• 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

高血压患者就诊间隔与长期心血管风险的关系。

Association between office visit intervals and long-term cardiovascular risk in hypertensive patients.

机构信息

Department of Medicine, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea.

Biomedical Research Institute, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, South Korea.

出版信息

J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2023 Aug;25(8):748-756. doi: 10.1111/jch.14698. Epub 2023 Jul 12.

DOI:10.1111/jch.14698
PMID:37436657
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10423752/
Abstract

Hypertension is a chronic disease that requires long-term follow-up in many patients, however, optimal visit intervals are not well-established. This study aimed to evaluate the incidences of major cardiovascular events (MACEs) according to visit intervals. We analyzed data from 9894 hypertensive patients in the Korean Hypertension Cohort, which enrolled and followed up 11,043 patients for over 10 years. Participants were classified into five groups based on their median visit intervals (MVIs) during the 4-year period and MACEs were compared among the groups. The patients were divided into clinically relevant MVIs of one (1013; 10%), two (1299; 13%), three (2732; 28%), four (2355; 24%), and six months (2515; 25%). The median follow-up period was 5 years (range: 1745 ± 293 days). The longer visit interval groups did not have an increased cumulative incidence of MACE (12.9%, 11.8%, 6.7%, 5.9%, and 4%, respectively). In the Cox proportional hazards model, those in the longer MVI group had a smaller hazard ratio (HR) for MACEs or all-cause death: 1.77 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.45-2.17), 1.7 (95% CI: 1.41-2.05), 0.90 (95% CI: 0.74-1.09) and 0.64 (95% CI: 0.52-0.79), respectively (Reference MVI group of 75-104 days). In conclusion, a follow-up visits with a longer interval of 3-6 months was not associated with an increased risk of MACE or all-cause death in hypertensive patients. Therefore, once medication adjustment is stabilized, a longer interval of 3-6 months is reasonable, reducing medical expenses without increasing the risk of cardiovascular outcomes.

摘要

高血压是一种需要许多患者长期随访的慢性病,但最佳就诊间隔尚未确定。本研究旨在根据就诊间隔评估主要心血管事件(MACE)的发生率。我们分析了韩国高血压队列中 9894 名高血压患者的数据,该队列招募并随访了 11043 名患者超过 10 年。根据 4 年内的中位数就诊间隔(MVIs),将参与者分为五组,并比较了各组之间的 MACE 情况。患者被分为临床相关的 MVIs:1 个月(1013 例,10%)、2 个月(1299 例,13%)、3 个月(2732 例,28%)、4 个月(2355 例,24%)和 6 个月(2515 例,25%)。中位随访期为 5 年(范围:1745±293 天)。就诊间隔较长的组 MACE 的累积发生率并没有增加(分别为 12.9%、11.8%、6.7%、5.9%和 4%)。在 Cox 比例风险模型中,就诊间隔较长组的 MACE 或全因死亡的风险比(HR)较小:1.77(95%置信区间 [CI],1.45-2.17)、1.7(95% CI:1.41-2.05)、0.90(95% CI:0.74-1.09)和 0.64(95% CI:0.52-0.79)(参考 MVI 组为 75-104 天)。总之,在高血压患者中,随访间隔延长至 3-6 个月不会增加 MACE 或全因死亡的风险。因此,一旦药物调整稳定,3-6 个月的较长间隔是合理的,可以降低医疗费用而不会增加心血管结局的风险。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/34c5/10423752/ed6e3bb9072a/JCH-25-748-g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/34c5/10423752/b24c0c65bba2/JCH-25-748-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/34c5/10423752/a9b2027fa04b/JCH-25-748-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/34c5/10423752/d58ab10b7097/JCH-25-748-g004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/34c5/10423752/ed6e3bb9072a/JCH-25-748-g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/34c5/10423752/b24c0c65bba2/JCH-25-748-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/34c5/10423752/a9b2027fa04b/JCH-25-748-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/34c5/10423752/d58ab10b7097/JCH-25-748-g004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/34c5/10423752/ed6e3bb9072a/JCH-25-748-g003.jpg

相似文献

1
Association between office visit intervals and long-term cardiovascular risk in hypertensive patients.高血压患者就诊间隔与长期心血管风险的关系。
J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2023 Aug;25(8):748-756. doi: 10.1111/jch.14698. Epub 2023 Jul 12.
2
Long-term cardiovascular risk of hypertensive events in emergency department: A population-based 10-year follow-up study.急诊科高血压事件的长期心血管风险:一项基于人群的10年随访研究。
PLoS One. 2018 Feb 15;13(2):e0191738. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0191738. eCollection 2018.
3
Remnant Cholesterol and Its Visit-to-Visit Variability Predict Cardiovascular Outcomes in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes: Findings From the ACCORD Cohort.残余胆固醇及其变异性与 2 型糖尿病患者心血管结局的关系:ACCORD 队列研究。
Diabetes Care. 2022 Sep 1;45(9):2136-2143. doi: 10.2337/dc21-2511.
4
Risk of Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events After Emergency Department Visits for Hypertensive Urgency.急诊就诊高血压急症后发生主要不良心血管事件的风险。
Hypertension. 2024 Jul;81(7):1592-1598. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.124.22885. Epub 2024 Apr 25.
5
High-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels are associated with major adverse cardiovascular events in male but not female patients with hypertension.高密度脂蛋白胆固醇水平与高血压男性患者而非女性患者的主要不良心血管事件相关。
Clin Cardiol. 2021 May;44(5):723-730. doi: 10.1002/clc.23606. Epub 2021 Mar 30.
6
Impact of visit-to-visit variability and systolic blood pressure control on subsequent outcomes in hypertensive patients with coronary artery disease (from the HIJ-CREATE substudy).就诊间血压变异性和收缩压控制对冠心病高血压患者后续结局的影响(来自HIJ-CREATE子研究)
Am J Cardiol. 2015 Jul 15;116(2):236-42. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2015.04.011. Epub 2015 Apr 20.
7
Hypertension-Mediated Organ Damage and Long-term Cardiovascular Outcomes in Asian Hypertensive Patients without Prior Cardiovascular Disease.亚洲原发性高血压患者高血压介导的器官损伤与长期心血管转归
J Korean Med Sci. 2020 Dec 14;35(48):e400. doi: 10.3346/jkms.2020.35.e400.
8
Short-Term but not Long-Term Blood Pressure Variability Is a Predictor of Adverse Cardiovascular Outcomes in Young Untreated Hypertensives.短期而非长期血压变异性是未治疗的年轻高血压患者不良心血管结局的预测指标。
Am J Hypertens. 2020 Nov 3;33(11):1030-1037. doi: 10.1093/ajh/hpaa121.
9
Assessment of Visit-to-Visit Blood Pressure Variability in Adults With Optimal Blood Pressure: A New Player in the Evaluation of Residual Cardiovascular Risk?成人血压控制良好者的血压变异性评估:评估残余心血管风险的新指标?
J Am Heart Assoc. 2022 May 3;11(9):e022716. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.121.022716. Epub 2022 Apr 26.
10
Masked tachycardia. A predictor of adverse outcome in hypertension.隐匿性心动过速。高血压不良预后的一个预测指标。
J Hypertens. 2017 Mar;35(3):487-492. doi: 10.1097/HJH.0000000000001194.

引用本文的文献

1
Review of Blood Pressure Control in Vulnerable Older Adults: The Role of Frailty and Sarcopenia.脆弱老年人群血压控制的综述:衰弱和肌肉减少症的作用
J Vasc Dis. 2025 Jun;4(2). doi: 10.3390/jvd4020018. Epub 2025 May 14.

本文引用的文献

1
The 2022 focused update of the 2018 Korean Hypertension Society Guidelines for the management of hypertension.《2018年韩国高血压学会高血压管理指南》2022年重点更新版
Clin Hypertens. 2023 Feb 15;29(1):11. doi: 10.1186/s40885-023-00234-9.
2
Long-term cardiovascular events in hypertensive patients: full report of the Korean Hypertension Cohort.高血压患者的长期心血管事件:韩国高血压队列的完整报告。
Korean J Intern Med. 2023 Jan;38(1):56-67. doi: 10.3904/kjim.2022.249. Epub 2022 Dec 14.
3
Medication adherence prediction through temporal modelling in cardiovascular disease management.
通过在心血管疾病管理中的时间建模进行药物依从性预测。
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2022 Nov 29;22(1):313. doi: 10.1186/s12911-022-02052-9.
4
An economic evaluation of intensive hypertension control in CKD patients: a cost-effectiveness study.慢性肾脏病患者强化高血压控制的经济学评估:一项成本效益研究。
Clin Hypertens. 2022 Nov 1;28(1):32. doi: 10.1186/s40885-022-00215-4.
5
Comparison of the efficiency between electrocardiogram and echocardiogram for left ventricular hypertrophy evaluation in patients with hypertension: Insight from the Korean Hypertension Cohort Study.心电图与超声心动图评估高血压患者左心室肥厚的效率比较:来自韩国高血压队列研究的结果。
J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2022 Nov;24(11):1451-1460. doi: 10.1111/jch.14583. Epub 2022 Oct 21.
6
Korea hypertension fact sheet 2021: analysis of nationwide population-based data with special focus on hypertension in women.《2021年韩国高血压情况说明书:基于全国人口数据的分析,特别关注女性高血压》
Clin Hypertens. 2022 Jan 3;28(1):1. doi: 10.1186/s40885-021-00188-w.
7
Cost-effectiveness analysis of intensive blood pressure control in Korea.韩国强化血压控制的成本效益分析。
Hypertens Res. 2022 Mar;45(3):507-515. doi: 10.1038/s41440-021-00774-3. Epub 2021 Dec 21.
8
The Korean Hypertension Cohort study: design and baseline characteristics.韩国高血压队列研究:设计和基线特征。
Korean J Intern Med. 2021 Sep;36(5):1115-1125. doi: 10.3904/kjim.2020.551. Epub 2021 Jul 22.
9
Korea hypertension fact sheet 2020: analysis of nationwide population-based data.《2020年韩国高血压情况说明书:基于全国人口数据的分析》
Clin Hypertens. 2021 Mar 15;27(1):8. doi: 10.1186/s40885-021-00166-2.
10
Global Burden of Cardiovascular Diseases and Risk Factors, 1990-2019: Update From the GBD 2019 Study.全球心血管疾病负担及危险因素, 1990-2019:来自 GBD 2019 研究的更新。
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2020 Dec 22;76(25):2982-3021. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2020.11.010.