Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.
To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to upgrade your browser.
…
481 pages
1 file
AI-generated Abstract
The paper discusses the historical context and evolution of hypertension treatment guidelines, culminating in a systematic review and meta-analysis evaluating the effectiveness of various quality improvement (QI) strategies on blood pressure control. It emphasizes the significance of coordinated interventions involving self-management and monitoring tools, such as mobile support and education, highlighting median blood pressure reductions achieved through different strategies.
Pharmacotherapy, 2004
Hypertension is a key risk factor for cardiovascular disease. Current management of hypertension, both pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic, is based on an extensive amount of published literature. We present a list of publications, clinical trials, meta-analyses, and clinical practice guidelines that we believe are essential in defining the current practice standards in the management of hypertension.
Hypertension is the most prevalent clinical symptom arising from various cardiovascular disorders. Likewise, it is considered a precursor or sequelae to the development of acute coronary artery disease and congestive heath failure (CHF). Hypertension has been considered a cardinal criterion to determine cardiovascular function. According to the World Health Organization (WHO) global observatory data, hypertension causes more than 7.5 million deaths a year, about 12.8% of the total human mortality. Similarly, the Center for Disease Control (CDC) states that 35% of the American adults have been estimated to have a persistently high blood pressure, which makes it about one in every three adults. Hypertension is a modifiable symptom that can be managed through pharmacological and non-pharmacological methods and standard protocols set forth by the American Heart Association (AHA). With new findings from various clinical trials related to the management of hypertension, new developments and recommendations have been made to update the previously established protocols for hypertension. This article aims to discuss and dissect the modern updates of hypertension management as comprehensively elaborated in the 2017 Hypertension Clinical Practice Guidelines.
Hypertension (Dallas, Tex. : 1979), 2017
Since 1980, the American College of Cardiology (ACC) and American Heart Association (AHA) have translated scientific evidence into clinical practice guidelines (guidelines) with recommendations to improve cardiovascular health. In 2013, the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) Advisory Council recommended that the NHLBI focus specifically on reviewing the highest-quality evidence and partner with other organizations to develop recommendations. P-1,P-2 Accordingly, the ACC and AHA collaborated with the NHLBI and stakeholder and professional organizations to complete and publish 4 guidelines (on assessment of cardiovascular risk, lifestyle modifications to reduce cardiovascular risk, management of blood cholesterol in adults, and management of overweight and obesity in adults) to make them available to the widest possible constituency. In 2014, the ACC and AHA, in partnership with several other professional societies, initiated a guideline on the prevention, detection, evaluation, and management of high blood pressure (BP) in adults. Under the management of the ACC/ AHA Task Force, a Prevention Subcommittee was appointed to help guide development of the suite of guidelines on prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD). These guidelines, which are based on systematic methods to evaluate and classify evidence, provide a cornerstone for quality cardiovascular care. The ACC and AHA sponsor the development and publication of guidelines without commercial support, and members of each organization volunteer their time to the writing and review efforts. Guidelines are official policy of the ACC and AHA. Hypertension June 2018 of clinical practice. The Task Force may also invite organizations and professional societies with related interests and expertise to participate as partners, collaborators, or endorsers. Relationships With Industry and Other Entities The ACC and AHA have rigorous policies and methods to ensure that guidelines are developed without bias or improper influence. The complete relationships with industry and other entities (RWI) policy can be found online. Appendix 1 of the present document lists writing committee members' relevant RWI. For the purposes of full transparency, writing committee members' comprehensive disclosure information is available online. Comprehensive disclosure information for the Task Force is available online. Evidence Review and Evidence Review Committees In developing recommendations, the writing committee uses evidence-based methodologies that are based on all available data. P-6-P-9 Literature searches focus on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) but also include registries, nonrandomized comparative and descriptive studies, case series, cohort studies, systematic reviews, and expert opinion. Only key references are cited. An independent evidence review committee (ERC) is commissioned when there are 1 or more questions deemed of utmost clinical importance that merit formal systematic review. The systematic review will determine which patients are most likely to benefit from a drug, device, or treatment strategy and to what degree. Criteria for commissioning an ERC and formal systematic review include: a) the absence of a current authoritative systematic review, b) the feasibility of defining the benefit and risk in a time frame consistent with the writing of a guideline, c) the relevance to a substantial number of patients, and d) the likelihood that the findings can be translated into actionable recommendations. ERC members may include methodologists, epidemiologists, healthcare providers, and biostatisticians. The recommendations developed by the writing committee on the basis of the systematic review are marked with "SR." Guideline-Directed Management and Therapy The term guideline-directed management and therapy (GDMT) encompasses clinical evaluation, diagnostic testing, and pharmacological and procedural treatments. For these and all recommended drug treatment regimens, the reader should confirm the dosage by reviewing product insert material and evaluate the treatment regimen for contraindications and interactions. The recommendations are limited to drugs, devices, and treatments approved for clinical use in the United States. Class of Recommendation and Level of Evidence The Class of Recommendation (COR) indicates the strength of the recommendation, encompassing the estimated magnitude and certainty of benefit in proportion to risk. The Level of Evidence (LOE) rates the quality of scientific evidence that supports the intervention on the basis of the type, quantity, and consistency of data from clinical trials and other sources (Table 1
BMC Health Services Research, 2006
Background: To be useful, clinical practice guidelines need to be evidence based; otherwise they will not achieve the validity, reliability and credibility required for implementation.
Hypertension is the most common condition seen in primary care and leads to myocardial infarction, stroke, renal failure, and death if not detected early and treated appropriately. Patients want to be assured that blood pressure (BP) treatment will reduce their disease burden, while clinicians want guidance on hypertension management using the best scientific evidence. This report takes a rigorous, evidence-based approach to recommend treatment thresholds, goals, and medications in the management of hypertension in adults. Evidence was drawn from randomized controlled trials, which represent the gold standard for determining efficacy and effectiveness. Evidence quality and recommendations were graded based on their effect on important outcomes. There is strong evidence to support treating hypertensive persons aged 60 years or older to a BP goal of less than 150/90 mm Hg and hypertensive persons 30 through 59 years of age to a diastolic goal of less than 90 mm Hg; however, there is insufficient evidence in hypertensive persons younger than 60 years for a systolic goal, or in those younger than 30 years for a diastolic goal, so the panel recommends a BP of less than 140/90 mm Hg for those groups based on expert opinion. The same thresholds and goals are recommended for hypertensive adults with diabetes or nondiabetic chronic kidney disease (CKD) as for the general hypertensive population younger than 60 years. There is moderate evidence to support initiating drug treatment with an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor, angiotensin receptor blocker, calcium channel blocker, or thiazide-type diuretic in the nonblack hypertensive population, including those with diabetes. In the black hypertensive population, including those with diabetes, a calcium channel blocker or thiazide-type diuretic is recommended as initial therapy. There is moderate evidence to support initial or add-on antihypertensive therapy with an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker in persons with CKD to improve kidney outcomes. Although this guideline provides evidence-based recommendations for the management of high BP and should meet the clinical needs of most patients, these recommendations are not a substitute for clinical judgment, and decisions about care must carefully consider and incorporate the clinical characteristics and circumstances of each individual patient.
American journal of hypertension, 2002
Cardiovascular disease prevention depends on reduction of risk factors, including hypertension. Guidelines designed to improve management of hypertension are widely available. Their purpose is to assemble the available data from basic biomedical science, epidemiology, and clinical science in an accessible form with which physicians and patients can make reasoned decisions for individual cases. However, guidelines have been neither widely accepted, nor effectively implemented. We recommend a strategy for guideline preparation designed to yield a product more user friendly, accessible, and effective. Guideline recommendations and the evidence used to make them should be based on an explicit grading system. Relevant clinical as well as nonclinical factors must be considered. Moreover, because the goal of antihypertensive therapy is to prevent cardiovascular events, and the likelihood of such events is determined by multifactor or absolute risk assessment, risk, rather than level of blo...
Journal of Hypertension, 2007
Journal of the American Heart Association, 2015
Hypertension is the most common condition seen in primary care and leads to myocardial infarction, stroke, renal failure, and death if not detected early and treated appropriately. Patients want to be assured that blood pressure (BP) treatment will reduce their disease burden, while clinicians want guidance on hypertension management using the best scientific evidence. This report takes a rigorous, evidence-based approach to recommend treatment thresholds, goals, and medications in the management of hypertension in adults. Evidence was drawn from randomized controlled trials, which represent the gold standard for determining efficacy and effectiveness. Evidence quality and recommendations were graded based on their effect on important outcomes.
Loading Preview
Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.
Journal of Human Hypertension, 2004
Hong Kong Medical Journal, 2020
Hypertension Research, 2021
PLoS ONE, 2013
The Canadian Journal of Cardiology, 2002
New England Journal of Medicine, 2018
The American Journal of Medicine, 2004
The Journal of Clinical Hypertension, 2008
Arab journal of nephrology and transplantation, 2013
Journal of Human Hypertension, 2008