Setia Sajita, Subramaniam Kannan, Tay Jam Chin, Teo Boon Wee
Chief Medical Office, Medical Affairs, Pfizer Pte Ltd, Singapore.
Global Medical Affairs, Asia Pacific Region, Pfizer Australia, West Ryde, NSW, Australia.
Vasc Health Risk Manag. 2017 Jul 17;13:275-285. doi: 10.2147/VHRM.S138694. eCollection 2017.
There are limited data on blood pressure variability (BPV) in Singapore. The absence of updated local guidelines might contribute to variations in diagnosis, treatment and control of hypertension and BPV between physicians. This study evaluated BPV awareness, hypertension management and associated training needs in physicians from Singapore.
Physicians from Singapore were surveyed between September 8, 2016, and October 5, 2016. Those included were in public or private practice for ≥3 years, cared directly for patients ≥70% of the time and treated ≥30 patients for hypertension each month. The questionnaire covered 6 main categories: general blood pressure (BP) management, BPV awareness/diagnosis, home BP monitoring (HBPM), ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM), BPV management and associated training needs.
Responses from 60 physicians (30 general practitioners [GPs], 20 cardiologists, 10 nephrologists) were analyzed (77% male, 85% aged 31-60 years, mean 22 years of practice). Approximately 63% of physicians considered white-coat hypertension as part of BPV. The most common diagnostic tool was HBPM (overall 77%, GPs 63%, cardiologists 65%, nephrologists 70%), but ABPM was rated as the tool most valued by physicians (80% overall), especially specialists (97%). Withdrawn Singapore guidelines were still being used by 73% of GPs. Approximately 48% of physicians surveyed did not adhere to the BP cutoff recommended by most guidelines for diagnosing hypertension using HBPM (>135/85 mmHg). Hypertension treatment practices also varied from available guideline recommendations, although physicians did tend to use a lower BP target for patients with diabetes or kidney disease. There were a number of challenges to estimating BPV, the most common of which was patient refusal of ABPM/HBPM. The majority of physicians (82%) had no training on BPV, but stated that this would be useful.
There appear to be gaps in knowledge and guideline adherence relating to the assessment and management of BPV among physicians in Singapore.
新加坡关于血压变异性(BPV)的数据有限。缺乏最新的本地指南可能导致医生在高血压及BPV的诊断、治疗和控制方面存在差异。本研究评估了新加坡医生对BPV的认知、高血压管理情况及相关培训需求。
于2016年9月8日至2016年10月5日对新加坡医生进行了调查。纳入的医生需在公立或私立机构执业≥3年,直接照料患者的时间≥70%,且每月治疗高血压患者≥30例。问卷涵盖6个主要类别:一般血压(BP)管理、BPV认知/诊断、家庭血压监测(HBPM)、动态血压监测(ABPM)、BPV管理及相关培训需求。
分析了60名医生(30名全科医生[GP]、20名心脏病专家、10名肾病专家)的回复(77%为男性,85%年龄在31 - 60岁,平均执业22年)。约63%的医生将白大衣高血压视为BPV的一部分。最常用的诊断工具是HBPM(总体为77%,全科医生为63%,心脏病专家为65%,肾病专家为70%),但ABPM被评为医生最看重的工具(总体为80%),尤其是专科医生(97%)。73%的全科医生仍在使用已废止的新加坡指南。约48%接受调查的医生在使用HBPM诊断高血压时未遵循大多数指南推荐的血压临界值(>135/85 mmHg)。高血压治疗实践也与现有指南建议不同,不过医生确实倾向于为糖尿病或肾病患者设定更低的血压目标。估计BPV存在诸多挑战,最常见的是患者拒绝ABPM/HBPM。大多数医生(82%)未接受过BPV培训,但表示这会很有用。
新加坡医生在BPV评估和管理的知识及指南遵循方面似乎存在差距。