Trends in time to confirmation and recognition of new-onset hypertension, 2002-2006

Medication Adherence and Treatment-Resistant Hypertension in Newly Treated Hypertensive Patients in the United Arab Emirates

(1) Background: The present study aimed to analyze medication adherence and its effect on blood pressure (BP) control and assess the prevalence of treatment-resistant hypertension (TRH) among newly treated hypertensive patients in the United Arab Emirates (UAE); (2) Methods: A retrospective chart review was conducted to evaluate 5308 naïve hypertensive adults registered for the treatment across Abu Dhabi Health Services (SEHA) clinics in Abu Dhabi in 2017. After collecting data regarding basic details and BP measurements, patients were followed up for six months. Patients who did not reach BP targets despite taking three or more antihypertensive medications were defined as TRH; (3) Results: The overall adherence to antihypertensive treatment was 42%. At 6-month, a significant reduction in BP was observed in patients adherent to medications (systolic: -4.5 mm Hg and diastolic: -5.9 mm Hg) than those who were nonadherent to antihypertensive therapy (1.15 mm Hg and 3.59 mm Hg). Among 189 patients using three or more antihypertensive medications for six months, only 34% (n = 64) were adherent to the treatment, and only 13.7% (n = 26) reached the BP target. The prevalence of TRH was 20.1%; (4) Conclusions: Medication adherence and BP control among the participants were suboptimal. The study shows a high prevalence of TRH among newly treated hypertensives in the UAE. More extraordinary efforts toward improving adherence to antihypertensive therapy and more focus toward BP control and TRH are urgently needed.

Using Electronic Health Records in Longitudinal Studies: Estimating Patient Attrition

BACKGROUND

Electronic health records (EHRs) provide rich data on many domains not routinely available in other data, as such, they are a promising source to study changes in health outcomes using longitudinal study designs (eg, cohort studies, natural experiments, etc.). Yet, patient attrition rates in these data are unknown.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to estimate overall and among adults with diabetes or hypertension: (1) patient attrition over a 3-year period at community health centers; and (2) the likelihood that patients with Medicaid permanently switched their source of primary care.

RESEARCH DESIGN

A retrospective cohort study of 2012-2017 data from the Accelerating Data Value Across a National Community Health Center Network (ADVANCE) Clinical Data Research Network of community health centers were used to assess EHR data attrition. Oregon Medicaid enrollment and claims data were used to estimate the likelihood of changing the source of primary care.

SUBJECTS

A total of 827,657 patients aged 19-64 with ≥1 ambulatory visit from 76 community health center systems across 20 states. In all, 232,891 Oregon Medicaid enrollees (aged 19-64) with a gap of ≥6 months following a claim for a visit billed to a primary care source.

MEASURES

Percentage of patients not returning within 3 years of their qualifying visit (attrition). The probability that a patient with Medicaid permanently changed their primary care source.

RESULTS

Attrition over the 3 years averaged 33.5%; attrition rates were lower (<25%) among patients with diabetes and/or hypertension. Among Medicaid enrollees, the percentage of provider change after a 6-month gap between visits was 12% for community health center patients compared with 39% for single-provider practice patients. Over 3 years, the likelihood of a patient changing to a new provider increased with length of time since their last visit but remained lowest among community health center patients.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates the use of the EHR dataset is a reliable source of data to support longitudinal studies while highlighting variability in attrition by primary care source and chronic conditions.

Identifying hypertension in pregnancy using electronic medical records: The importance of blood pressure values

OBJECTIVE

To incorporate blood pressure (BP), diagnoses codes, and medication fills from electronic medical records (EMR) to identify pregnant women with hypertension.

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective cohort study of singleton pregnancies at three US integrated health delivery systems during 2005-2014.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Women were considered hypertensive if they had any of the following: (1) ≥2 high BPs (≥140/90 mmHg) within 30 days during pregnancy (High BP); (2) an antihypertensive medication fill in the 120 days before pregnancy and a hypertension diagnosis from 1 year prior to pregnancy through 20 weeks gestation (Treated Chronic Hypertension); or (3) a high BP, a hypertension diagnosis, and a prescription fill within 7 days during pregnancy (Rapid Treatment). We described characteristics of these pregnancies and conducted medical record review to understand hypertension presence and severity.

RESULTS

Of 566,624 pregnancies, 27,049 (4.8%) met our hypertension case definition: 24,140 (89.2%) with High BP, 5,409 (20.0%) with Treated Chronic Hypertension, and 5,363 (19.8%) with Rapid Treatment (not mutually exclusive). Of hypertensive pregnancies, 19,298 (71.3%) received a diagnosis, 9,762 (36.1%) received treatment and 11,226 (41.5%) had a BP ≥ 160/110. In a random sample (n = 55) of the 7,559 pregnancies meeting the High BP criterion with no hypertension diagnosis, clinical statements about hypertension were found in medical records for 58% of them.

CONCLUSION

Incorporating EMR BP identified many pregnant women with hypertension who would have been missed by using diagnosis codes alone. Future studies should seek to incorporate BP to study treatment and outcomes of hypertension in pregnancy.

Recidivism to uncontrolled blood pressure in patients with previously controlled hypertension

BACKGROUND

Control of hypertension has improved nationally with focus on identifying and treating elevated blood pressures (BPs) to guideline recommended levels. However, once BP control is achieved, the frequency in which BP falls out of control and the factors associated with BP recidivism is unknown. In this retrospective cohort study conducted at 2 large, integrated health care systems we sought to examine rates and predictors of BP recidivism in adults with controlled hypertension. No change for methods, results and conclusion.

METHODS

Patients with a prior diagnosis of hypertension based on a combination of International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, codes, receipt of antihypertensive medications, and/or elevated BP readings were eligible to be included. We defined controlled hypertension as normotensive BP readings (<140/90 mmHg or <130/80 mmHg in those with diabetes) at 2 consecutive primary care visits. We then followed up patients for BP recidivism defined by the date of the second of 2 consecutive BP readings >140/90 mmHg (>130/80 mmHg for diabetes or chronic kidney disease) during a median follow-up period of 16.6 months. Cox proportional hazards regression assessed the association between patient characteristics, comorbidities, medication adherence, and provider medication management with time to BP recidivism.

RESULTS

A total of 23,321 patients with controlled hypertension were included in this study. The proportion of patients with hypertension recidivism was 24.1% over the 16.6-month study period. For those with BP recidivism, the median time to relapse was 7.3 months. In multivariate analysis, those with diabetes (hazard ratio [HR] 3.99, CI 3.67-4.33), high normal baseline BP (for systolic BP HR 1.03, CI 1.03-1.04), or low antihypertensive medication adherence (HR 1.20, CI 1.11-1.29) had significantly higher rates of hypertension recidivism. Limitations of this work include demographics of our patient sample, which may not reflect other communities in addition to the intrinsic limitations of office-based BP measurements.

CONCLUSIONS

Hypertensive recidivism occurs in a significant portion of patients with previously well-controlled BP and accounts for a substantial fraction of patients with poorly controlled hypertension. Systematic identification of those most at risk for recidivism and implementation of strategies to minimize hypertension recidivism may improve overall levels of BP control and hypertension-related quality measures.

Undiagnosed hypertension among young adults with regular primary care use

Objective:

Young adults meeting hypertension diagnostic criteria have a lower prevalence of a hypertension diagnosis than middle-aged and older adults. The purpose of this study was to compare the rates of a new hypertension diagnosis for different age groups and identify predictors of delays in the initial diagnosis among young adults who regularly use primary care.

Methods:

A 4-year retrospective analysis included 14 970 patients, at least 18 years old, who met clinical criteria for an initial hypertension diagnosis in a large, Midwestern, academic practice from 2008 to 2011. Patients with a previous hypertension diagnosis or prior antihypertensive medication prescription were excluded. The probability of diagnosis at specific time points was estimated by Kaplan–Meier analysis. Cox proportional hazard models (hazard ratio; 95% confidence interval) were fit to identify predictors of delays to an initial diagnosis, with a subsequent subset analysis for young adults (18–39 years old).

Results:

After 4 years, 56% of 18–24-year-olds received a diagnosis compared with 62% (25–31-year-olds), 68% (32–39-year-olds), and more than 70% (≥40-year-olds). After adjustment, 18–31-year-olds had a 33% slower rate of receiving a diagnosis (18–24 years hazard ratio 0.66, 0.53–0.83; 25–31 years hazard ratio 0.68, 0.58–0.79) compared with adults at least 60 years. Other predictors of a slower diagnosis rate among young adults were current tobacco use, white ethnicity, and non-English primary language. Young adults with diabetes, higher blood pressures, or a female provider had a faster diagnosis rate.

Conclusion:

Provider and patient factors are critical determinants of poor hypertension diagnosis rates among young adults with regular primary care use.

An investigation of associations between clinicians' ethnic or racial bias and hypertension treatment, medication adherence and blood pressure control

BACKGROUND

Few studies have directly investigated the association of clinicians' implicit (unconscious) bias with health care disparities in clinical settings.

OBJECTIVE

To determine if clinicians' implicit ethnic or racial bias is associated with processes and outcomes of treatment for hypertension among black and Latino patients, relative to white patients.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS

Primary care clinicians completed Implicit Association Tests of ethnic and racial bias. Electronic medical records were queried for a stratified, random sample of the clinicians' black, Latino and white patients to assess treatment intensification, adherence and control of hypertension. Multilevel random coefficient models assessed the associations between clinicians' implicit biases and ethnic or racial differences in hypertension care and outcomes.

MAIN MEASURES

Standard measures of treatment intensification and medication adherence were calculated from pharmacy refills. Hypertension control was assessed by the percentage of time that patients met blood pressure goals recorded during primary care visits.

KEY RESULTS

One hundred and thirty-eight primary care clinicians and 4,794 patients with hypertension participated. Black patients received equivalent treatment intensification, but had lower medication adherence and worse hypertension control than white patients; Latino patients received equivalent treatment intensification and had similar hypertension control, but lower medication adherence than white patients. Differences in treatment intensification, medication adherence and hypertension control were unrelated to clinician implicit bias for black patients (P = 0.85, P = 0.06 and P = 0.31, respectively) and for Latino patients (P = 0.55, P = 0.40 and P = 0.79, respectively). An increase in clinician bias from average to strong was associated with a relative change of less than 5 % in all outcomes for black and Latino patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Implicit bias did not affect clinicians' provision of care to their minority patients, nor did it affect the patients' outcomes. The identification of health care contexts in which bias does not impact outcomes can assist both patients and clinicians in their efforts to build trust and partnership.

Effects of physical activity and sedentary time on the risk of heart failure

BACKGROUND

Although the benefits of physical activity for risk of coronary heart disease are well established, less is known about its effects on heart failure (HF). The risk of prolonged sedentary behavior on HF is unknown.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The study cohort included 82 695 men aged≥45 years from the California Men's Health Study without prevalent HF who were followed up for 10 years. Physical activity, sedentary time, and behavioral covariates were obtained from questionnaires, and clinical covariates were determined from electronic medical records. Incident HF was identified through International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision codes recorded in electronic records. During a mean follow-up of 7.8 years (646 989 person-years), 3473 men were diagnosed with HF. Controlling for sedentary time, sociodemographics, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, unfavorable lipid levels, body mass index, smoking, and diet, the hazard ratio (95% confidence interval [CI]) of HF in the lowest physical activity category compared with those in the highest category was 1.52 (95% CI, 1.39-1.68). Those in the medium physical activity category were also at increased risk (hazard ratio, 1.17 [95% CI, 1.06-1.29]). Controlling for the same covariates and physical activity, the hazard ratio (95% CI) of HF in the highest sedentary category compared with the lowest was 1.34 (95% CI, 1.21-1.48). Medium sedentary time also conveyed risk (hazard ratio, 1.13 [95% CI, 1.04-1.24]). Results showed similar trends across white and Hispanic subgroups, body mass index categories, baseline hypertension status, and prevalent coronary heart disease.

CONCLUSIONS

Both physical activity and sedentary time may be appropriate intervention targets for preventing HF.

Predicting 90-day mortality after bariatric surgery: an independent, external validation of the OS-MRS prognostic risk score

BACKGROUND

The Obesity Surgery Mortality Risk Score (OS-MRS) was developed using data from 1995 to 2004; it has yet to be validated for more recent patients in integrated delivery system settings. The objective of this study was to validate the OS-MRS using data from electronic health records in a distributed data network.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 3,817 adults who underwent an open (21.4%) or laparoscopic (78.6%) gastric bypass surgery between 2005 and 2007 in the Scalable Partnering Network. Our main outcome was all-cause mortality during the 90 days after surgery. We scored patients' risk of mortality by adding characteristics according to the OS-MRS (i.e., 1 point for each predictor).

RESULTS

Sixteen of 3,817 (0.42/100; 95% CI, .24-.68) patients died within 90 days. The OS-MRS discriminated low-risk and high-risk patients effectively: low-risk (2 of 1,654 patients; .12 deaths/100 patients), intermediate-risk (10 of 2,008 patients; .50 deaths/100 patients), and high-risk (4 of 155 patients; 2.58 deaths/100 patients). High-risk patients were 21.3 times more likely to die in the first 90 days after surgery than low-risk patients (risk ratio = 21.3; 95% CI, 3.9-115.6).

CONCLUSION

In these 10 U.S. healthcare delivery systems, the OS-MRS appears valid-albeit with the caveat that we observed a small number of deaths. The OS-MRS appears useful for identifying the small fraction of patients at high risk for 90-day mortality after open and laparoscopic RYGB.

Initial persistence with antihypertensive therapies is associated with depression treatment persistence, but not depression

The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between the presence of clinical depression and persistence to drug therapy treatment for depression with early nonpersistence to antihypertensive therapies in a large, diverse cohort of newly treated hypertension patients. Using a hypertension registry at Kaiser Permanente Northern California, the authors conducted a retrospective cohort study of 44,167 adults (18 years and older) with hypertension who were new users of antihypertensive therapy in 2008. We used multivariate logistic regression analysis to model the relationships between the presence of clinical depression and early nonpersistence (defined as failing to refill the first prescription within 90 days after the end of the first fill days' supply) to antihypertensive therapies, controlling for sociodemographic and clinical risk factors. Within the group of 1484 patients who had evidence of clinical depression in the 12 months prior to the initiation of antihypertensive therapy, the authors examined the relationship between drug therapy treatment for depression and 6-month persistence with antidepressant therapy with early nonpersistence with antihypertensive therapies. No association was found between the presence of clinical depression and early nonpersistence to antihypertensive therapies after adjustment for individual demographic and clinical characteristics and neighborhood-level socioeconomic status. However, among the subset of 1484 patients with documented evidence of clinical depression in the 12 months prior to the initiation of antihypertensive therapy, being prescribed and persistence with antidepressant therapy was strongly associated with lower odds of early nonpersistence to antihypertensive medications (odds ratio, 0.64; confidence interval, 0.42-0.96). In an integrated delivery system, the authors found that treatment for depression was associated with higher levels of antihypertensive persistence. Improving quality of depression care in patients with comorbid hypertension may be an important strategy in decreasing cardiovascular disease risk in these patients.

Factors associated with therapeutic goal attainment in patients with concomitant hypertension and dyslipidemia

BACKGROUND

Hypertension and dyslipidemia are the most prevalent cardiovascular risk factors, with approximately 30 million patients in the United States having these concomitant conditions. Further, the presence of high body mass index (BMI) has a negative effect on the achievement of blood pressure (BP) and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) targets.

OBJECTIVE

This study evaluates the demographic, diagnostic, and medication-related factors associated with BP and LDL-C goal attainment in patients with concomitant hypertension and dyslipidemia stratified by BMI.

METHODS

This retrospective study utilized the GE Centricity Electronic Medical Records database (2004-2011) of a primary care physician group. Patients aged ≥ 18 years with concomitant hypertension and dyslipidemia were included. The attainment of BP and LDL-C targets were assessed based on Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure (JNC 7) and National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III (NCEP ATP III) guidelines. Patients were classified into 3 cohorts based on their BMI: normal weight (≤ 24.9 kg/m2), overweight (25.0-29.9 kg/m2), and obese (≥ 30.0 kg/m2). Multivariate logistic regression analysis was conducted to identify the predictors of goal attainment.

RESULTS

A total of 9086 patients with concomitant hypertension and dyslipidemia were identified, of which 7723, 6724, and 5824 patients did not attain BP, LDL-C, and dual BP and LDL-C goals, respectively. Age was a significant predictor of BP and LDL-C goal attainment in those who were of normal weight or overweight, and obese women had a decreased likelihood of achieving these goals (P < 0.05). Failure to attain BP and LDL-C goals was more likely in patients with diabetes across all BMI groups (P < 0.001). Further, patients with stage 1 hypertension and higher baseline total cholesterol levels were less successful in attaining BP and LDL-C goals, respectively (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

These variations in therapeutic goal attainment in patients with concomitant hypertension and dyslipidemia across different BMI groups suggest that future research is needed to determine the underlying reasons for these disparities.

Systemic implementation strategies to improve hypertension: the Kaiser Permanente Southern California experience

The past decade has seen hypertension improving in the United States where control is approximately 50%. Kaiser Permanente has mirrored and exceeded these national advances in control. Integrated models of care such as Kaiser Permanente and the Veterans Administration health systems have demonstrated the greatest hypertension outcomes. We detail the story of Kaiser Permanente Southern California (KPSC) to illustrate the success that can be achieved with an integrated health system model that uses implementation, dissemination, and performance feedback approaches to chronic disease care. KPSC, with a large ethnically diverse population of more than 3.6 million, has used a stepwise approach to achieve control rates greater than 85% in those recognized with hypertension. This was accomplished through systemic implementations of specific strategies: (1) capturing hypertensive members into a hypertension registry; (2) standardization of blood pressure measurements; (3) drafting and disseminating an internal treatment algorithm that is evidence-based and is advocating of combination therapy; and (4) a multidisciplinary approach using medical assistants, nurses, and pharmacists as key stakeholders. The infrastructure, support, and involvement across all levels of the health system with rapid and continuous performance feedback have been pivotal in ensuring the follow-through and maintenance of these strategies. The KPSC hypertension program is continually evolving in these areas. With these high control rates and established infrastructure, they are positioned to take on different innovations and study models. Such potential projects are drafting strategies on resistant hypertension or addressing the concerns about overtreatment of hypertension.

Sex differences in cardiovascular outcomes in patients with incident hypertension

BACKGROUND

The time of initial hypertension diagnosis represents an opportunity to assess subsequent risk of adverse cardiovascular outcomes. The extent to which women and men with newly identified hypertension are at a similar risk for adverse cardiovascular events, including chronic kidney disease (CKD), is not well known.

METHODS

Among women and men with incident hypertension from 2001 to 2006 enrolled in the Cardiovascular Research Network (CVRN) Hypertension Registry, we compared incident events including all-cause death; hospitalization for myocardial infarction (MI), heart failure or stroke; and the development of CKD. Multivariable models were adjusted for patient demographic and clinical characteristics.

RESULTS

Among 177,521 patients with incident hypertension, 55% were women. Compared with men, women were older, more likely white and had more kidney disease at baseline. Over median 3.2 years (interquartile range 1.6-4.8) of follow-up, after adjustment, women were equally likely to be hospitalized for heart failure [hazard ratio 0.90, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76-1.07] and were significantly less likely to die of any cause (hazard ratio 0.85, 95% CI 0.80-0.90) or be hospitalized for MI (hazard ratio 0.44, 95% CI 0.39-0.50) or stroke (hazard ratio 0.68, 95% CI 0.60-0.77) compared with men. Women were significantly more likely to develop CKD (9.60 vs. 7.15%; adjusted hazard ratio 1.17, 95% CI 1.12-1.22) than men.

CONCLUSION

In this cohort with incident hypertension, women were more likely to develop CKD and less likely to develop other cardiovascular outcomes compared with men. Future studies should investigate the potential reasons for these sex differences.

Detection and recognition of hypertension in anxious and depressed patients

OBJECTIVE

Hypertension management requires detection (i.e. confirmation of persistently high blood pressure (BP) after an initial elevated measurement) and recognition of the condition (evidenced by a formal diagnosis and/or initiation of treatment). Our objective was to determine whether disparities exist in detection of elevated BP and recognition (i.e. diagnosis or treatment) of hypertension in patients with depression and anxiety.

METHODS

Using data from the Cardiovascular Research Network Hypertension Registry, we assessed time-to-detection of elevated BP and recognition of hypertension in patients with comorbid anxiety and depression compared with patients with neither disorder. We performed multivariable survival analysis of time to detection and recognition in patients who entered the registry in 2002-2006. We adjusted for primary care visit rate and other relevant clinical factors.

RESULTS

In 168,630 incident hypertension patients, detection occurred earlier among patients with anxiety and depression compared with patients without these diagnoses [adjusted hazard ratio for anxiety and depression 1.30, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.26-1.35]. Recognition of hypertension within 12 months of the second elevated BP was similar (adjusted hazard ratio for anxiety and depression 0.94, 95% CI 0.89-1.00) or delayed (adjusted hazard ratio for anxiety 0.93, 95% CI 0.88-0.99 and for depression 0.93, 95% CI 0.90-0.97).

CONCLUSIONS

Detection of elevated BP occurred earlier in patients with anxiety and depression. Time from detection to diagnosis or treatment was similar or delayed in patients with and without these diagnoses. Our findings suggest that as-yet-unidentified factors contribute to disparities in hypertension detection and recognition.

Comparative effectiveness of 2 β-blockers in hypertensive patients

BACKGROUND

Randomized controlled trials have demonstrated the efficacy of selected β-blockers for preventing cardiovascular (CV) events in patients following myocardial infarction (MI) or with heart failure (HF). However, the effectiveness of β-blockers for preventing CV events in patients with hypertension has been questioned recently, but it is unclear whether this is a class effect.

METHODS

Using electronic medical record and health plan data from the Cardiovascular Research Network Hypertension Registry, we compared incident MI, HF, and stroke in patients who were new β-blocker users between 2000 and 2009. Patients had no history of CV disease and had not previously filled a prescription for a β-blocker. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to examine the associations of atenolol and metoprolol tartrate with incident CV events using both standard covariate adjustment (n = 120,978) and propensity score-matching methods (n = 22,352).

RESULTS

During follow-up (median, 5.2 years), there were 3517 incident MI, 3272 incident HF, and 3664 incident stroke events. Hazard ratios for MI, HF, and stroke in metoprolol tartrate users were 0.99 (95% CI, 0.97-1.02), 0.99 (95% CI, 0.96-1.01), and 0.99 (95% CI, 0.97-1.02), respectively. An alternative approach using propensity score matching yielded similar results in 11,176 new metoprolol tartrate users, who were similar to 11,176 new atenolol users with regard to demographic and clinical characteristics.

CONCLUSIONS

There were no statistically significant differences in incident CV events between atenolol and metoprolol tartrate users with hypertension. Large registries similar to the one used in this analysis may be useful for addressing comparative effectiveness questions that are unlikely to be resolved by randomized trials.

Longitudinal study of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators: methods and clinical characteristics of patients receiving implantable cardioverter-defibrillators for primary prevention in contemporary practice

BACKGROUND

Implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) are increasingly used for primary prevention after randomized, controlled trials demonstrating that they reduce the risk of death in patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction. The extent to which the clinical characteristics and long-term outcomes of unselected, community-based patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction undergoing primary prevention ICD implantation in a real-world setting compare with those enrolled in the randomized, controlled trials is not well characterized. This study is being conducted to address these questions.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The study cohort includes consecutive patients undergoing primary prevention ICD placement between January 1, 2006 and December 31, 2009 in 7 health plans. Baseline clinical characteristics were acquired from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry ICD Registry. Longitudinal data collection is underway, and will include hospitalization, mortality, and resource use from standardized health plan data archives. Data regarding ICD therapies will be obtained through chart abstraction and adjudicated by a panel of experts in device therapy. Compared with the populations of primary prevention ICD therapy randomized, controlled trials, the cohort (n=2621) is on average significantly older (by 2.5-6.5 years), more often female, more often from racial and ethnic minority groups, and has a higher burden of coexisting conditions. The cohort is similar, however, to a national population undergoing primary prevention ICD placement.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing primary prevention ICD implantation in this study differ from those enrolled in the randomized, controlled trials that established the efficacy of ICDs. Understanding a broad range of health outcomes, including ICD therapies, will provide patients, clinicians, and policy makers with contemporary data to inform decision-making.

Benefits of early hypertension control on cardiovascular outcomes in patients with diabetes

OBJECTIVE

To assess the impact of early hypertension (HT) control on occurrence of subsequent major cardiovascular events in those with diabetes and recent-onset HT.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Study subjects were 15,665 adults with diabetes but no diagnosed coronary or cerebrovascular disease at baseline who met standard criteria for new-onset HT. Poisson regression models assessed whether adequate blood pressure control within 1 year of HT onset predicts subsequent occurrence of major cardiovascular events with and without adjustment for baseline Framingham Risk Score (FRS) and other covariates.

RESULTS

Mean age was 51.5 years, and mean blood pressure at HT onset was 136.8/80.8 mmHg. In the year after HT onset, mean blood pressure decreased to 131.4/78.0 mmHg and was <130/80 mmHg in 32.9% of subjects and <140/90 mmHg in 80.2%. Over a mean follow-up of 3.2 years, age-adjusted rates of major cardiovascular events in those with mean 1-year blood pressure measurements of <130/80, 130-139/80-89, and ≥140/90 mmHg were 5.10, 4.27, and 6.94 events/1,000 person-years, respectively (P = 0.004). In FRS-adjusted models, rates of major cardiovascular events were significantly higher in those with mean blood pressure ≥140/90 mmHg in the first year after HT onset (rate ratio 1.30 [95% CI 1.01-1.169]; P = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

Failure to adequately control BP within 1 year of HT onset significantly increased the likelihood of major cardiovascular events within 3 years. Prompt control of new-onset HT in patients with diabetes may provide important short-term clinical benefits.

Health system factors and antihypertensive adherence in a racially and ethnically diverse cohort of new users

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to identify potential health system solutions to suboptimal use of antihypertensive therapy in a diverse cohort of patients initiating treatment.

METHODS

Using a hypertension registry at Kaiser Permanente Northern California, we conducted a retrospective cohort study of 44 167 adults (age, ≥18 years) with hypertension who were new users of antihypertensive therapy in 2008. We used multivariate logistic regression analysis to model the relationships between race/ethnicity, specific health system factors, and early nonpersistence (failing to refill the first prescription within 90 days) and nonadherence (<80% of days covered during the 12 months following the start of treatment), respectively, controlling for sociodemographic and clinical risk factors.

RESULTS

More than 30% of patients were early nonpersistent and 1 in 5 were nonadherent to therapy. Nonwhites were more likely to exhibit both types of suboptimal medication-taking behavior compared with whites. In logistic regression models adjusted for sociodemographic, clinical, and health system factors, nonwhite race was associated with early nonpersistence (black: odds ratio, 1.56 [95% CI, 1.43-1.70]; Asian: 1.40 [1.29-1.51]; Hispanic: 1.46 [1.35-1.57]) and nonadherence (black: 1.55 [1.37-1.77]; Asian: 1.13 [1.00-1.28]; Hispanic: 1.46 [1.31-1.63]). The likelihood of early nonpersistence varied between Asians and Hispanics by choice of first-line therapy. In addition, racial and ethnic differences in nonadherence were appreciably attenuated when medication co-payment and mail-order pharmacy use were accounted for in the models.

CONCLUSIONS

Racial/ethnic differences in medication-taking behavior occur early in the course of treatment. However, health system strategies designed to reduce patient co-payments, ease access to medications, and optimize the choice of initial therapy may be effective tools in narrowing persistent gaps in the use of these and other clinically effective therapies.

Evaluation of the dose-response relationship of amlodipine and losartan combination in patients with essential hypertension: an 8-week, randomized, double-blind, factorial, phase II, multicenter study

BACKGROUND

Despite recommendations for more intensive treatment and the availability of several effective treatments, hypertension remains uncontrolled in many patients.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to determine the dose-response relationship and assess the efficacy and safety of amlodipine or losartan monotherapy and amlodipine camsylate/losartan combination therapy in patients with essential hypertension.

METHODS

This was an 8-week, randomized, double-blind, factorial design, phase II, multicenter study conducted in outpatient hospital clinics among adult patients aged 18-75 years with essential hypertension. At screening, patients received placebo for 2-4 weeks. Eligible patients (n=320) were randomized to one of eight treatment groups: amlodipine 5 mg or 10 mg, losartan 50 mg or 100 mg, amlodipine camsylate/losartan 5 mg/50 mg, 5 mg/100 mg, 10 mg/50 mg, or 10 mg/100 mg.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The assumption of strict superiority was estimated using the mean change in sitting diastolic blood pressure (DBP) at 8 weeks. Safety was monitored through physical examinations, vital signs, laboratory test results, ECG, and adverse events.

RESULTS

The reduction in DBP at 8 weeks was significantly greater in patients treated with the combination therapies compared with the respective monotherapies for all specified comparisons except amlodipine camsylate/losartan 10 mg/100 mg versus amlodipine 10 mg. The incidence of adverse events in the group of patients treated with the amlodipine camsylate/losartan 10 mg/50 mg combination tended to be higher than for any other group (27.9%, 12/43); however, the effect was not statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

Combination amlodipine camsylate/losartan (5 mg/50 mg, 5 mg/100 mg and 10 mg/50 mg) resulted in significantly greater BP lowering compared with amlodipine or losartan monotherapy, and was determined to be generally safe and tolerable in patients with essential hypertension.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

Registered at clinicaltrials.gov: NCT00942344.

Simultaneous control of diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and hyperlipidemia in 2 health systems

BACKGROUND

Many individuals with diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and hyperlipidemia have difficulty achieving control of all 3 conditions. We assessed the incidence and duration of simultaneous control of hyperglycemia, blood pressure, and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol in patients from 2 health care systems in Colorado.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We performed a retrospective cohort study of adults at Denver Health and Kaiser Permanente Colorado with diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and hyperlipidemia from 2000 through 2008. Over a median of 4.0 and 4.4 years, 16% and 30% of individuals at Denver Health and Kaiser Permanente achieved the primary outcome (simultaneous control with a glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA(1c)) <7.0%, blood pressure <130/80 mm Hg, and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol <100 mg/dL), respectively. With less strict goals (HbA(1c) <8.0%, blood pressure <140/90 mm Hg, and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol <130 mg/dL), 44% and 70% of individuals at Denver Health and Kaiser Permanente achieved simultaneous control. Sociodemographic characteristics (increasing age, white ethnicity), and the presence of cardiovascular disease or other comorbidities were significantly but not strongly predictive of achieving simultaneous control in multivariable models. Simultaneous control was less likely as severity of the underlying conditions increased, and more likely as medication adherence increased.

CONCLUSIONS

Simultaneous control of diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and hyperlipidemia was uncommon and generally transient. Less stringent goals had a relatively large effect on the proportion achieving simultaneous control. Individuals who simultaneously achieve multiple treatment goals may provide insight into self-care strategies for individuals with comorbid health conditions.

The association between medication adherence and treatment intensification with blood pressure control in resistant hypertension

Patients with resistant hypertension are at risk for poor outcomes. Medication adherence and intensification improve blood pressure (BP) control; however, little is known about these processes or their association with outcomes in resistant hypertension. This retrospective study included patients from 2002 to 2006 with incident hypertension from 2 health systems who developed resistant hypertension or uncontrolled BP despite adherence to ≥3 antihypertensive medications. Patterns of hypertension treatment, medication adherence (percentage of days covered), and treatment intensification (increase in medication class or dose) were described in the year after resistant hypertension identification. Then, the association between medication adherence and intensification with 1-year BP control was assessed controlling for patient characteristics. Of the 3550 patients with resistant hypertension, 49% were male, and mean age was 60 years. One year after resistance hypertension determination, fewer patients were taking diuretics (77.7% versus 92.2%; P<0.01), β-blockers (71.2% versus 79.4%; P<0.01), and angiotensinogen-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker (64.8% versus 70.1%; P<0.01) compared with baseline. Rates of BP control improved over 1 year (22% versus 55%; P<0.01). During this year, adherence was not associated with 1-year BP control (adjusted odds ratio, 1.18 [95% CI: 0.94-1.47]). Treatment was intensified in 21.6% of visits with elevated BP. Increasing treatment intensity was associated with 1-year BP control (adjusted odds ratio, 1.64 [95% CI, 1.58-1.71]). In this cohort of patients with resistant hypertension, treatment intensification but not medication adherence was significantly associated with 1-year BP control. These findings highlight the need to investigate why patients with uncontrolled BP do not receive treatment intensification.

Incidence and prognosis of resistant hypertension in hypertensive patients

BACKGROUND

Despite a recent American Heart Association (AHA) consensus statement emphasizing the importance of resistant hypertension, the incidence and prognosis of this condition are largely unknown.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This retrospective cohort study in 2 integrated health plans included patients with incident hypertension in whom treatment was begun between 2002 and 2006. Patients were followed up for the development of resistant hypertension based on AHA criteria of uncontrolled blood pressure despite use of ≥3 antihypertensive medications, with data collected on prescription filling information and blood pressure measurement. We determined incident cardiovascular events (death or incident myocardial infarction, heart failure, stroke, or chronic kidney disease) in patients with and without resistant hypertension with adjustment for patient and clinical characteristics. Among 205 750 patients with incident hypertension, 1.9% developed resistant hypertension within a median of 1.5 years from initial treatment (0.7 cases per 100 person-years of follow-up). These patients were more often men, were older, and had higher rates of diabetes mellitus than nonresistant patients. Over 3.8 years of median follow-up, cardiovascular event rates were significantly higher in those with resistant hypertension (unadjusted 18.0% versus 13.5%, P<0.001). After adjustment for patient and clinical characteristics, resistant hypertension was associated with a higher risk of cardiovascular events (hazard ratio, 1.47; 95% confidence interval, 1.33-1.62).

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with incident hypertension in whom treatment was begun, 1 in 50 patients developed resistant hypertension. Patients with resistant hypertension had an increased risk of cardiovascular events, which supports the need for greater efforts toward improving hypertension outcomes in this population.

Efficacy of fixed-dose amlodipine and losartan combination compared with amlodipine monotherapy in stage 2 hypertension: a randomized, double blind, multicenter study

Background

The objective of this trial was to compare the blood-pressure lowering efficacy of amlodipine/losartan combination with amlodipine monotherapy after 6 weeks of treatment in Korean patients with stage 2 hypertension.

Results

In this multi-center, double-blind, randomized study, adult patients (n = 148) with stage 2 hypertension were randomized to amlodipine 5 mg/losartan 50 mg or amlodipine 5 mg. After 2 weeks, patients with systolic blood pressure (SBP) > 140 mmHg were titrated to amlodipine 10 mg/losartan 50 mg or amlodipine 10 mg. After 4 weeks of titration, hydrochlorothiazide 12.5 mg could be optionally added to both groups. The change from baseline in SBP was assessed after 6 weeks. The responder rate (defined as achieving SBP < 140 mmHg or DBP < 90 mmHg) was also assessed at 2, 6 and 8 weeks as secondary endpoints. Safety and tolerability were assessed through adverse event monitoring and laboratory testing. Baseline demographics and clinical characteristics were generally similar between treatment groups. Least-square mean reduction in SBP at 6 weeks (primary endpoint) was significantly greater in the combination group (36.5 mmHg vs. 31.6 mmHg; p = 0.0117). The responder rate in SBP (secondary endpoints) was significantly higher in the combination group at 2 weeks (52.1% vs. 33.3%; p = 0.0213) but not at 6 weeks (p = 0.0550) or 8 weeks (p = 0.0592). There was no significant difference between groups in the incidence of adverse events.

Conclusion

These results demonstrate that combination amlodipine/losartan therapy provides an effective and generally well-tolerated first line therapy for reducing blood pressure in stage 2 hypertensive patients.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01127217

Missed opportunities in cardiovascular disease prevention?: low rates of hypertension recognition for women at medicine and obstetrics-gynecology clinics

Younger women use both internal medicine and obstetrics-gynecology (OBGYN) clinics as primary sources of health care. However, the role of OBGYN clinics in cardiovascular disease prevention is largely unexplored. The objective of this study was to examine rates of hypertension recognition in women<50 years of age who presented with elevated blood pressures in family practice and internal medicine (medicine) OBGYN clinics and to compare these rates across clinic type. The study's population consisted of 34 627 nonpregnant women ages 18 to 49 years with new-onset hypertension (defined as 2 consecutive visits with elevated blood pressures of systolic blood pressure≥140 mm Hg or diastolic blood pressure≥90 mm Hg with no previous hypertension history) from 2002 to 2006. Multivariate logistic regressions predicting the clinical recognition of hypertension (a recorded diagnosis of hypertension and/or an antihypertensive prescription by any provider within 1 year of the second elevated blood pressure) assessed the association between hypertension recognition and the clinic where the second elevated blood pressure was recorded. Analysis showed that hypertension was recognized in <33% of women with new-onset hypertension. Women whose second consecutive elevated blood pressure was recorded in OBGYN clinics were less likely to be recognized as having hypertension within 12 months by any provider compared with women whose second consecutive elevated blood pressure was recorded in a medicine clinic (odds ratio: 0.51 [95% CI: 0.48 to 0.54]). This study suggests that further attention be paid to identifying and treating cardiovascular disease risk factors in women<50 years of age presenting in both medicine and OBGYN clinics and that improved coordination across care settings has the potential to improve cardiovascular disease prevention in young women.