ArticleCureus2022
Assessing the Impact of Intensified Hypertension (HTN) Treatment Guidelines: A Single Center Experience.
Article in Cureus, 2022. 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, 0 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
6 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionHypertension (HTN) is an independent risk factor for heart disease, stroke, and premature death. In 2017 there was a shift in the definition of HTN by the American College of Cardiology (ACC), as well as the American Heart Association (ACC/AHA), resulting in lower blood pressure (BP) readings meeting criteria for diagnosis. Our study aimed to explore the impact the change had on a single cardiology practice's management of patients with HTN.
methodsWe performed a retrospective chart review of a single cardiology practice. We separated the time into two categories: 12 months before and 12 months after the reclassification of HTN categories in November 2017. A paired t-test analysis was done comparing averaged blood pressures (BPs) in each of the two time periods, as well as the number of medications in each time period and several subgroup analyses.
resultsA total of 441 patients were included in the final analysis. Patients were prescribed an average of 2.61 ± 1.20 medications at baseline, and 2.74 ± 1.22 medications post-reclassification (p < 0.0001). There was an average of 0.82 ± 1.28 medication changes per patient. The overall average BP was 133.7 ± 14.1/76.4 ± 9.5 at baseline, and 131.3 ± 13.1/76.7 ± 7.7 after the recategorization [Δ -2.41 (95% CI 1.18-3.63)/0.269 (95% CI -0.29 to 0.459); p<0.0001 for systolic blood pressure (SBP), p=0.467 for diastolic blood pressure (DBP)].
conclusionThe change in definition of HTN significantly impacted this single cardiology practice. There was a statistically significant increase in antihypertensive medications prescribed with an expected decrease in BP observed in this study.
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.