Back to Search Start Over

Effect of Antihypertensive Medication Reduction vs Usual Care on Short-term Blood Pressure Control in Patients With Hypertension Aged 80 Years and Older: The OPTIMISE Randomized Clinical Trial.

Authors :
Sheppard, James P.
Burt, Jenni
Lown, Mark
Temple, Eleanor
Lowe, Rebecca
Fraser, Rosalyn
Allen, Julie
Ford, Gary A
Heneghan, Carl
Hobbs, F. D. Richard
Jowett, Sue
Kodabuckus, Shahela
Little, Paul
Mant, Jonathan
Mollison, Jill
Payne, Rupert A.
Williams, Marney
Yu, Ly-Mee
McManus, Richard J.
OPTIMISE Investigators
Source :
JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association; 5/26/2020, Vol. 323 Issue 20, p2039-2051, 13p
Publication Year :
2020

Abstract

<bold>Importance: </bold>Deprescribing of antihypertensive medications is recommended for some older patients with polypharmacy and multimorbidity when the benefits of continued treatment may not outweigh the harms.<bold>Objective: </bold>This study aimed to establish whether antihypertensive medication reduction is possible without significant changes in systolic blood pressure control or adverse events during 12-week follow-up.<bold>Design, Setting, and Participants: </bold>The Optimising Treatment for Mild Systolic Hypertension in the Elderly (OPTIMISE) study was a randomized, unblinded, noninferiority trial conducted in 69 primary care sites in England. Participants, whose primary care physician considered them appropriate for medication reduction, were aged 80 years and older, had systolic blood pressure lower than 150 mm Hg, and were receiving at least 2 antihypertensive medications were included. Participants enrolled between April 2017 and September 2018 and underwent follow-up until January 2019.<bold>Interventions: </bold>Participants were randomized (1:1 ratio) to a strategy of antihypertensive medication reduction (removal of 1 drug [intervention], n = 282) or usual care (control, n = 287), in which no medication changes were mandated.<bold>Main Outcomes and Measures: </bold>The primary outcome was systolic blood pressure lower than 150 mm Hg at 12-week follow-up. The prespecified noninferiority margin was a relative risk (RR) of 0.90. Secondary outcomes included the proportion of participants maintaining medication reduction and differences in blood pressure, frailty, quality of life, adverse effects, and serious adverse events.<bold>Results: </bold>Among 569 patients randomized (mean age, 84.8 years; 276 [48.5%] women; median of 2 antihypertensive medications prescribed at baseline), 534 (93.8%) completed the trial. Overall, 229 (86.4%) patients in the intervention group and 236 (87.7%) patients in the control group had a systolic blood pressure lower than 150 mm Hg at 12 weeks (adjusted RR, 0.98 [97.5% 1-sided CI, 0.92 to ∞]). Of 7 prespecified secondary end points, 5 showed no significant difference. Medication reduction was sustained in 187 (66.3%) participants at 12 weeks. Mean change in systolic blood pressure was 3.4 mm Hg (95% CI, 1.1 to 5.8 mm Hg) higher in the intervention group compared with the control group. Twelve (4.3%) participants in the intervention group and 7 (2.4%) in the control group reported at least 1 serious adverse event (adjusted RR, 1.72 [95% CI, 0.7 to 4.3]).<bold>Conclusions and Relevance: </bold>Among older patients treated with multiple antihypertensive medications, a strategy of medication reduction, compared with usual care, was noninferior with regard to systolic blood pressure control at 12 weeks. The findings suggest antihypertensive medication reduction in some older patients with hypertension is not associated with substantial change in blood pressure control, although further research is needed to understand long-term clinical outcomes.<bold>Trial Registration: </bold>EudraCT Identifier: 2016-004236-38; ISRCTN identifier: 97503221. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
00987484
Volume :
323
Issue :
20
Database :
Complementary Index
Journal :
JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
143493649
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2020.4871