Evolution of therapy inertia in primary care setting in Spain during 2002–2010

Clinical characteristics, treatment, and blood pressure control in patients with hypertension seen by primary care physicians in Spain: the IBERICAN study

Objectives

To determine the clinical profile, according to the history of hypertension, the risk of developing hypertension, current antihypertensive treatment and BP control rates in patients with hypertension from the IBERICAN cohort.

Methods

IBERICAN is an ongoing prospective cohort study, whose primary objective is to determine the frequency, incidence, and distribution of CVRF in the adult Spanish population seen in primary care settings. This analysis shows the baseline clinical characteristics of patients with hypertension. Adequate BP control was defined as BP <140/90 mmHg according to 2013 ESH/ESC guidelines.

Results

A total of 8,066 patients were consecutively included, of whom 3,860 (48.0%) had hypertension. These patients were older (65.8 ± 10.9 vs. 51.6 ± 14.7 years; p < 0.001), had more cardiovascular risk factors, target organ damage and cardiovascular disease (CVD) in comparison with those without hypertension. The risk of hypertension increased with the presence of associated CV risk factors and comorbidities, particularly diabetes, obesity and the metabolic syndrome, and decreased with the intensity of physical activity. Regarding antihypertensive treatments, 6.1% of patients did not take any medication, 38.8% were taking one antihypertensive drug, 35.5% two drugs, and 19.6% three or more antihypertensive drugs. Overall, 58.3% achieved BP goals <140/90 mmHg. A greater probability of BP control was observed with increasing age of patients and the greater number of antihypertensive drugs. Blood pressure control was lower in hypertensive patients with diabetes, obesity, the metabolic syndrome, increased urinary albumin excretion, higher pulse pressure, and lack of antihypertensive treatment.

Conclusions

About half of patients attended in primary care settings have hypertension in Spain. Patients with hypertension have a worse CV clinical profile than non-hypertensive patients, with greater association of CVRF and CVD. Around four out of ten patients do not achieve the recommended BP goals, and higher use of combination therapies is associated with a better BP control.

Comparison of efficacy and safety between third-dose triple and third-dose dual antihypertensive combination therapies in patients with hypertension

We compared the efficacy and safety of third-standard-dose triple and third-standard-dose dual antihypertensive combination therapies in patients with mild to moderate hypertension. This was a phase II multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group trial. After a 4-week placebo run-in period, 245 participants were randomized to the third-dose triple combination (ALC group; amlodipine 1.67 mg + losartan potassium 16.67 mg + chlorthalidone 4.17 mg) or third-dose dual combination (AL group; amlodipine 1.67 mg + losartan potassium 16.67 mg, LC group; losartan potassium 16.67 mg + chlorthalidone 4.17 mg, AC group; amlodipine 1.67 mg + chlorthalidone 4.17 mg) therapy groups and followed up for 8 weeks. The mean systolic blood pressure (BP) reduction was -18.3 ± 13.2, -13.0 ± 13.3, -16.3 ± 12.4, and -13.8 ± 13.2 mmHg in the ALC, AL, LC, and AC groups, respectively. The ALC group showed significant systolic BP reduction compared to the AL and AC groups at weeks 4 (P = .010 and P = .018, respectively) and 8 (P = .017 and P = .036, respectively). At week 4, the proportion of systolic BP responders was significantly higher in the ALC group (42.6%) than in the AL (22.0%), LC (23.3%), and AC (27.1%) groups (P = .013, P = .021, and P = .045, respectively). At week 8, the proportion of systolic and diastolic BP responders was significantly higher in the ALC group (59.7%) than in the AL (39.3%) and AC (42.4%) groups (P = .022 and P = .049, respectively) at week 8. Third-standard-dose triple antihypertensive combination therapy demonstrated early effective BP control compared to third-standard-dose dual combination therapies, without increasing adverse drug reactions in patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension.

Clinical Profile and Management of Patient Patients with Ischemic Heart Disease and/or Peripheral Artery Disease in Clinical Practice: The APALUSA Study

This study was aimed to ascertain the clinical profile and management of patients with ischemic heart disease (IHD) and/or peripheral artery disease (PAD). In this observational and cross-sectional study developed in 80 hospitals throughout Spain, consecutive adults with stable IHD and/or PAD were included. A total of 1089 patients were analyzed, of whom 65.3% had only IHD, 17.8% PAD and 16.9% both. A total of 80.6% were taking only one antiplatelet agent, and 18.2% were on dual antiplatelet therapy (mainly aspirin/clopidogrel). Almost all patients were taking ≥1 lipid lowering drug, mainly moderate-to-high intensity statins. IHD patients took ezetimibe more commonly than PAD (43.9% vs. 12.9%; p < 0.001). There were more patients with IHD that achieved blood pressure targets compared to PAD (<140/90 mmHg: 67.9% vs. 43.0%; p < 0.001; <130/80 mmHg: 34.1% vs. 15.7%; p < 0.001), LDL-cholesterol (<70 mg/dL: 53.1% vs. 41.5%; p = 0.033; <55 mg/dL: 26.5% vs. 16.0%; p = 0.025), and diabetes (HbA1c < 7%, with SGLT2i/GLP1-RA: 21.7% vs. 8.8%; p = 0.032). Modifications of antihypertensive agents and lipid-lowering therapy were performed in 69.0% and 82.3% of patients, respectively, without significant differences between groups. The use of SGLT2i/GLP1-RA was low. In conclusion, cardiovascular risk factors control remains poor among patients with IHD, PAD, or both. A higher use of combined therapy is warranted.

Patient Awareness and Clinical Inertia: Obstacles to Hypertension Control in Rural Communities in the Dominican Republic

BACKGROUND

Many obstacles exist for adequate hypertension control, including low individual awareness and clinical inertia (CI). In this study, we aimed to determine hypertension prevalence, awareness, treatment, and control among community residents of rural areas of Peravia in Dominican Republic (DR), followed by an assessment of CI in their primary care clinics (PCCs).

METHODS

We interviewed 827 adults from 8 rural communities of Peravia. Demographics, medical history, health care information, and blood pressure (BP) were obtained. We reviewed the community PCC visits of patients with known hypertension or a BP ≥140/90, abstracting medical history and the physician's action toward uncontrolled BP.

RESULTS

Of those interviewed, 57% (95% CI: 53%-60%) had hypertension, with 63% (95% CI: 59%-68%) of those aware of their diagnosis. Among individuals with hypertension, 60% (95% CI: 56%-65%) were receiving pharmacological treatment, and only 35% (95% CI: 31%-40%) were controlled. Characteristics associated with awareness were female sex, age >55 years, diabetes, private insurance, and having at least 1 health care visit within the past year. Of the 507 PCC patients reviewed, 340 (67%) had uncontrolled BP. Of these, 220 had no clinical action to address the uncontrolled BP, corresponding to a CI rate of 65%.

CONCLUSIONS

Among rural communities in the DR, undiagnosed hypertension remains common, especially in individuals who are younger, uninsured, or with limited access to health care. For those seen in PCCs, therapeutic intensification to achieve controlled BP is infrequently done. Strategies to address population awareness and CI are needed to improve hypertension control.

Therapeutic inertia in the management of hypertension in primary care

BACKGROUND

Therapeutic inertia is considered to be an obstacle to effective blood pressure (BP) control.

AIMS

To identify patient characteristics associated with therapeutic inertia in patients with hypertension managed in primary care and to assess reasons not to intensify therapy.

METHODS

A Dutch cohort study was conducted using electronic health record data of patients registered in the Julius General Practitioners' Network (n = 530 564). Patients with a diagnosis of hypertension, SBP at least 140 and/or DBP at least 90 mmHg, and one or two BP-lowering drug(s) were included. Therapeutic inertia was defined as not undertaking therapeutic action in follow-up despite uncontrolled BP. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify characteristics associated with inertia. Furthermore, an exploratory survey was performed in which general practitioners of 114 patients were asked for reasons not to intensify treatment.

RESULTS

We identified 6400 (10% of all patients with hypertension) uncontrolled patients on one or two BP-lowering drugs. Therapeutic inertia was 87%, similar in men and women. Older age, lower systolic, diastolic and near-target SBP, and diabetes were positively associated, while renal insufficiency and heart failure were inversely related to inertia. General practitioners did not intensify therapy because they first, considered office BP measurements as nonrepresentative (27%); second, waited for next BP readings (21%); third, wanted to optimize lifestyle first (19%). Eleven percent of patients explicitly did not want to change treatment.

CONCLUSION

Therapeutic inertia is common in primary care patients with uncontrolled hypertension. Older age, and closer to target BP, but also concurrent diabetes were associated with inertia.

Clinical inertia in hypertension: a new holistic and practical concept within the cardiovascular continuum and clinical care process

Purpose: Recognition of clinical inertia is essential to improve the control of chronic diseases. Although it is very intuitive, a better interpretation of the concept of clinical inertia is lacking, likely due to its high complexity. Materials and Methods: After a review of the published articles, we propose a practical vision of inertia, contextualized within the clinical process of hypertension care. Results: This new vision enables the integration of previous terms and definitions of clinical inertia, as well as proposing specific strategies for its reduction. Conclusion: Although some concepts should be considered as 'justified inertia' or 'investigator inertia', the idea that inertia may be present throughout the continuum of care gives physicians a holistic view of the problem that is easily applicable to their clinical practice. Measures to overcome inertia are complicated because of the intrinsic complexity of the concept.

[Perception of Primary Care physicians on the integration with cardiology through continuity of healthcare programs in secondary prevention]

OBJECTIVE

To determine the perception of Primary Care (PC) physicians on the integration with cardiology (CA) through continuity of healthcare programs.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A cross-sectional and multicentre study was conducted, in which a total of 200 PC physicians from all over Spain completed a qualitative survey that evaluated the level of integration with CA in secondary prevention. Physicians were grouped according to the level of PC-CA integration.

RESULTS

The integration between CA and PC was good, but it was better in those centres with a higher integration (74.0% vs. 60.0%; p=.02) and in general, physicians considered that integration had improved (92.0% vs. 73.0%; p<.001). Almost all PC physicians received the hospital discharge report. The majority of the hospital discharge reports included recommendations about the CA and PC follow-up, control of risk factors, as well as the duration of secondary prevention treatment, with not significant differences according to the level of integration. In 55.8%, 63.6%, and 51.3% of hospital discharge reports, indications were given on when to perform the follow-up blood analysis, as well as information about returning to working life and sexual activity, respectively. The most common communication method was the paper-based report (75 vs. 84%; p=NS). The communication between healthcare levels was greater in those Primary Care centres with a higher level of integration, as well as periodicity of the communication and the satisfaction of physicians (80.0% vs. 63.0%; p=.005).

CONCLUSIONS

The level of integration between PC and CA is, in general, satisfactory, but those centres with a higher level of integration benefit more from a greater communication and satisfaction.

Hypertension Attitude PersPEctives and Needs (HAPPEN): A Real-World Survey of Physicians and Patients With Hypertension in China

The Hypertension Attitude PersPEctives and Needs (HAPPEN) survey was a real-world survey of cardiologists, nephrologists, and patients with treated hypertension at level 3 hospitals in China. It aimed to characterize the attitudes and behavior of physicians and patients and to identify possible causes of poor blood pressure (BP) control. Randomly selected participants (100 cardiologists, 30 nephrologists, 400 patients) completed face-to-face interviews investigating BP control rates, consulting behavior, prescribing patterns, and attitudes toward hypertension management. Perceived levels of BP control were high; 70% of physicians and 85% of patients believed that BP targets were achieved, despite only 31% of patients achieving targets. Physician satisfaction with control rates and patient satisfaction with treatment were high. Differences in perceived and actual levels of BP control may be driving therapeutic inertia. In combination with inadequate patient evaluation and support services, therapeutic inertia may contribute to poor BP control among patients with treated hypertension in China.

Untreated, Uncontrolled, and Apparent Resistant Hypertension: Results of the German Health Examination Survey 2008-2011

The prevalence and associated factors of untreated, uncontrolled, and apparent-resistant hypertension (RH) in Germany are unknown. Based on European Society of Hypertension criteria, apparent RH was defined as blood pressure (BP) ≥140/90 mm Hg (≥140/85 mm Hg in diabetics) under treatment with three different classes of antihypertensive agents including a diuretic. Data from the German Health Examination Survey (2008-2011; n=7115, age 18-79 years) including standardized BP measurements and Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical-coded taken medications were analyzed. Among patients aware of their hypertensive status (n=2205), 37.9% were uncontrolled and, among those, 33.4% were untreated. Being aware and having untreated and uncontrolled BP was associated with male sex, young age, not having cardiovascular disease, not performing BP self-measurement, not being obese, and not smoking. Apparent RH occurred in 6.8% of treated aware hypertensive patients and was positively associated with having diabetes. The proportion of uncontrolled BP is still high. Not having "obvious risk factors" has become a risk itself for having untreated and uncontrolled hypertension.

Hypertension Prevalence, Awareness, Treatment, and Control: Should 24-Hour Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring be the Tool of Choice?

We aimed to examine hypertension prevalence, awareness, treatment and control in a community sample and investigate the impact of using 24 hour ABPM. Office blood pressure (BP) was taken from the electronic health record. Study BP was measured by standardised methods. Participants were invited to undergo ABPM. Hypertension was defined by accepted thresholds or anti-hypertensive use. Standardised questions assessed awareness and treatment. Control was defined as anti-hypertensive use with BP below normal threshold. There were 931 (45%) participants with office BP, study BP and ABPM. By study BP, hypertension prevalence was 60%, awareness 59%, 60% were treated and 46% controlled. By daytime ABPM threshold, prevalence was 61%, awareness 59%, 59% were treated and 54% controlled. ABPM reclassified 13.5% from normotensive to hypertensive and 14.5% from hypertensive to normotensive. ABPM may not hugely impact population hypertension prevalence but at an individual level it reduces misclassification and facilitates more appropriate management.

Improving cardiovascular protection: focus on a cardiovascular polypill

Lack of adherence may explain, at least in part, the poor cardiovascular risk factors control observed in patients with ischemic heart disease, increasing the risk of developing new events. Polypill improves medication adherence, which may actually reduce blood pressure and LDL cholesterol compared with the drugs given separately. The fixed combination of acetylsalicylic acid 100 mg + ramipril 2.5, 5, or 10 mg + either simvastatin 40 mg or atorvastatin 20 mg is the unique cardiovascular polypill that has been registered in 22 countries worldwide. The polypill-containing simvastatin has been specifically tested in a clinical trial including only patients with ischemic heart disease. The FOCUS study showed that patients treated with the polypill showed a higher adherence compared with those receiving separate medications.

Effectiveness and clinical inertia in the management of hypertension in patients in Colombia

Determine the effectiveness of treatment and the frequency of clinical inertia in the management of hypertension in Colombian patients. A retrospective study with prospective follow-up of individuals on antihypertensive medication who were treated on medical consultation for 1 year was conducted in 20 Colombian cities. Clinical inertia was considered when no modification of therapy occurred despite not achieving control goals. A total of 355 hypertensive patients were included. From a total of 1142 consultations, therapy was effective in 81.7% of cases. In 18.3% of the cases, the control goal was not achieved, and of these, 81.8% were considered clinical inertia. A logistic regression showed that the use of antidiabetics (odds ratio: 2.31; 95% confidence interval: 1.290-4.167; P = .008) was statistically associated with an increased risk of clinical inertia. With a determination of the frequency of inertia and the high effectiveness of antihypertensive treatment, valuable information can be provided to understand the predictors of clinical inertia.

Anticoagulation Control in Patients With Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation Attended at Primary Care Centers in Spain: The PAULA Study

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

To determine the current status of anticoagulation control in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation treated with vitamin K antagonists in the primary care setting in Spain.

METHODS

The PAULA study was a multicenter cross-sectional/retrospective observational study conducted throughout Spain. The study included patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation who had been receiving vitamin K antagonist therapy during the past year and were attended at primary care centers. International normalized ratio (INR) values over the past 12 months were recorded. The degree of anticoagulation control was defined as the time the patient had remained within the therapeutic range and was determined by both the direct method (poor control < 60%) and by the Rosendaal method (poor control < 65%).

RESULTS

The study assessed 1524 patients (mean age, 77.4 ± 8.7 years; 48.6% women; 64.2% in permanent atrial fibrillation; CHADS2 mean, 2.3 ± 1.2; CHA2DS2-VASc, 3.9 ± 1.5, and HAS-BLED, 1.6 ± 0.9). The mean number of INR readings recorded per patient was 14.4 ± 3.8. A total of 56.9% of patients had adequate INR control according to the direct method and 60.6% according to the Rosendaal method. The multivariate analysis identified the following predictors for poor INR control: female sex, dietary habits potentially affecting anticoagulation with vitamin K antagonists, multidrug therapy, and a history of labile INR.

CONCLUSIONS

Approximately 40% of patients (43.1% by the direct method and 39.4% by the Rosendaal method) with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation who were receiving anticoagulation therapy with vitamin K antagonists in primary care in Spain had poor anticoagulation control during the previous 12 months.