3
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Lowering blood pressure in primary care in Vienna (LOW-BP-VIENNA) : A cluster-randomized trial

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Summary

          Background

          In Austria only 41% of patients with treated hypertension (HTN) have their blood pressure (BP) controlled. This study investigated a strategy to improve BP control in primary care.

          Methods

          General practitioners (GPs) were randomized to interventional care vs. standard care and included patients with uncontrolled office BP > 140/90 mm Hg. In interventional care, antihypertensive therapy was up-titrated using a single pill combination (olmesartan, amlodipine and/or hydrochlorothiazde) in 4‑week intervals. In standard care, physicians were encouraged to treat according to the 2013 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with controlled office BP < 140/90 mm Hg at 6 months. The main secondary endpoint was the improvement in 24 h ambulatory BP (ABPM, Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02377661).

          Results

          Between 2015–2017, 20 GPs contributed to patient recruitment. The trial was discontinued due to slow recruitment after inclusion of 139 eligible patients, 54 of whom were included in the interventional group. A significantly larger proportion of patients in interventional vs. standard care achieved the office BP target (67% ± 26% vs. 39% ± 29%, respectively, mean difference −27.9%, 95% confidence interval CI −54.0%; −1.7%, p = 0.038). The proportion of patients with controlled 24 h ABPM (<130/80 mm Hg) was similar between groups (49% ± 33% vs. 40% ± 34%, respectively, mean difference −8.8%, 95% CI −40.7%; 23.1%, p = 0.57). At baseline, pretreated patients received an average of 1.5 ± 0.8 vs. 1.7 ± 0.9 antihypertensive prescriptions. At 6 months, the respective BP reductions were achieved with 1.2 ± 0.5 prescriptions in interventional vs. 2.0 ± 1.0 in standard care ( p < 0.01).

          Conclusion

          In both groups statistically and clinically significant BP reductions were observed after 6 months. In the interventional care group, a larger proportion of patients achieved the office BP target compared to standard care. The 24 h ambulatory blood pressure levels were controlled in 44% of patients at 6 months, without significant differences between groups. The respective BP reductions were achieved with a significantly lower medication burden in interventional care.

          Electronic supplementary material

          The online version of this article (10.1007/s00508-018-1374-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

          Related collections

          Most cited references12

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Catheter-based renal sympathetic denervation for resistant hypertension: a multicentre safety and proof-of-principle cohort study.

          Renal sympathetic hyperactivity is associated with hypertension and its progression, chronic kidney disease, and heart failure. We did a proof-of-principle trial of therapeutic renal sympathetic denervation in patients with resistant hypertension (ie, systolic blood pressure >/=160 mm Hg on three or more antihypertensive medications, including a diuretic) to assess safety and blood-pressure reduction effectiveness. We enrolled 50 patients at five Australian and European centres; 5 patients were excluded for anatomical reasons (mainly on the basis of dual renal artery systems). Patients received percutaneous radiofrequency catheter-based treatment between June, 2007, and November, 2008, with subsequent follow-up to 1 year. We assessed the effectiveness of renal sympathetic denervation with renal noradrenaline spillover in a subgroup of patients. Primary endpoints were office blood pressure and safety data before and at 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months after procedure. Renal angiography was done before, immediately after, and 14-30 days after procedure, and magnetic resonance angiogram 6 months after procedure. We assessed blood-pressure lowering effectiveness by repeated measures ANOVA. This study is registered in Australia and Europe with ClinicalTrials.gov, numbers NCT 00483808 and NCT 00664638. In treated patients, baseline mean office blood pressure was 177/101 mm Hg (SD 20/15), (mean 4.7 antihypertensive medications); estimated glomerular filtration rate was 81 mL/min/1.73m(2) (SD 23); and mean reduction in renal noradrenaline spillover was 47% (95% CI 28-65%). Office blood pressures after procedure were reduced by -14/-10, -21/-10, -22/-11, -24/-11, and -27/-17 mm Hg at 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months, respectively. In the five non-treated patients, mean rise in office blood pressure was +3/-2, +2/+3, +14/+9, and +26/+17 mm Hg at 1, 3, 6, and 9 months, respectively. One intraprocedural renal artery dissection occurred before radiofrequency energy delivery, without further sequelae. There were no other renovascular complications. Catheter-based renal denervation causes substantial and sustained blood-pressure reduction, without serious adverse events, in patients with resistant hypertension. Prospective randomised clinical trials are needed to investigate the usefulness of this procedure in the management of this condition.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Hypertension treatment and control in five European countries, Canada, and the United States.

            Levels of hypertension treatment and control have been noted to vary between Europe and North America, although direct comparisons with similar methods have not been undertaken. In this study, we sought to estimate the relative impact of hypertension treatment strategies in Germany, Sweden, England, Spain, Italy, Canada, and the United States by using sample surveys conducted in the 1990s. Hypertension was defined as a blood pressure of 160/95 mm Hg or 140/90 mm Hg, plus persons taking antihypertensive medication. "Controlled hypertension" was defined as a blood pressure less than threshold among persons taking antihypertensive medications. Among persons 35 to 64 years, 66% of hypertensives in the United States had their blood pressure controlled at 160/95 mm Hg, compared with 49% in Canada and 23% to 38% in Europe. Similar discrepancies were apparent at the 140/90 mm Hg threshold, at which 29% of hypertensives in the United States, 17% in Canada, and
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Clinical features of 8295 patients with resistant hypertension classified on the basis of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring.

              We aimed to estimate the prevalence of resistant hypertension through both office and ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in a large cohort of treated hypertensive patients from the Spanish Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring Registry. In addition, we also compared clinical features of patients with true or white-coat-resistant hypertension. In December 2009, we identified 68 045 treated patients with complete information for this analysis. Among them, 8295 (12.2% of the database) had resistant hypertension (office blood pressure ≥140 and/or 90 mm Hg while being treated with ≥3 antihypertensive drugs, 1 of them being a diuretic). After ambulatory blood pressure monitoring, 62.5% of patients were classified as true resistant hypertensives, the remaining 37.5% having white-coat resistance. The former group was younger, more frequently men, with a longer duration of hypertension and a worse cardiovascular risk profile. The group included larger proportions of smokers, diabetics, target organ damage (including left ventricular hypertrophy, impaired renal function, and microalbuminuria), and documented cardiovascular disease. Moreover, true resistant hypertensives exhibited in a greater proportion a riser pattern (22% versus 18%; P<0.001). In conclusion, this study first reports the prevalence of resistant hypertension in a large cohort of patients in usual daily practice. Resistant hypertension is present in 12% of the treated hypertensive population, but among them more than one third have normal ambulatory blood pressure. A worse risk profile is associated with true resistant hypertension, but this association is weak, thus making it necessary to assess ambulatory blood pressure monitoring for a correct diagnosis and management.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                +43-491502301 , +43-491502309 , miklos.rohla@meduniwien.ac.at
                Journal
                Wien Klin Wochenschr
                Wien. Klin. Wochenschr
                Wiener Klinische Wochenschrift
                Springer Vienna (Vienna )
                0043-5325
                1613-7671
                15 August 2018
                15 August 2018
                2018
                : 130
                : 23
                : 698-706
                Affiliations
                [1 ]ISNI 0000 0004 0524 3028, GRID grid.417109.a, 3rd Medical Department, Cardiology and Intensive Care Medicine, , Wilhelminenhospital, ; Vienna, Austria
                [2 ]GRID grid.487248.5, Institute for Cardiometabolic Diseases, , Karl Landsteiner Society, ; St. Pölten, Austria
                [3 ]ISNI 0000 0004 0367 8888, GRID grid.263618.8, Medical Faculty, , Sigmund Freud University, ; Vienna, Austria
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8967-0806
                Article
                1374
                10.1007/s00508-018-1374-4
                6290730
                30112584
                0a6c6647-2db1-4153-ad78-7ba068de0562
                © The Author(s) 2018

                Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

                History
                : 19 February 2018
                : 23 July 2018
                Funding
                Funded by: Daiichi-Sankyo Europe
                Award ID: N/A
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100004374, Medtronic;
                Award ID: N/A
                Funded by: Werner-Klein Award of the Austrian Society of Hypertension
                Award ID: N/A
                Funded by: Association for the Promotion of Research in Atherosclerosis, Thrombosis and Vascular Biology
                Award ID: N/A
                Funded by: Medical University of Vienna
                Funded by: Medical University of Vienna
                Categories
                Original Article
                Custom metadata
                © Springer-Verlag GmbH Austria, part of Springer Nature 2018

                Medicine
                arterial hypertension,hypertension control,disease management programs,single pill combination drugs,ambulatory blood pressure measurement

                Comments

                Comment on this article