Auditing hypertension control and management: a position paper.

The categorical term "auditing" hypertension control is chosen on purpose, to emphasize the responsibility of health politicians for assessing the quality and effects of interventions in populations. Auditing of hypertension is needed for reasons of Efficacy, Economics and Ethics. An analysis of efficacy should test whether the local strategies of hypertension control are sufficiently adapted to the needs and characteristics of a given population. Economic analyses should consider hypertension control in the perspective of resources and priorities. The ethical imperative requires an assessment and follow-up of the effects of health measures on the population, by the same token as evaluation of treatment results is obligatory in clinical medicine. The WHO/WHL Hypertension Management Audit Project was an attempt to analyze the repercussions of hypertension control programs on selected population. Five approaches were taken: (i) assessment of the epidemiological situation; (ii) clinical analysis on a sample of patients; (iii) assessment of patient satisfaction and of (iv) physicians' knowledge and attitudes; and (v) drug utilization studies. The results showed (a) a mixture of under- and overdiagnosis of hypertension in populations; (b) undertreatment of various degrees; (c) mixed patient satisfaction; (d) partial compliance of physicians' concepts and attitudes with standards promulgated by WHO and ISH; and, (e) great differences (at the time of the study) between drug utilization patterns in different countries.