scholarly journals Eligibility and subsequent burden of cardiovascular disease of four strategies for blood pressure-lowering treatment: a retrospective cohort study

The Lancet ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 394 (10199) ◽  
pp. 663-671 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emily Herrett ◽  
Sarah Gadd ◽  
Rod Jackson ◽  
Krishnan Bhaskaran ◽  
Elizabeth Williamson ◽  
...  
Author(s):  
Sangmo Hong ◽  
Jung Hwan Park ◽  
Kyungdo Han ◽  
Chang Beom Lee ◽  
Dong Sun Kim ◽  
...  

Background Blood pressure (BP) targets in elderly patients with diabetes remain unclear. We evaluated the association between BP and cardiovascular disease in elderly patients with diabetes without cardiovascular disease or heart failure. Methods and Results We performed a retrospective cohort study of 225 563 elderly (aged ≥65 years) patients with diabetes without cardiovascular disease or heart failure from 2009 to 2017 using the National Health Information Database. We divided the participants by systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP. Primary composite outcomes were stroke, myocardial infarction, heart failure, and all‐cause death analyzed by Cox proportional hazards regression analysis adjusted for baseline covariates. During a median follow‐up of 7.76 years, the incidence rate of primary composite outcomes was 26.62 per 1000 person‐years. In multivariable Cox proportional hazard modeling, the risk of the primary outcome had a U‐curved association with SBP/diastolic blood pressure with a nadir between 120 and 129 mm Hg/65 and 69 mm Hg, respectively. Hypertension medication was associated with lower risk of primary composite outcomes in SBP ≥140 mm Hg ( P for interaction for SBP <0.001) and diastolic blood pressure ≥90 mm Hg ( P for interaction for diastolic blood pressure=0.018). In participants aged ≥80 years, SBP ≥160 mm Hg was only a marginally higher risk for primary composite outcomes (hazard ratio=1.11; 95% CI, 0.98–1.24). Conclusions In this large sample of older Korean patients with diabetes, cardiovascular events were more common in people with resting SBP or diastolic BP ≥140 or 95 mm Hg, respectively, and also more common in people with resting SBP or diastolic BP <120 or 65 mm Hg, respectively.


2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Boon-How Chew ◽  
Husni Hussain ◽  
Ziti Akthar Supian

Abstract Background Good-quality evidence has shown that early glycaemic, blood pressure and LDL-cholesterol control in people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) leads to better outcomes. In spite of that, diseases control have been inadequate globally, and therapeutic inertia could be one of the main cause. Evidence on therapeutic inertia has been lacking at primary care setting. This retrospective cohort study aimed to determine the proportions of therapeutic inertia when treatment targets of HbA1c, blood pressure and LDL-cholesterol were not achieved in adults with T2D at three public health clinics in Malaysia. Methods The index prescriptions were those that when the annual blood tests were reviewed. Prescriptions of medication were verified, compared to the preceding prescriptions and classified as 1) no change, 2) stepping up and 3) stepping down. The treatment targets were HbA1c < 7.0% (53 mmol/mol), blood pressure (BP) < 140/90 mmHg and LDL-cholesterol < 2.6 mmol/L. Therapeutic inertia was defined as no change in the medication use in the present of not reaching the treatment targets. Descriptive, univariable, multivariable logistic regression and sensitive analyses were conducted. Results A total of 552 cohorts were available for the assessment of therapeutic inertia (78.9% completion rate). The mean (SD) age and diabetes duration were 60.0 (9.9) years and 5.0 (6.0) years, respectively. High therapeutic inertia were observed in oral anti-diabetic (61–72%), anti-hypertensive (34–65%) and lipid-lowering therapies (56–77%), and lesser in insulin (34–52%). Insulin therapeutic inertia was more likely among those with shorter diabetes duration (adjusted OR 0.9, 95% CI 0.87, 0.98). Those who did not achieve treatment targets were less likely to experience therapeutic inertia: HbA1c ≥ 7.0%: adjusted OR 0.10 (0.04, 0.24); BP ≥ 140/90 mmHg: 0.28 (0.16, 0.50); LDL-cholesterol ≥ 2.6 mmol/L: 0.37 (0.22, 0.64). Conclusions Although therapeutic intensifications were more likely in the presence of non-achieved treatment targets but the proportions of therapeutic inertia were high. Possible causes of therapeutic inertia were less of the physician behaviours but might be more of patient-related non-adherence or non-availability of the oral medications. These observations require urgent identification and rectification to improve disease control, avoiding detrimental health implications and costly consequences. Trial registration Number NCT02730754, April 6, 2016.


2016 ◽  
Vol 374 (21) ◽  
pp. 2009-2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eva M. Lonn ◽  
Jackie Bosch ◽  
Patricio López-Jaramillo ◽  
Jun Zhu ◽  
Lisheng Liu ◽  
...  

BMJ Open ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (8) ◽  
pp. e015743 ◽  
Author(s):  
Derbew Fikadu Berhe ◽  
Katja Taxis ◽  
Flora M Haaijer-Ruskamp ◽  
Afework Mulugeta ◽  
Yewondwossen Tadesse Mengistu ◽  
...  

ObjectivesWe examined determinants of achieving blood pressure control in patients with hypertension and of treatment intensification in patients with uncontrolled blood pressure (BP).DesignA retrospective cohort study in six public hospitals, Ethiopia.ParticipantsAdult ambulatory patients with hypertension and with at least one previously prescribed antihypertensive medication in the study hospital.OutcomeControlled BP (<140/90 mm Hg) and treatment intensification of patients with uncontrolled BP.ResultsThe study population comprised 897 patients. Their mean age was 57 (SD 14) years, 63% were females, and 35% had one or more cardiometabolic comorbidities mainly diabetes mellitus. BP was controlled in 37% of patients. Treatment was intensified for 23% patients with uncontrolled BP. In multivariable (logistic regression) analysis, determinants positively associated with controlled BP were treatment at general hospitals (OR 1.89, 95% CI 1.26 to 2.83) compared with specialised hospitals and longer treatment duration (OR 1.04, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.06). Negatively associated determinants were previously uncontrolled BP (OR 0.30, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.43), treatment regimens with diuretics (OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.94) and age (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.00). The only significant—positive—determinant for treatment intensification was duration of therapy (OR 1.05, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.09).ConclusionsThe level of controlled BP and treatment intensification practice in this study was low. The findings suggest the need for in-depth understanding and interventions of the identified determinants such as uncontrolled BP on consecutive visits, older age and type of hospital.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document