Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20642553›Full record

ArticleBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2010

Oversight: a retrospective study of biochemical monitoring in patients beginning antihypertensive drug treatment in primary care.

Jamie J Coleman, Sarah E McDowell, Stephen J W Evans, Paramjit S Gill, Robin E Ferner

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Pharmacoepidemiology.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2012
    Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Jamie J ColemanDepartment of Clinical Pharmacology, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Sarah E McDowell
Stephen J W Evans
Paramjit S Gill
Robin E Ferner

Funding

Medical Research Council
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

what is already known about this subjectGuidelines recommend biochemical monitoring of patients treated with antihypertensive agents, although there is little primary evidence for these recommendations. WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS: Patients treated for hypertension in general practice often have no biochemical tests before, or in the 6 months after, starting drug treatment.

aimsGuidelines on the management of hypertension have recommended baseline testing of serum electrolyte and creatinine concentrations before treatment since the 1990s. We wished to examine the extent of laboratory monitoring in patients with newly diagnosed hypertension and newly treated with antihypertensive drugs.

methodsWe carried out a retrospective analysis of 74,096 patients in the General Practice Research Database (GPRD) aged 18 years and older with newly diagnosed hypertension and prescribed a single antihypertensive agent. We determined the number of patients with a laboratory test for serum electrolyte and creatinine (or urea) concentrations prior to the first antihypertensive drug prescription and in the 6 months after and patient factors associated with subsequent monitoring.

resultsThirty-four thousand nine hundred and forty-seven patients (47%) had at least one biochemical test in the 12 months prior to beginning antihypertensive treatment, and 26,946 (36%) had at least one biochemical monitoring test in the 6 months after beginning antihypertensive treatment. Thirteen thousand five hundred and four (18%) had both baseline and monitoring tests. Baseline tests were normal in 11,671 patients (86%), of whom 10,213 (88%) had normal tests at first monitoring. Monitoring was significantly more likely in patients treated with ACE inhibitors than thiazides (adjusted OR 1.90; 95% CI 1.80, 2.00), older patients (adjusted OR 1.23; 95% CI 1.11, 1.36) [individuals aged 80-89 years compared with <40 years], and patients with diabetes mellitus (adjusted OR 2.03; 95% CI 1.91, 2.16).

conclusionBiochemical testing at baseline and monitoring after starting treatment is often omitted in newly diagnosed hypertensive patients. When both are tested, one in eight normal results becomes abnormal.

Indexed as

Drug MonitoringAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAntihypertensive AgentsDrug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsFemaleHumansHypertensionMaleMiddle AgedPatient CarePrimary Health CareRetrospective StudiesYoung AdultAntihypertensive Agents

Identifiers

PMID20642553
PMCPMC2909813

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.