Comparative Efficacy of Hypertension Management Strategies

Author:

Schneider Jordan1ORCID,Alvarez-Betancourt Alejandro2,Elbaz Joshua1,Wenn Peter2ORCID,Makaryus Amgad N.ORCID,Zeltser Roman

Affiliation:

1. Donald and Barbara Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell, Hempstead, New York

2. Department of Cardiology, Nassau University Medical Center, East Meadow, New York

Abstract

AbstractHypertension (HTN) is a major cardiovascular risk factor and a significant contributor to disease burden in the United States. Despite therapeutic advances, gaps remain between clinical trials and practice. This study aims to bridge those gaps by evaluating antihypertensive strategies. This was a retrospective analysis of HTN patients seen at a hospital clinic from 2016 to 2022 with 3- and 12-month follow-up appointments. Demographics, history, blood pressure (BP), and medication regimen were recorded. Treatment strategies were categorized as follows: adding medication (AM), increasing dosage (ID), switching medications (SM), dropped medications (DrM), or no change (NC). Changes in systolic blood pressure (SBP) were compared using linear regressions to assess the efficacy of HTN management. Of 873 patient charts reviewed, 332 patients were included. The AM group had an adjusted ∆SBP of −11 mm Hg at 3 months (p < 0.001) and −9 mm Hg at 12 months (p = 0.006). The ID group had an ∆SBP of −8.5 mm Hg at 3 months (p = 0.074) and −7 mm Hg at 12 months (p = 0.3). ∆SBP between the AM and ID groups was not statistically significant (p = 0.8). SM was associated with an ∆SBP of −3 mm Hg at 3 months (p = 0.6) and −3 mm Hg at 12 months (p = 0.7). There are meaningful differences in SBP reduction between antihypertensive medication adjustment strategies. AM had the greatest effect on lowering SBP, with ID having a slightly lesser effect. The difference in ∆SBP between the AM versus ID groups was not significant. While further study with a larger dataset is warranted, our findings highlight trends in the efficacy of HTN management strategies to help guide therapeutic regimens.

Publisher

Georg Thieme Verlag KG

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3