Recognizing asymptomatic elevated blood pressure in ED patients: how good (bad) are we?

Home Blood Pressure Telemonitoring Technology for Patients With Asymptomatic Elevated Blood Pressure Discharged From the Emergency Department: Pilot Study

BACKGROUND

Hypertension affects 1 in 5 Canadians and is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally. Hypertension control is declining due to multiple factors including lack of access to primary care. Consequently, patients with hypertension frequently visit the emergency department (ED) due to high blood pressure (BP). Telehealth for Emergency-Community Continuity of Care Connectivity via Home-Telemonitoring Blood Pressure is a pilot project that implements and evaluates a comprehensive home blood pressure telemonitoring (HBPT) and physician case management protocol designed as a postdischarge management strategy to support patients with asymptomatic elevated BP as they transition from the ED to home.

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to conduct a feasibility study of an HBPT program for patients with asymptomatic elevated BP discharged from the ED.

METHODS

Patients discharged from an urban, tertiary care hospital ED with asymptomatic elevated BP were recruited in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, and provided with HBPT technology for 3 months of monitoring post discharge and referred to specialist hypertension clinics. Participants monitored their BP twice in the morning and evenings and tele-transmitted readings via Bluetooth Sensor each day using an app. A monitoring clinician received these data and monitored the patient's condition daily and adjusted antihypertensive medications. Feasibility outcomes included eligibility, recruitment, adherence to monitoring, and retention rates. Secondary outcomes included proportion of those who were defined as having hypertension post-ED visits, changes in mean BP, overall BP control, medication adherence, changes to antihypertensive medications, quality of life, and end user experience at 3 months.

RESULTS

A total of 46 multiethnic patients (mean age 63, SD 17 years, 69%, n=32 women) found to have severe hypertension (mean 191, SD 23/mean 100, SD 14 mm Hg) in the ED were recruited, initiated on HBPT with hypertension specialist physician referral and followed up for 3 months. Eligibility and recruitment rates were 40% (56/139) and 88% (49/56), respectively. The proportion of participants that completed ≥80% of home BP measurements at 1 and 3 months were 67% (31/46) and 41% (19/46), respectively. The proportion of individuals who achieved home systolic BP and diastolic BP control at 3 months was 71.4% (30/42) and 85.7% (36/42) respectively. Mean home systolic and diastolic BP improved by -13/-5 mm Hg after initiation of HBPT to the end of the study. Patients were prescribed 1 additional antihypertensive medication. No differences in medication adherence from enrollment to 3 months were noted. Most patients (76%, 25/33) were highly satisfied with the HBPT program and 76% (25/33) found digital health tools easy to use.

CONCLUSIONS

HBPT intervention is a feasible postdischarge management strategy and can be beneficial in supporting patients with asymptomatic elevated BP from the ED. A randomized trial is underway to evaluate the efficacy of this intervention on BP control.

Blood Pressure Assessment and Treatment in the Observation Unit

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To review the pathophysiology, diagnosis, and the management of hypertension. Given the paucity of literature regarding the role of the observation unit in the management of hypertension, we will provide our recommendations based on our experience working in an observation unit.

RECENT FINDINGS

Many patients have limited access to primary care, and hypertension diagnosis often relies on office-based measurements. We will describe situations where that is not necessary to make the diagnosis. We will discuss the current non-pharmacologic treatment guidelines, the education of which should be provided to patients both in the emergency department and observation units. We will provide the current recommendations on what anti-hypertension medications can be initiated in the emergency department and observation units. Hypertension is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in the USA. The utility of an observation unit in the diagnosis and management of patients with hypertension is beneficial particularly for those with risk factors for atherosclerotic disease. An observation unit stay provides the opportunity to diagnosis hypertension, initiate lifestyle education and pharmacologic treatment if indicated, and help to arrange appropriate follow-up for ongoing management and treatment in individuals with limited access to care.

The prognostic value of emergency department measured hypertension: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

The objective was to assess the prognostic value of hypertension detected in the emergency department (ED).

METHODS

The ED presents a unique opportunity to predict long-term cardiovascular disease (CVD) outcomes with its potential for high-footfall, and large-scale routine data collection applied to underserved patient populations. A systematic review and meta-analyses were conducted to assess the prognostic performance and feasibility of ED-measured hypertension as a risk factor for long-term CVD outcomes. We searched MEDLINE and Embase databases and gray literature sources. The target populations were undifferentiated ED patients. The prognostic factor of interest was hypertension. Feasibility outcomes included prevalence, reliability, and follow-up attendance. Meta-analyses were performed for feasibility using a random effect and exact likelihood.

RESULTS

The searches identified 1072 studies after title and abstract review, 53 studies had their full text assessed for eligibility, and 26 studies were included. Significant heterogeneity was identified, likely due to the international populations and differing study design. The meta-analyses estimate of prevalence for ED-measured hypertension was 0.31 (95% confidence interval  0.25-0.37). ED hypertension was persistent outside the ED (FE estimate of 0.50). The proportion of patients attending follow-up was low with an exact likelihood estimate of 0.41. Three studies examined the prognostic performance of hypertension and demonstrated an increased risk of long-term CVD outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Hypertension can be measured feasibly in the ED and consequently used in a long-term cardiovascular risk prediction model. There is an opportunity to intervene in targeted individuals, using routinely collected data.

Diagnosis and treatment of hypertensive emergencies and urgencies among Italian emergency and intensive care departments. Results from an Italian survey: Progetto GEAR (Gestione dell'Emergenza e urgenza in ARea critica)

Hypertensive emergencies (HE) and urgencies (HU) are frequent causes of patients referral to Emergency Department (ED) and the approach may be different according to local clinical practice. Our aim was to explore awareness, management, treatment and counselling after discharge of HE and HU in Italy, by mean of an on-line survey. The young investigator research group of the Italian Society of Hypertension developed a 23-item questionnaire spread by e-mail invitation to the members of Italian Scientific societies in the field of Hypertension. 665 questionnaires were collected from EDs, Emergency and Urgency Medicine, Cardiology or Coronary Units, Internal Medicines, Intensive care, Stroke units. Symptoms considered suspicious of acute organ damage were: chest pain (89.0%), visual disturbances (89.8%), dyspnoea (82.7%), headache (82.1%), dizziness (52.0%), conjunctival haemorrhages (41.5%), tinnitus (38.2%) and epistaxis (34.4%). Exams more frequent prescribed were: electrocardiogram (97.2%), serum creatinine (91.4%), markers of cardiomyocyte necrosis (66.2%), echocardiography (65.1%). The use of intravenous or oral medications to treat HEs was 94.7% and 3.5%, while for HUs 24.4% and 70.8% respectively. Of note, a surprisingly high percentage of physicians (22 % overall, 24.5% in North Italy) used to prescribe sublingual nifedipine. After discharge, home blood pressure monitoring and general practitioner re-evaluation were more frequently suggested, while ambulatory blood pressure monitoring and hypertension specialist examination were less prescribed. The differences observed across the different macro-areas, regarded prescription of diagnostic test and drug administration. This survey depicts a complex situation of shades and lights in the real-life management of HE and HU in Italy.

Screening for Hypertension in the INpatient Environment(SHINE): a protocol for a prospective study of diagnostic accuracy among adult hospital patients

INTRODUCTION

A significant percentage of patients admitted to hospital have undiagnosed hypertension. However, present hypertension guidelines in the UK, Europe and USA do not define a blood pressure threshold at which hospital inpatients should be considered at risk of hypertension, outside of the emergency setting. The objective of this study is to identify the optimal in-hospital mean blood pressure threshold, above which patients should receive postdischarge blood pressure assessment in the community.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Screening for Hypertension in the INpatient Environment is a prospective diagnostic accuracy study. Patients admitted to hospital whose mean average daytime blood pressure after 24 hours or longer meets the study eligibility threshold for mean daytime blood pressure (≥120/70 mm Hg) and who have no prior diagnosis of, or medication for hypertension will be eligible. At 8 weeks postdischarge, recruited participants will wear an ambulatory blood pressure monitor for 24 hours. Mean daytime ambulatory blood pressure will be calculated to assess for the presence or absence of hypertension. Diagnostic performance of in-hospital blood pressure will be assessed by constructing receiver operator characteristic curves from participants' in-hospital mean systolic and mean diastolic blood pressure (index test) versus diagnosis of hypertension determined by mean daytime ambulatory blood pressure (reference test).

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval has been provided by the National Health Service Health Research Authority South Central-Oxford B Research Ethics Committee (19/SC/0026). Findings will be disseminated through national and international conferences, peer-reviewed journals and social media.

Screening for hypertension using emergency department blood pressure measurements can identify patients with undiagnosed hypertension: A systematic review with meta-analysis

Hypertension is the leading risk factor for death globally. A significant percentage of patients admitted to hospital have undiagnosed hypertension, yet recognition of elevated blood pressure (BP) in hospital and referral for post‐discharge assessment are poor. Physician perception that elevated inhospital BP is attributable to anxiety, pain, or white coat syndrome may underlie an expectation that BP will normalize following discharge. However, these patients frequently remain hypertensive. The authors conducted a systematic review to evaluate the extent to which elevated inhospital BP can predict the presence of hypertension in previously undiagnosed adults. The authors included cohort studies in which hospital patients whose BP exceeded the study threshold underwent further post‐discharge BP assessment following discharge. Twelve studies were identified as eligible for inclusion; a total of 2627 participants met review eligibility criteria, and follow‐up BP data were available for 1240 (47.2%). Median percentage of patients remaining hypertensive following discharge was 43.6% (range: 14.2‐76.5). Across 7 studies which identified people with possible hypertension using an index test threshold of 140/90, the pooled proportion subsequently identified with hypertension at follow‐up was 43.4% (95% CI: 25.1%‐61.8%). This review indicates that screening for hypertension in the emergency hospital environment consistently identifies groups of patients with undiagnosed hypertension. Unscheduled hospital attendance therefore offers an important public health opportunity to identify patients with undiagnosed hypertension.

National trends in the emergency department management of adult patients with elevated blood pressure from 2005 to 2015

Emergency department (ED)-based screening and referral of patients with elevated blood pressure (BP) are recommended by 2006 and 2013 American College of Emergency Physicians guidelines; however, it is unknown if these recommendations or disparities in care impact clinical practice. The objectives of the study were to assess temporal trends in antihypertensive prescriptions, outpatient follow-up referrals, and diagnosis of hypertension (HTN)/elevated BP and to identify potential disparities by patient characteristics. Using the 2005-2015 National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey, we examined the frequency and trends over time of antihypertensive prescriptions, outpatient follow-up referrals, and BP diagnoses for US ED visits by adult patients with an elevated triage BP and identified potential disparities in management by patient demography and socioeconomic status. Of the 594 million eligible ED visits by patients from 2005 to 2015, 1.2% (1.0%-1.4%) received antihypertensive prescriptions at discharge, 82.3% (80.0%-83.6%) outpatient follow-up referrals, and 2.1% (1.9%-2.4%) an HTN/elevated BP diagnosis. There were small annual increases over time in the odds of antihypertensive prescriptions at discharge (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.05 [1.00-1.10]), follow-up referrals (aOR 1.04 [1.01-1.07]), and HTN/elevated BP diagnosis (aOR 1.05 [1.02-1.08]). For BPs ≥160/100 mm Hg, prescriptions were more common for Blacks (aOR 2.36 [1.93, 2.88]) and uninsured patients (aOR 1.81 [1.38, 2.38]), and diagnoses were more common for Blacks (aOR 1.95 [1.70, 2.24]) and uninsured patients (aOR 1.30 [1.09, 1.55]). These data suggest little change in and the need for improvement in the management of ED patients with elevated BP, despite the American College of Emergency Physicians guidelines, and raise concern about patient care disparities.

Hypertensive ED patients: Missed opportunities for addressing hypertension and facilitating outpatient follow-up

OBJECTIVES

Hypertension is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality. The emergency department (ED) frequently serves populations with unmet health needs and could have a greater and more systematic role in secondary prevention for hypertension. This study sought to determine, among hypertensive patients discharged from the ED, the frequency that patients 1) received hypertension-specific education, and 2) followed-up with a primary care provider. We secondarily assessed participant beliefs about hypertension.

METHODS

This non-experimental, observational study enrolled a convenience sample of consenting patients with asymptomatic, markedly elevated blood pressure (systolic ≥160 mmHg or diastolic ≥100 mmHg) with medium to low triage acuity discharged from an urban, academic ED. Discharge instructions were assessed through chart review. Patients followed up per their normal routine without intervention. Participants were interviewed by phone two to four weeks after ED discharge to ascertain outpatient follow-up and describe beliefs about hypertension.

RESULTS

From April through June 2014, 200 patients were approached, of whom 90 were enrolled. Of these, 77% of patients reported a previous diagnosis of hypertension, and 60% reported current treatment with antihypertensive medications. Five patients (5.5%) received written instructions at discharge addressing hypertension, although 59 (65.6%) reported that they were informed about their elevated blood pressure during the ED visit. Follow-up with a primary care provider within 2-4 weeks of discharge was completed in 57% of cases. None of the patients who received hypertension-specific discharge instructions completed follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Over half of markedly hypertensive patients discharged from the ED followed up with primary care within four weeks. Nonetheless, missed opportunities for improved secondary prevention among ED patients with hypertension are common. There is an urgent need for evidence-based interventions to assist emergency departments in addressing this health threat.

Long-term cardiovascular risk of hypertensive events in emergency department: A population-based 10-year follow-up study

Background

Hypertension-related visits to the emergency department (ED) are increasing every year. Thus, ED could play a significant role in detecting hypertension and providing necessary interventions. However, it is not known whether a hypertensive event observed in the ED is an independent risk factor for future major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE).

Methods

A population-based observational study was conducted using a nationally representative cohort that contained the claim data of 1 million individuals from 2002 to 2013. We included non-critical ED visits without any history of MACE, and compared the new occurrences of MACE according to the presence of hypertensive events using extended Cox regression model. The disease-modifying effect of a follow-up visit was assessed by analyzing the interaction between hypertensive event and follow-up visit.

Results

Among 262,927 first non-critical ED visits during the study period (from 2004 to 2013), 6,243 (2.4%) visits were accompanied by a hypertensive event. The hypertensive event group had a higher risk of having a first MACE at 3 pre-specified intervals: 0–3 years (HR, 4.25; 95% CI, 3.83–4.71; P<0.001), 4–6 years (HR, 3.65; 95% CI, 3.14–4.24; P<0.001), and 7–10 years (HR, 3.20; 95% CI, 2.50–4.11; P<0.001). Follow-up visits showed significant disease-modifying effect at 2 intervals: 0–3 years (HR 0.65, 95% CI, 0.50–0.83) and 4–7 years (HR 0.68, 95% CI, 0.48–0.95).

Conclusions

A hypertensive event in the ED is an independent risk factor for MACE, and follow-up visits after the event can significantly modify the risk.

Recognition of Asymptomatic Hypertension in an Urban Emergency Department: Where Are We Now?

Persistently elevated blood pressure ([BP]; hypertension [HTN]) occurs at higher rates in the emergency department ([ED]; 44%) than in the general population (27%) and disproportionately affects black patients and older adults. The American College of Emergency Physicians recommends referral to primary care for HTN confirmation and management when patients are asymptomatic and their BP is persistently elevated (). However, adherence to this clinical policy is suboptimal. The purpose of this study was to examine the prevalence of asymptomatic HTN, rates of BP reassessment and referral, and factors associated with it among adult patients who visit the ED and who were discharged a decade after this policy was disseminated. A retrospective chart analysis of adults with an initial BP of 140/90 mmHg or greater and who were discharged was included in the sampling frame. Appropriate bivariate analysis, followed by multivariate regression, was conducted. There were 2,367 patients who met inclusion criteria, of which 1,184 patients had asymptomatic HTN. A greater proportion of the sample was male (51.3%), Black (43.2%; p < 0.000), middle aged (μ = 50.2 ± 16), and covered by Medicaid (39.8%). Mean initial BP was 170/88 mmHg. A large proportion of patients with asymptomatic HTN (94.2%) had no previously diagnosed cardiovascular disease (CVD). The BP reassessment rate was 49% (μ = 158/88), and these patients were more likely to have no previously diagnosed CVDs (p = 0.02). Only 4.6% (n = 28) of patients with asymptomatic HTN were referred, and these patients were more likely to have no previously diagnosed CVDs (p = 0.000) and be middle-aged (p = 0.008). Adherence to follow-up was 100%.

A Population-Based Analysis of Outcomes in Patients With a Primary Diagnosis of Hypertension in the Emergency Department

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Patients treated primarily for hypertension are common in the emergency department (ED). The outcomes of these patients who were given a primary ED diagnosis of hypertension have not been described at a population level. In this study, we describe the characteristics and outcomes of these patients, as well as changes over time.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study used linked health databases from the province of Ontario, Canada, to assess ED visits made between April 1, 2002, and March 31, 2012, with a primary diagnosis of hypertension. We determined the annual number of visits, as well as the age- and sex-standardized rates. We examined visit disposition and assessed mortality outcomes and potential hypertensive complications at 7, 30, 90, and 365 days and at 2 years subsequent to the ED visit.

RESULTS

There were 206,147 qualifying ED visits from 180 sites. Visits increased by 64% between 2002 and 2012, from 15,793 to 25,950 annual visits, respectively. The age- and sex-standardized rate increased from 170 per 100,000 persons to 228 per 100,000 persons during the same period, a 34% increase. Eight percent of visits ended in hospitalization, but this proportion decreased from 9.9% to 7.1% during the study period. Mortality was very low: less than 1% within 90 days, 2.5% within 1 year, and 4.1% within 2 years. Among subsequent hospitalizations for potential hypertensive complications, stroke was the most frequent admitting diagnosis, but the frequency was still less than 1% at 1 year. Together hospitalizations for stroke, heart failure, acute myocardial infarction, atrial fibrillation, renal failure, hypertensive encephalopathy, and dissection were less than 1% at 30 days.

CONCLUSION

The number of visits made primarily for hypertension has increased significantly during the last decade. Although some of the increase is due to aging of the population, other forces are contributing to it as well. Subsequent mortality and complication rates are low and have declined. With current practice patterns, the feared complications of hypertension are extremely infrequent.

Hypertension in the Emergency Department

Hypertension is the leading risk factor for the global burden of disease, yet more than 20% of adults with hypertension are unaware of their condition. Underlying hypertension affects over 25% emergency department attendees, and the condition is more commonly encountered in emergency departments than in primary care settings. Emergency departments are strategically well placed to fulfill the important public health goal of screening for hypertension, yet less than 30% of patients with mild to severe hypertension are referred for follow up. In predominantly African American populations, subclinical hypertensive disease is highly prevalent in ED attendees with asymptomatic elevated blood pressure. Although medical intervention is not usually required, in select patient populations, it may be beneficial for antihypertensive medications to be started or adjusted in the emergency department, aiming for optimizing blood pressure control earlier while waiting for continuing care.

Management of Discharged Emergency Department Patients with a Primary Diagnosis of Hypertension: A Multicentre Study

Introduction Many patients are seen in the emergency department (ED) for hypertension, and the numbers will likely increase in the future. Given limited evidence to guide the management of such patients, the practice of one's peers provides a de facto standard.

METHODS

A survey was distributed to emergency physicians during academic rounds at three community and four tertiary EDs. The primary outcome measure was the proportion of participants who had a blood pressure (BP) threshold at which they would offer a new antihypertensive prescription to patients they were sending home from the ED. Secondary outcomes included patient- and provider-level factors associated with initiating an antihypertensive based on clinical vignettes of a 69-year-old man with two levels of hypertension (160/100 vs 200/110 mm Hg), as well as the recommended number of days after which to follow up with a primary care provider following ED discharge.

RESULTS

All 81 surveys were completed (100%). Half (51.9%; 95% CI 40.5-63.1) of participants indicated that they had a systolic BP threshold for initiating an antihypertensive, and 55.6% (95% CI 44.1-66.6) had a diastolic threshold: mean systolic threshold was 199 mm Hg (SD 19) while diastolic was 111 mm Hg (SD 8). A higher BP (OR 12.9; 95% CI 7.5-22.2) and more patient comorbidities (OR 3.0; 95% CI 2.1-4.3) were associated with offering an antihypertensive prescription, while physician years of practice, certification type, and hospital type were not. Participants recommended follow-up care within a median 7.0 and 3.0 days for the patient with lower and higher BP levels, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Half of surveyed emergency physicians report having a BP threshold to start an antihypertensive; BP levels and number of patient comorbidities were associated with a modification of the decision, while physician characteristics were not. Most physicians recommended follow-up care within seven days of ED discharge.

Blood pressure treatment and outcomes in hypertensive patients without acute target organ damage: a retrospective cohort

OBJECTIVES

The objective is of the study to evaluate the effect of antihypertensive therapy in emergency department (ED) patients with markedly elevated blood pressure (BP) but no signs/symptoms of acute target organ damage (TOD).

METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study of ED patients age 18 years and older with an initial BP greater than or equal to 180/100 mm Hg and no acute TOD, who were discharged with a primary diagnosis of hypertension. Patients were divided based on receipt of antihypertensive therapy and outcomes (ED revisits and mortality) and were compared.

RESULTS

Of 1016 patients, 435 (42.8%) received antihypertensive therapy, primarily (88.5%) oral clonidine. Average age was 49.2 years, and 94.5% were African American. Treated patients more often had a history of hypertension (93.1% vs 84.3%; difference = -8.8; 95% confidence interval [CI], -12.5 to -4.9) and had higher mean initial systolic (202 vs 185 mm Hg; difference = 16.9; 95% CI, -19.7 to -14.1) and diastolic (115 vs 106 mm Hg; difference = -8.6; 95% CI, -10.3 to -6.9) BP. Emergency department revisits at 24 hours (4.4% vs 2.4%; difference = -2.0; 95% CI, -4.5 to 0.3) and 30 days (18.9% vs 15.2%; difference = -3.7; 95% CI, -8.5 to 0.9) and mortality at 30 days (0.2% vs 0.2%; difference = 0; 95% CI, -1.1 to 0.8) and 1 year (2.1% vs 1.6%; difference = -0.5; 95% CI, -2.5 to 1.2) were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

Revisits and mortality were similar for ED patients with markedly elevated BP but no acute TOD, whether they were treated with antihypertensive therapy, suggesting relative safety with either approach.

Epidemiology of elevated blood pressure in the ED

OBJECTIVES

To determine the prevalence and demographics of elevated blood pressure (BP) in emergency department (ED) patients.

METHODS

Retrospective study at an academic ED. ED patients with any systolic blood pressure (SBP) ≥140mm Hg or diastolic blood pressure (DBP) ≥90mm Hg over a 1-year period were included. Data pertaining to frequency of elevated BP across different ethnic categories, age groups, days of the week, shifts, and gender were collected.

RESULTS

A total of 44435 patient records were accessed. Overall 47.6% (95% CI, 47.2%-48.1%) of patients had elevated BP (SBP ≥140mm Hg or DBP ≥90mm Hg). Fifty three percent (95% CI, 52%-54%) were women. Among patients with elevated BP, 18% (95% CI, 17.8%-18.9%) had severe BP elevation (SBP ≥180 or DBP ≥110). Overall, patients >45years old were more likely to have elevated BP in ED. Across all ethnic groups, BP increased with age. Significant differences were noted in the prevalence of elevated BP between whites (52%), and other ethnic groups (African Americans [45%] and Hispanics [31%]) (P < .01). Overall, 64% (95% CI, 63.3%-64.6%) of patients with elevated BP were discharged from the ED. Forty four percent (95% CI, 42.4%-45.5%) of patients with severe BP elevation were also discharged from the ED.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides knowledge of distribution of elevated BP among different age, gender and ethnic groups in the ED which can be used to develop specific interventions to improve recognition, prevention, detection, and treatment of hypertension.

Prevalence of undiagnosed hypertension in the emergency department

Background:

Hypertension (HTN) is a serious health problem that threatens one fourth of the adult population in some countries.

Objectives:

This study aimed to assess the prevalence and outcome of undiagnosed hypertensive patients admitted to the emergency department.

Materials and Methods:

This cross-sectional study was conducted from March 2009 to March 2010 at Imam Hossein Medical and Educational Center, Teheran, Iran. A total of 2070 patients aged 18 years and older were admitted to the emergency department without previous HTN history. Blood pressure was taken and repeated 10 minutes later if initial systolic blood pressure ≥ 140 mmHg or diastolic blood pressure ≥ 90 mmHg. Those who matched the inclusion criteria entered the study for further follow-up. A numerical pain score was also used for pain intensity assessment. Chi-Square and Mann Whitney U tests were performed to compare differences between sex, age and education of the participants.

Results:

Based on the inclusion criteria, 346 patients entered the study, out of which 168 qualified for further evaluation and follow-up. Forty eight patients (28.6%) were finally diagnosed with high blood pressure. Our study showed that the prevalence of undiagnosed HTN was 4.8%. Significant differences between blood pressure, age, pain score and education level (P < 0.001) were found. This implies that old age, poor education and low pain score are positively associated with hypertension.

Conclusions:

Blood pressure readings in emergency departments should not be readily attributed to pain or anxiety. Diagnosis must be based on meticulous follow-up and precise examinations.

Severe acute hypertension among inpatients admitted from the emergency department

BACKGROUND

Hospitalists often treat patients with severe acute hypertension (AH) presenting to the hospital. Little is known about the epidemiology of this syndrome.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the prevalence of severe AH in patients admitted through the emergency department (ED) and its associated outcomes.

DESIGN

A cohort study using retrospectively collected vital signs and other clinical data.

PATIENTS

A total of 1,290,804 adults admitted between 2005 and 2007.

SETTING

One hundred fourteen acute-care hospitals.

MEASUREMENTS

Severe AH was defined as at least 1 systolic blood pressure (SBP) >180 mmHg. We used multivariable regression to estimate AH-attributable in-hospital mortality, need for mechanical ventilation (MV), and length of stay (LOS).

RESULTS

Severe AH occurred in 178,131 (13.8%) patients. Disease categories with the highest prevalence were nervous (29.0%), circulatory (16.0%), endocrine (14.7%), and kidney/urinary (13.5%). The overall in-hospital mortality was 3.6%. The relationship between severe AH strata and mortality was graded for nervous system diseases; mortality rates for each 10 mmHg increase in SBP from 180 to >220 mmHg were 6.5%, 8.1%, 9.9%, 12.0%, and 19.7%, respectively (P < 0.0001). The relationship between severe AH strata and need for MV was graded in the most pronounced way in respiratory and circulatory conditions (P < 0.0001). The relationship between severe AH strata and LOS was graded in most disease categories (P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Severe AH appears common and its prevalence varies by underlying clinical condition. Severe AH is associated with excess in-hospital mortality for patients with nervous system diseases and, for most disease categories, prolongs hospitalization.

Feasibility of referral of patients with elevated blood pressure from the Emergency Department

Recent studies suggest that patients' elevated blood pressure (BP) readings in the Emergency Department (ED) may be due to hypertension (HTN) rather than pain and anxiety. Identifying BP patterns suggestive of HTN in the ED presents an opportunity for referral. The purpose of this prospective cohort study was to assess the feasibility of referral of ED patients with elevated BP readings suggestive of HTN. Adults with elevated BP suggestive of HTN and no history of HTN were tracked as to referral status using an actively monitored ED referral system. Patients referred to a community clinic network were tracked regarding clinic visits, subsequent BP, and diagnosis of HTN. Of 662 patients with elevated BP in the ED at triage, 197 (29.8%) had a pattern of blood pressure readings that were suggestive of HTN. Of these, 63 (32.0%) were referred to in-network clinics, 5 (2.5%) were referred out of network, and 129 (65.5%) were not referred. Of the 63 referred to network clinics, 17 (27.0%) kept their appointments and of those, 5 (29.4%) were diagnosed with HTN. Elevated BP was not mentioned in any ED physician referral notes as a reason for referral and the number of appointments kept among patients who were referred was low. Referral to outpatient clinics based on BP levels suggestive of HTN may not be feasible despite active referral systems.

The feasibility and effectiveness of emergency department based hypertension screening: a systematic review

PURPOSE

Hypertension is a highly prevalent risk factor for cardiovascular disease, and its early identification and management results in reductions in morbidity and mortality. Our objectives were to: (1) determine the extent to which the emergency department (ED) has been used to screen patients for undiagnosed hypertension; (2) estimate the incidence of undiagnosed hypertension in the ED population; (3) identify and describe the programs for ED hypertension screening; and (4) determine the feasibility of ED-based hypertension screening programs and the requirements for further study.

DATA SOURCES

An online search of databases (i.e., OVID Search, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science), unpublished sources (i.e., ProQuest Dissertation & Theses and Papers First), and grey literature (i.e., OpenSIGLE and the New York Academy of Grey Literature) was conducted. A manual search of the reference lists of relevant studies was also completed.

CONCLUSION

Hypertension screening in the ED is feasible. Individuals with elevated blood pressure (BP) in the ED should be referred for follow-up. Further study is needed to develop an ED screening tool that is predictive of persistently elevated BP in undiagnosed individuals.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Nurse practitioners in the ED should identify patients with elevated BP, provide hypertension education, and ensure appropriate intervention and referral.

Diagnosis, treatment, and referral of hypertension or prehypertension in an emergency department after an educational program: preliminary results

The authors prospectively audited 602 randomly selected charts of patients seen in an academic emergency department (ED) for prevalence of hypertension and its management after an educational program (EP) because of results found in auditing 500 charts before the EP. Blood pressure was not measured in 11 of 500 patients (2.2%) before the EP and in 1 of 602 patients (0.2%) after the EP (P < .005). Hypertension was treated in the ED in 14 of 187 patients (8%) before the EP and in 29 of 282 patients (10%) after the EP (P = not significant). Of 187 patients with hypertension before the EP, 99 (53%) were referred to a physician or clinic for follow-up of hypertension, and 281 of 282 patients (99.6%) with hypertension were referred to a physician or clinic for follow-up of hypertension after the EP (P < .001). These data show that an EP administered to the staff of an academic ED significantly increased measurement of blood pressure in the ED, significantly increased obtaining a history of hypertension and of its treatment in ED patients, and significantly increased referral of patients with hypertension to a physician or clinic for follow-up of hypertension.

Hypertension in the ED: a multifaceted intervention to change provider practice

This project measured the effect of a multifaceted intervention on health care provider identification and treatment of undiagnosed hypertensive patients. The intervention comprised provider education, audit, and feedback. The primary outcomes were pre-/postintervention differences in the proportion of patients presenting with elevated blood pressure who were (1) identified, (2) given blood pressure measurements, (3) counseled regarding behavior change, (4) prescribed medications, and (5) advised of the need for follow-up. These 5 behaviors were selected based on the recommendations in the seventh report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure. Rates of all 5 outcomes improved significantly after the intervention, with prevalence differences ranging from 5% to 25%. However, despite increases, rates for each behavior remained low. At no point during the study were all 5 practitioner behaviors documented for an individual patient. In conclusion, while an intervention composed of education and practitioner audit and feedback improved practitioner behaviors in treating patients with elevated blood pressure, additional interventions are needed to bring practitioner behaviors up to the level of JACHO standards.

Diagnosis, treatment, and referral of hypertension in an emergency department

The authors prospectively audited 500 randomly selected charts of patients seen during a 6-month period ending in October 2008, in the emergency department of a university medical center for the prevalence of hypertension and how it was managed. Of the 187 patients with hypertension, 14 (8%) were treated for hypertension in the emergency department and 99 (53%) were hospitalized or referred to a physician or clinic for follow-up of their hypertension. Much improvement is needed, especially since many of the patients seen in the emergency department do not have a primary care physician.

Asymptomatic hypertension in the emergency department: a matter of critical public health importance

Asymptomatic hypertension (HTN) is commonly encountered in the emergency department (ED), but in most circumstances little is done about it. While many factors may contribute to this, the failure to recognize asymptomatic HTN as a public health problem is particularly important. Given the established long-term consequences of elevated blood pressure (BP), a reconsideration of methods that could enhance surveillance and intervention in the ED is needed. In this article, we discuss the relevant epidemiology of asymptomatic HTN and present a novel approach using a modified version of the Haddon's matrix to systematically address the challenges that contribute to ineffective screening and suboptimal outcomes.

Provider self-report and practice: reassessment and referral of emergency department patients with elevated blood pressure

BACKGROUND

We attempted to identify patient factors associated with blood pressure (BP) reassessment and to compare health-care provider self-reported reassessment and referral to actual practice in an emergency department (ED) setting.

METHODS

Provider reassessment and referral practices were determined through systematic review of 1,250 medical records at five EDs. Medical records were included if patients were > or =18 years, nonpregnant, presented with a systolic (SBP) > or =140 or diastolic BP (DBP) > or =90 mm Hg, and discharged. A separate questionnaire obtained self-reported practice patterns of health-care providers. Multivariate logistic regression identified factors associated with patient BP reassessment and referral.

RESULTS

Of 1,250 patients, only 57% underwent BP reassessment and 9% received a referral for outpatient management. The most significant independent variables related to a reassessment were as follows: treatment of elevated BP in the ED (odds ratio (OR): 6.05; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.80-20.31), chest pain (OR: 3.90; 95% CI: 2.37-6.42), and presence of an ED reassessment protocol (OR: 2.49; 95% CI: 1.77-3.50). The most significant factors associated with a referral included treatment of elevated BP in the ED (OR: 5.55; 95% CI: 2.72-11.32), presence of a reassessment protocol (OR: 2.58; 95% CI: 1.32-5.05), and a BP reassessment (OR: 2.56; 95% CI: 1.34-4.89). For self-reported practice patterns, 379 (72%) health-care providers completed questionnaires. Providers consistently overestimated their referral practices, yet the mean referral threshold values reported (SBP, 150 mm Hg; DBP, 93 mm Hg) were lower than the mean BP values of patients who actually received a directed referral (SBP, 170 mm Hg; DBP, 97 mm Hg, P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Reassessment and referral of discharged ED patients with elevated BP was infrequent and health-care providers overestimate their reassessment and referral efforts.

Asymptomatically elevated blood pressure in the emergency department: a finding deserving of attention by emergency physicians?

The Emergency Department (ED) may be an ideal place to screen and refer patients for blood pressure monitoring in the outpatient setting. Yet, little is known about the public health significance of asymptomatically elevated blood pressure measurements in the ED and what to tell patients when these abnormal vital signs are recorded. Since the prevalence of hypertension and inadequately treated hypertension is so high, the incidental finding of elevated blood pressure in a previously undiagnosed patient may be a pivotal moment in that patient's life. For those patients carrying the diagnosis of hypertension, it is the author's opinion that the observation of elevated blood pressures should trigger advice to see their physicians to consider medication adjustments or changes. Emergency Physicians and their staff are in a unique position to screen and refer large populations of patients to their community physicians and help abort the long-term sequelae of unidentified or inadequately managed hypertension. How best to advise physicians and their patients requires research and innovative methods for transmitting important information to patients that may be unrelated to their primary complaint in the ED.

Point-of-care glucose and hemoglobin A1c in emergency department patients without known diabetes: implications for opportunistic screening

OBJECTIVES

The objectives were to evaluate the correlation between random glucose and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) in emergency department (ED) patients without known diabetes and to determine the ability of diabetes screening in the ED to predict outpatient diabetes.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional study at an urban academic ED. The authors enrolled consecutive adult patients without known diabetes during eight 24-hour periods. Point-of-care (POC) random capillary glucose and HbA1c levels were tested, as well as laboratory HbA1c in a subset of patients. Participants with HbA1c > or = 6.1% were scheduled for oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT).

RESULTS

The 265 enrolled patients were 47% female and 80% white, with a median age of 42 years. Median glucose and HbA1c levels were 93 mg/dL (interquartile range [IQR] = 82-108) and 5.8% (IQR = 5.5-6.2), respectively. The correlation between POC and laboratory HbA1c was r = 0.96, with mean difference 0.33% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.27% to 0.39%). Glucose threshold > or = 120 mg/dL had 89% specificity and 26% sensitivity for predicting the 76 (29%) patients with abnormal HbA1c; > or = 140 mg/dL had 98% specificity and 14% sensitivity. The correlation between random glucose and HbA1c was moderate (r = 0.60) and was affected by age, gender, prandial status, corticosteroid use, and current injury. Only 38% of participants with abnormal HbA1c returned for OGTTs; 38% had diabetes, 34% had impaired fasting glucose/impaired glucose tolerance, and 28% had normal glucose tolerance.

CONCLUSIONS

ED patients have a high prevalence of undiagnosed diabetes. Although screening with POC random glucose and HbA1c is promising, improvement in follow-up with confirmatory testing and initiation of treatment is needed before opportunistic ED screening can be recommended.

Untreated hypertension and the emergency department: a chance to intervene?

OBJECTIVES

Untreated hypertension (HTN) is a major public health problem. Screening for untreated HTN in the emergency department (ED) may lead to appropriate treatment of more patients. The authors investigated the accuracy of identifying HTN in the ED, the proportion of ED patients with untreated HTN, patient characteristics predicting untreated HTN, and provider documentation of untreated HTN.

METHODS

The authors performed a retrospective cross-sectional study on a random sample of 2,061 adults treated at an urban academic ED. The validity of six candidate definitions of HTN in the ED was assessed in a subsample using outpatient clinic records as the reference standard. "Untreated HTN" was HTN without a HTN medication listed in the ED history. "Documentation of untreated HTN was documentation of HTN as a visit problem, specific referral for HTN, or ED discharge with a HTN" information sheet or a HTN medication. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine associations.

RESULTS

The preferred definition of HTN in the ED had sensitivity of 86% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 80% to 90%), specificity of 78% (95% CI = 69% to 85%), and accuracy of 83% (95% CI = 78% to 87%). Of the 42% (95% CI = 40% to 44%) of ED patients with HTN, 43% (95% CI = 39% to 46%) had untreated HTN. Patients who were younger and male, without primary care physicians, with fewer prior ED visits, and without cardiovascular comorbidities, had higher odds of untreated HTN. Of those with untreated HTN, 8% (95% CI = 5% to 11%) had their untreated HTN documented.

CONCLUSIONS

Untreated HTN was common in the ED but rarely documented. Providers can use ED blood pressures along with patient characteristics to identify those with untreated HTN for referral to primary care.