Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28761353›Full record

ArticleVascular health and risk management2017

Hypertension and blood pressure variability management practices among physicians in Singapore.

Sajita Setia, Kannan Subramaniam, Jam Chin Tay, Boon Wee Teo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Vascular health and risk management, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
–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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Current realities of home blood pressure monitoring from physicians' perspectives: results from Asia HBPM survey 2020.Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2023
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Budget impact analysis of the adoption of new hypertension guidelines in Colombia.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2018
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

4 authors.

Sajita SetiaChief Medical Office, Medical Affairs, Pfizer Pte Ltd, Singapore.
Kannan SubramaniamGlobal Medical Affairs, Asia Pacific Region, Pfizer Australia, West Ryde, NSW, Australia.
Jam Chin TayDepartment of General Medicine, Tan Tock Seng Hospital.
Boon Wee TeoDepartment of Medicine, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThere are limited data on blood pressure variability (BPV) in Singapore. The absence of updated local guidelines might contribute to variations in diagnosis, treatment and control of hypertension and BPV between physicians. This study evaluated BPV awareness, hypertension management and associated training needs in physicians from Singapore. MATERIALS AND

methodsPhysicians from Singapore were surveyed between September 8, 2016, and October 5, 2016. Those included were in public or private practice for ≥3 years, cared directly for patients ≥70% of the time and treated ≥30 patients for hypertension each month. The questionnaire covered 6 main categories: general blood pressure (BP) management, BPV awareness/diagnosis, home BP monitoring (HBPM), ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM), BPV management and associated training needs.

resultsResponses from 60 physicians (30 general practitioners [GPs], 20 cardiologists, 10 nephrologists) were analyzed (77% male, 85% aged 31-60 years, mean 22 years of practice). Approximately 63% of physicians considered white-coat hypertension as part of BPV. The most common diagnostic tool was HBPM (overall 77%, GPs 63%, cardiologists 65%, nephrologists 70%), but ABPM was rated as the tool most valued by physicians (80% overall), especially specialists (97%). Withdrawn Singapore guidelines were still being used by 73% of GPs. Approximately 48% of physicians surveyed did not adhere to the BP cutoff recommended by most guidelines for diagnosing hypertension using HBPM (>135/85 mmHg). Hypertension treatment practices also varied from available guideline recommendations, although physicians did tend to use a lower BP target for patients with diabetes or kidney disease. There were a number of challenges to estimating BPV, the most common of which was patient refusal of ABPM/HBPM. The majority of physicians (82%) had no training on BPV, but stated that this would be useful.

conclusionThere appear to be gaps in knowledge and guideline adherence relating to the assessment and management of BPV among physicians in Singapore.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAntihypertensive AgentsBlood PressureBlood Pressure Monitoring, AmbulatoryCardiologistsCross-Sectional StudiesEducation, Medical, ContinuingFemaleGeneral PractitionersGuideline AdherenceHealth Care SurveysHumansHypertensionInservice TrainingMaleAntihypertensive Agentsantihypertensivesblood pressureblood pressure monitoringblood pressure variabilityguidelineshypertension

Identifiers

PMID28761353
PMCPMC5522821

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.