Advertisement

Consistency of Blood Pressure Control: a Useful Tool of Hypertension Assessment in a Vulnerable Population

  • Anthi KatsouliEmail author
  • Tanu S. Pandey
  • David Goldberg
Concise Research Reports

INTRODUCTION

There is strong evidence that treatment of hypertension reduces cardiovascular morbidity and mortality.1 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) and a national quality program, the Health Plan Employer Data and Information Set (HEDIS), use point prevalence of blood pressure with a cut point of less than 140/90 mmHg to assess control for the population and for clinical practices, respectively.2, 3

There is compelling data showing that the proportion of visits with blood pressure control below 140/90 is a graded predictor of hypertension-related outcomes.4 The implication of this study is that beyond point prevalence of hypertension control, consistency of control below 140/90 may be an important patient-centered goal of care.

METHODS

We conducted an electronic medical record (EMR) review of patients in a primary care clinic at John H. Stroger, Jr. Hospital of Cook County approved by our institutional review board. Patients seen over a 2-week period of a...

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

We conducted an electronic medical record (EMR) review of patients in a primary care clinic at John H. Stroger, Jr. Hospital of Cook County approved by our institutional review board.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they do not have a conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    James PA, Oparil S, Carter BL, Cushman WC, Dennison-Himmelfarb C, Handler J, Lackland DT, LeFevre ML, MacKenzie TD, Ogedegbe O, Smith SC, Svetkey LP, Taler SJ, Townsend RR, Wright JT. Narva AS, Ortiz E. 2014 evidence-based guideline for the management of high blood pressure in adults: Report from the panel members appointed to the Eighth Joint National Committee (JNC 8). JAMA. 2014;311:507-520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Egan BM, Zhao Y, Axon RN. US trends in prevalence, awareness, treatment, and control of hypertension, 1988-2008. JAMA. 2010;303:2043-50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Patel MM, Datu B, Roman D, Barton MB, Ritchey MD, Wall HK, Loustalot F. Progress of health plans towards meeting the million hearts clinical target for high blood pressure control – United States, 2010-2012. MMWR. 2014;63:127-130.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mancia G, Messerli F, Bakris G, Zhou Q, Champion A, Pepine CJ. Blood pressure control and improved cardiovascular outcomes in the international Verapamil SR-Trandolapril study. Hypertension. 2007;50:299-305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rothwell PM, Howard SC, Dolan E, O’Brien E, Dobson JE, Dahlöf B, Sever PS, Poulter NR. Prognostic significance of visit-to-visit variability, maximum systolic blood pressure, and episodic hypertension. Lancet. 2010;375:895–905.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Huebschmann AG, Mizrahi T, Soenksen A, Beaty BL, Denberg TD. Reducing clinical inertia in hypertension treatment: a pragmatic randomized controlled trial. J Clin Hypertens. 2012;14:322-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of General Internal Medicine 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Anthi Katsouli
    • 1
    Email author
  • Tanu S. Pandey
    • 2
  • David Goldberg
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Internal MedicineLoyola University of Medical CenterMaywoodUSA
  2. 2.Department of MedicineJohn H. Stroger, Jr. Hospital of Cook CountyChicagoUSA

Personalised recommendations