Figar Silvana, Galarza Carlos, Petrlik Erica, Hornstein Lucila, Rodríguez Loria Gabriela, Waisman Gabriel, Rada Marcelo, Soriano Enrique Roberto, de Quirós Fernán González Bernaldo
Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Am J Hypertens. 2006 Jul;19(7):737-43. doi: 10.1016/j.amjhyper.2005.10.005.
It is not clear which educational strategy is most effective in helping patients to change their lifestyles. This study compared the efficacy of two different educational models on reducing blood pressure (BP).
This was a randomized controlled trial in ambulatory hypertensive patients >65 years of age. Workshops that aimed to develop self-management and patient empowerment (PEM) were compared to workshops that used a compliance-based model (CEM). The primary outcome was change in systolic BP at 3 months compared with basal values between groups (net reduction), measured by 24-h ambulatory BP monitoring.
A total of 30 patients were educated with PEM and 30 others with CM. Both groups were statistically similar with regard to age (67 v 70 years), systolic BP (157 v 156 mm Hg) and diastolic BP (88 v 88 mm Hg), diabetes (23% v 31%), and basal natriuresis 116 v 121 mEq/day). There were more women in the PEM group (57% v 30%). The PEM group showed a significant reduction of 8 mm Hg (95% confidence interval [CI] 2 to 15), whereas the CM group showed a reduction of 3 mm Hg (95% CI -3 to 8), with a net reduction of 6 (95% CI -3 to 14). Mean net night-time systolic BP reduction was 12 mm Hg (95% CI 2 to 22). BP control was 70% in PEM group vs 45% in CM group (P = 0.045). The relative odds ratio for BP control for the PEM group after adjustment for age, sex, diabetes, basal blood pressure and changes in pharmacological treatment was 3.7 (95% CI 1.05 to 13.1).
Based on these study results, the self-management education model was significantly more effective than the compliance-based model in BP control.
目前尚不清楚哪种教育策略在帮助患者改变生活方式方面最为有效。本研究比较了两种不同教育模式对降低血压(BP)的效果。
这是一项针对65岁以上门诊高血压患者的随机对照试验。将旨在培养自我管理和患者赋权(PEM)的工作坊与采用基于依从性的模式(CEM)的工作坊进行比较。主要结局是通过24小时动态血压监测测量,3个月时收缩压与各组基础值相比的变化(净降低值)。
共有30名患者接受了PEM教育,另外30名接受了CM教育。两组在年龄(67岁对70岁)、收缩压(157 mmHg对156 mmHg)、舒张压(88 mmHg对88 mmHg)、糖尿病(23%对31%)和基础尿钠排泄(116 mEq/天对121 mEq/天)方面在统计学上相似。PEM组女性更多(57%对30%)。PEM组收缩压显著降低8 mmHg(95%置信区间[CI] 2至15),而CM组降低3 mmHg(95% CI -3至8),净降低值为6(95% CI -3至14)。夜间平均收缩压净降低值为12 mmHg(95% CI 2至22)。PEM组血压控制率为70%,CM组为45%(P = 0.045)。在对年龄、性别、糖尿病、基础血压和药物治疗变化进行调整后,PEM组血压控制的相对比值比为3.7(95% CI 1.05至13.1)。
基于这些研究结果,自我管理教育模式在血压控制方面比基于依从性的模式显著更有效。