Trial reportAtencion primaria2012
[Prevention of therapeutic inertia in the treatment of arterial hypertension by using a program of home blood pressure monitoring].
Trial report in Atencion primaria, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the efficacy of a program of home blood pressure monitoring (HBPM) on therapeutic Inertia (TI) in mild-to-moderate hypertension (AHT).
designControlled, randomised clinical trial.
settingForty six clinics in 35 primary care centres. Spain.
participantsA total of 232 patients with uncontrolled hypertension were included.
interventionTwo groups with 116 patients were formed: 1) Control group (CG): standard health intervention; 2) Intervention group (IG): patients who were included in the HBPM program. MAIN MEASUREMENTS: TI was calculated by the ratio: Number of patients whose pharmacological treatment was not changed in each visit/Number of patients with an average BP 140mmHg and/or 90mmHg in the general population or 130 and/or 90 mmHg in diabetics. The mean BPs and the percentage of controlled patients were calculated. The mean number of people that required an intervention in order to avoid TI was calculated (NI).
resultsA total of 209 patients completed the study, with TI in 35.64% (95% CI=29.85%-41.43%) of the sample, and in 71.63% (95% CI=63.9-79.36%) of the uncontrolled hypertensive patients. The TI was 22.42% (95% CI=24.2-37%) in the IG and 50% (95% CI=37.75-62.25) in the CG (p<.05) in visit 2, and 25.23% (95% CI=14.84-35.62) and 46.07% (95% CI=33.85-58.29) in the final visit for IG and CG, respectively (P<.05). The NI was 4.3.
conclusionsTI was very significant among the uncontrolled hypertensive patients. The studied interventions are effective for improving TI.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.