Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24989986›Full record

SynthesisBMC family practice2014

The concept and definition of therapeutic inertia in hypertension in primary care: a qualitative systematic review.

Jean-Pierre Lebeau, Jean-Sébastien Cadwallader, Isabelle Aubin-Auger, Alain Mercier, Thomas Pasquet, Emmanuel Rusch, Kristin Hendrickx, Etienne Vermeire

Registry-linked trialAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC family practice, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03872856 (Home Blood Pressure Monitoring Intervention for Self-Management of High Blood Pressure Among Alaska Native People), which is not on this map. Cited by 82 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
82citing 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.

NCT03872856 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2019, after this paper: background citation

Home Blood Pressure Monitoring Intervention for Self-Management of High Blood Pressure Among Alaska Native People

TypeinterventionalSponsorSouthcentral FoundationRan2019 to 2023Enrolled164ConditionsHypertensionArmsBP-ICAN
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 2024 Thai guidelines on the treatment of hypertension.Asian biomedicine : research, reviews and news · 2025
    Article
  16. Clinical inertia in sexual medicine practice.World journal of methodology · 2025
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Lipid-lowering prescription patterns after a non-fatal acute coronary syndrome: A retrospective cohort study.International journal of cardiology. Cardiovascular risk and prevention · 2025
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

22 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

8 authors.

Jean-Pierre LebeauDepartment of General Practice, EES, University of Tours, 10 Boulevard Tonnellé, BP 3223, 37032 Tours, Cedex 1, France. jean-pierre.lebeau@univ-tours.fr.
Jean-Sébastien Cadwallader
Isabelle Aubin-Auger
Alain Mercier
Thomas Pasquet
Emmanuel Rusch
Kristin Hendrickx
Etienne Vermeire

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTherapeutic inertia has been defined as the failure of health-care provider to initiate or intensify therapy when therapeutic goals are not reached. It is regarded as a major cause of uncontrolled hypertension. The exploration of its causes and the interventions to reduce it are plagued by unclear conceptualizations and hypothesized mechanisms. We therefore systematically searched the literature for definitions and discussions on the concept of therapeutic inertia in hypertension in primary care, to try and form an operational definition.

methodsA systematic review of all types of publications related to clinical inertia in hypertension was performed. Medline, EMbase, PsycInfo, the Cochrane library and databases, BDSP, CRD and NGC were searched from the start of their databases to June 2013. Articles were selected independently by two authors on the basis of their conceptual content, without other eligibility criteria or formal quality appraisal. Qualitative data were extracted independently by two teams of authors. Data were analyzed using a constant comparative qualitative method.

resultsThe final selection included 89 articles. 112 codes were grouped in 4 categories: terms and definitions (semantics), "who" (physician, patient or system), "how and why" (mechanisms and reasons), and "appropriateness". Regarding each of these categories, a number of contradictory assertions were found, most of them relying on little or no empirical data. Overall, the limits of what should be considered as inertia were not clear. A number of authors insisted that what was considered deleterious inertia might in fact be appropriate care, depending on the situation.

conclusionsOur data analysis revealed a major lack of conceptualization of therapeutic inertia in hypertension and important discrepancies regarding its possible causes, mechanisms and outcomes. The concept should be split in two parts: appropriate inaction and inappropriate inertia. The development of consensual and operational definitions relying on empirical data and the exploration of the intimate mechanisms that underlie these behaviors are now needed.

Indexed as

Clinical CompetenceQuality of Health CareAntihypertensive AgentsHumansHypertensionPatient Care PlanningPrimary Health CareQualitative ResearchTreatment FailureTreatment OutcomeAntihypertensive Agents

Identifiers

PMID24989986
PMCPMC4094689

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.