• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

心脏风险与高血压治疗强化无关。

Cardiac risk is not associated with hypertension treatment intensification.

机构信息

Veterans Affairs Center for Clinical Management Research, HSR&D Center of Excellence, Ann Harbor, MI, USA.

出版信息

Am J Manag Care. 2012 Aug;18(8):414-20.

PMID:22928756
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3682773/
Abstract

OBJECTIVES

Considering cardiovascular (CV) risk could make clinical care more efficient and individualized, but most practice guidelines focus on single risk factors. We sought to determine if hypertension treatment intensification (TI) is more likely in patients with elevated CV risk.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective cohort study of 856 US veterans with diabetes and elevated blood pressure (BP).

METHODS

We used multilevel logistic regression to compare TI across 3 CV risk groups: those with history of heart disease, a high-risk primary prevention group (10-year event risk >20% but no history of heart disease), and those with low/ medium CV risk (10-year event risk <20%).

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in TI rates across risk groups, with adjusted odds ratios (ORs) of 1.19 (95% confidence interval 0.77-1.84) and 1.18 (0.76-1.83) for high-risk patients and those with a history of CVD, respectively, compared with those of low/medium risk. Several individual risk factors were associated with higher rates of TI: systolic BP, mean BP in the prior year, and higher glycated hemoglobin. Self-reported home BP <140/90 mm Hg was associated with lower rates of TI. Incorporating CV risk into TI decision algorithms could prevent an estimated 38% more cardiac events without increasing the number of treated patients.

CONCLUSIONS

While an individual's BP alters clinical decisions about TI, overall CV risk does not appear to play a role in clinical decision making. Adoption of TI decision algorithms that incorporate CV risk could substantially enhance the efficiency and clinical utility of CV preventive care.

摘要

目的

考虑心血管(CV)风险可以使临床护理更有效和个体化,但大多数实践指南都侧重于单一风险因素。我们旨在确定高血压治疗强化(TI)是否更可能发生在CV 风险升高的患者中。

研究设计

对 856 名患有糖尿病和血压升高的美国退伍军人进行前瞻性队列研究。

方法

我们使用多水平逻辑回归来比较 3 个 CV 风险组之间的 TI:有心脏病史的患者、高风险一级预防组(10 年事件风险>20%但无心脏病史)和低/中 CV 风险组(10 年事件风险<20%)。

结果

在风险组之间,TI 率没有显著差异,调整后的优势比(OR)分别为 1.19(95%置信区间 0.77-1.84)和 1.18(0.76-1.83),分别用于高风险患者和有 CVD 病史的患者,与低/中风险组相比。几个个体风险因素与更高的 TI 率相关:收缩压、前一年的平均血压和更高的糖化血红蛋白。自我报告的家庭血压<140/90mmHg 与 TI 率较低相关。将 CV 风险纳入 TI 决策算法可以在不增加治疗患者数量的情况下预防估计 38%更多的心脏事件。

结论

虽然一个人的血压会改变关于 TI 的临床决策,但总体 CV 风险似乎并未在临床决策中发挥作用。采用纳入 CV 风险的 TI 决策算法可以大大提高 CV 预防保健的效率和临床实用性。

相似文献

1
Cardiac risk is not associated with hypertension treatment intensification.心脏风险与高血压治疗强化无关。
Am J Manag Care. 2012 Aug;18(8):414-20.
2
A comparison between antihypertensive medication adherence and treatment intensification as potential clinical performance measures.作为潜在临床绩效指标的抗高血压药物依从性与治疗强化之间的比较。
Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2012 May;5(3):276-82. doi: 10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.112.965665. Epub 2012 May 10.
3
Systolic blood pressure levels among adults with hypertension and incident cardiovascular events: the atherosclerosis risk in communities study.患有高血压和新发心血管事件的成年人的收缩压水平:社区动脉粥样硬化风险研究
JAMA Intern Med. 2014 Aug;174(8):1252-61. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2014.2482.
4
Effects of individual risk factors on the incidence of cardiovascular events in the treated hypertensive patients of the Hypertension Optimal Treatment Study. HOT Study Group.高血压最佳治疗研究中接受治疗的高血压患者个体危险因素对心血管事件发生率的影响。HOT研究组。
J Hypertens. 2001 Jun;19(6):1149-59. doi: 10.1097/00004872-200106000-00021.
5
Effect of diuretic-based antihypertensive treatment on cardiovascular disease risk in older diabetic patients with isolated systolic hypertension. Systolic Hypertension in the Elderly Program Cooperative Research Group.基于利尿剂的降压治疗对老年单纯收缩期高血压糖尿病患者心血管疾病风险的影响。老年收缩期高血压计划合作研究组。
JAMA. 1996 Dec 18;276(23):1886-92.
6
Pulse pressure monitoring of open antihypertensive therapy.开放抗高血压治疗中的脉压监测。
Am J Hypertens. 2004 Dec;17(12 Pt 1):1088-94. doi: 10.1016/j.amjhyper.2004.06.024.
7
Which elderly patients should be considered for anti-hypertensive treatment? An evidence-based approach.哪些老年患者应考虑接受抗高血压治疗?循证方法。
J Hum Hypertens. 1998 Sep;12(9):607-13. doi: 10.1038/sj.jhh.1000674.
8
9
Suboptimal blood pressure control in chronic kidney disease stage 3: baseline data from a cohort study in primary care.慢性肾脏病 3 期血压控制不佳:初级保健队列研究的基线数据。
BMC Fam Pract. 2013 Jun 24;14:88. doi: 10.1186/1471-2296-14-88.
10
Personalizing the Intensity of Blood Pressure Control: Modeling the Heterogeneity of Risks and Benefits From SPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial).个性化血压控制强度:对收缩压干预试验(SPRINT)风险和获益的异质性进行建模
Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2017 Apr;10(4). doi: 10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.117.003624.

引用本文的文献

1
Understanding providers' attitudes and key concerns toward incorporating CVD risk prediction into clinical practice: a qualitative study.了解提供者对将 CVD 风险预测纳入临床实践的态度和主要关注点:一项定性研究。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2021 Jun 7;21(1):561. doi: 10.1186/s12913-021-06540-y.

本文引用的文献

1
Exceptions to outpatient quality measures for coronary artery disease in electronic health records.电子健康记录中冠心病门诊质量措施的例外情况。
Ann Intern Med. 2011 Feb 15;154(4):227-34. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-154-4-201102150-00003.
2
Building regulatory and operational flexibility into accountable care organizations and 'shared savings'.将监管和运营灵活性纳入问责制医疗照顾组织和“共享节约”中。
Health Aff (Millwood). 2011 Jan;30(1):23-31. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2010.0928.
3
Applying value-based insurance design to low-value health services.将基于价值的保险设计应用于低价值医疗服务。
Health Aff (Millwood). 2010 Nov;29(11):2017-21. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2010.0878.
4
Variation in the net benefit of aggressive cardiovascular risk factor control across the US population of patients with diabetes mellitus.美国糖尿病患者群体中积极控制心血管危险因素的净效益差异。
Arch Intern Med. 2010 Jun 28;170(12):1037-44. doi: 10.1001/archinternmed.2010.150.
5
Patient-provider concordance in the prioritization of health conditions among hypertensive diabetes patients.高血压合并糖尿病患者健康状况优先排序的医患一致性。
J Gen Intern Med. 2010 May;25(5):408-14. doi: 10.1007/s11606-009-1232-1. Epub 2010 Feb 2.
6
Optimizing statin treatment for primary prevention of coronary artery disease.优化他汀类药物治疗以预防冠心病
Ann Intern Med. 2010 Jan 19;152(2):69-77. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-152-2-201001190-00004.
7
Diminishing efficacy of combination therapy, response-heterogeneity, and treatment intolerance limit the attainability of tight risk factor control in patients with diabetes.联合治疗效果减弱、应答异质性以及治疗不耐受限制了糖尿病患者实现严格危险因素控制的可能性。
Health Serv Res. 2010 Apr;45(2):437-56. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2009.01075.x. Epub 2010 Jan 8.
8
Prediction of coronary heart disease risk in a general, pre-diabetic, and diabetic population during 10 years of follow-up: accuracy of the Framingham, SCORE, and UKPDS risk functions: The Hoorn Study.10 年随访期间一般、糖尿病前期和糖尿病患者人群的冠心病风险预测:弗雷明汉、SCORE 和 UKPDS 风险函数的准确性:霍恩研究。
Diabetes Care. 2009 Nov;32(11):2094-8. doi: 10.2337/dc09-0745.
9
Will hypertension performance measures used for pay-for-performance programs penalize those who care for medically complex patients?用于绩效薪酬计划的高血压绩效指标会惩罚那些照顾病情复杂患者的人吗?
Circulation. 2009 Jun 16;119(23):2978-85. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.108.836544. Epub 2009 Jun 1.
10
Use of blood pressure lowering drugs in the prevention of cardiovascular disease: meta-analysis of 147 randomised trials in the context of expectations from prospective epidemiological studies.降压药物在心血管疾病预防中的应用:基于前瞻性流行病学研究预期的147项随机试验的荟萃分析
BMJ. 2009 May 19;338:b1665. doi: 10.1136/bmj.b1665.