Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33975593›Full record

ArticleBMC medicine2021

Variation in hypertension clinical practice guidelines: a global comparison.

Richu Philip, Thomas Beaney, Nick Appelbaum, Carmen Rodriguez Gonzalvez, Charlotte Koldeweij, Amelia Kataria Golestaneh, Neil Poulter, Jonathan M Clarke

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing 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

29 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. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Observational
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

8 authors.

Richu PhilipDepartment of Primary Care and Public Health, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Thomas BeaneyDepartment of Primary Care and Public Health, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Nick AppelbaumHelix Centre for Design in Healthcare, Institute of Global Health Innovation, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Carmen Rodriguez GonzalvezHelix Centre for Design in Healthcare, Institute of Global Health Innovation, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Charlotte KoldeweijHelix Centre for Design in Healthcare, Institute of Global Health Innovation, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Amelia Kataria GolestanehDepartment of Primary Care and Public Health, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Neil PoulterImperial Clinical Trials Unit, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Jonathan M ClarkeCentre for Mathematics of Precision Healthcare, Department of Mathematics, Imperial College London, South Kensington Campus, London, SW7 2AZ, UK. j.clarke@imperial.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0003-1495-7746

Funding

Wellcome Trust 215938/Z/19/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHypertension is the largest single contributor to the global burden of disease, affecting an estimated 1.39 billion people worldwide. Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) can aid in the effective management of this common condition, however, inconsistencies exist between CPGs, and the extent of this is unknown. Understanding the differences in CPG recommendations across income settings may provide an important means of understanding some of the global variations in clinical outcomes related to hypertension.

aimsThis study aims to analyse the variation between hypertension CPGs globally. It aims to assess the variation in three areas: diagnostic threshold and staging, treatment and target blood pressure (BP) recommendations in hypertension.

methodsA search was conducted on the MEDLINE repository to identify national and international hypertension CPGs from 2010 to May 2020. An additional country-specific grey-literature search was conducted for all countries and territories of the world as identified by the World Bank. Data describing the diagnosis, staging, treatment and target blood pressure were extracted from CPGs, and variations between CPGs for these domains were analysed.

resultsForty-eight CPGs from across all World Bank income settings were selected for analysis. Ninety-six per cent of guidelines defined hypertension as a clinic-based BP of ≥140/90 mmHg, and 87% of guidelines recommended a target BP of < 140/90 mmHg. In the pharmacological treatment of hypertension, eight different first-step, 17 different second-step and six different third-step drug recommendations were observed. Low-income countries preferentially recommended diuretics (63%) in the first-step treatment, whilst high-income countries offered more choice between antihypertensive classes. Forty-four per cent of guidelines, of which 71% were from higher-income contexts recommended initiating treatment with dual-drug therapy at BP 160/100 mmHg or higher.

conclusionThis study found that CPGs remained largely consistent in the definition, staging and target BP recommendations for hypertension. Extensive variation was observed in treatment recommendations, particularly for second-line therapy. Variation existed between income settings; low-income countries prescribed cheaper drugs, offered less clinician choice in medications and initiated dual therapy at later stages than higher-income countries. Future research exploring the underlying drivers of this variation may improve outcomes for hypertensive patients across clinical contexts.

Indexed as

HypertensionAntihypertensive AgentsBlood PressureHumansAntihypertensive Agents

Identifiers

PMID33975593
PMCPMC8114719

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.