Observational studyThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2015
Predicting blood pressure outcomes using single-item physician-administered measures: a retrospective pooled analysis of observational studies in Belgium.
Observational study in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Managing Medications and Medication Adherence Among US Adults During the Early Phase of the COVID-19 Pandemic.Patient preference and adherence · 2023Article
- A New Lebanese Medication Adherence Scale: Validation in Lebanese Hypertensive Adults.International journal of hypertension · 2018Article
- Adherence to antihypertensive medications and associations with blood pressure among African Americans with hypertension in the Jackson Heart Study.Journal of the American Society of Hypertension : JASH · 2017Article
- Hierarchical Modeling of Patient and Physician Determinants of Blood Pressure Outcomes in Hypertensive Patients with and without Diabetes: Pooled Analysis of Six Observational Valsartan Studies with 15,282 Evaluable Patients.International journal of chronic diseases · 2017Article
- Association between adherence, treatment satisfaction and illness perception in hypertensive patients.Journal of human hypertension · 2016Article
- Evaluating the Role of Clinical Pharmacists in Providing Pharmaceutical Care to Improve Adherence in Hypertensive Patients at a Rural Hospital in Southern Chile: A Pilot Study.Journal of research in pharmacy practiceArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatient adherence is often not monitored because existing methods of evaluating adherence are either burdensome or do not accurately predict treatment outcomes.
aimTo examine whether two simple, single-item physician-administered measures of patient adherence to antihypertensive medication are predictive of blood pressure outcomes. DESIGN AND
settingRetrospective database analysis of patients with hypertension treated in Belgian primary care.
methodUsing pooled data from five observational studies, a sample was identified of 9725 patients who were assessed using two single-item physician-administered measures of adherence to antihypertensive medication: the first item of the Basel Assessment of Adherence Scale (BAAS) and the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). These two assessment tools were administered by GPs during regular appointments with patients. Systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), and combined SBP/DBP were measured at baseline and at 90 days.
resultsBAAS-identified adherent patients achieved lower mean SBP and DBP compared with non-adherent patients at 90 days (P<0.001), and had odds ratios of achieving blood pressure control of 0.66 (95% confidence intervals (CI) = 0.61 to 0.73, P<0.001) for SBP, 0.69 (95% CI = 0.62 to 0.76, P<0.001) for DBP, and 0.65 (95% CI = 0.59 to 0.72, P<0.001) for combined SBP/DBP. For VAS-identified adherent patients, the odds ratios of achieving blood pressure control were 0.93 (95% CI = 0.86 to 1.00, P<0.001) for SBP, 0.79 (95% CI = 0.73 to 0.85, P<0.001) for DBP, and 0.91 (95% CI = 0.84 to 0.99, P<0.001) for combined SBP/DBP.
conclusionsThe first item of the BAAS and the VAS are independent predictors of blood pressure control. These methods can be integrated seamlessly into routine clinical practice by allowing GPs to quickly evaluate a patient's adherence and tailor treatment recommendations accordingly.
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.