMI method 2, there was a 5.1±7.4 mm Hg difference in systolic BP and a -0.2±5.4 mm Hg difference in diastolic BP. In patients with CKD, the OMRON HEM-907XL appears to be accurate for measuring diastolic BP, but did not perform as well for systolic BP. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]