Herbal or Dietary Supplement Use and Hypertensive Medications: Does the Combination Relate to Medication Adherence and Blood Pressure Control

Introduction: Medication nonadherence contributes to poor blood pressure control and increases cardiovascular disease risk in patients with hypertension. Identifying modifiable risk factors for low or nonadherence to antihypertensive medication is needed. Studies that have examined the relationship between herbal or dietary supplement (HDS) use and antihypertensive medication nonadherence provide inconsistent findings. Data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey were used to examine the association between HDS use, current use of prescribed antihypertensive medication, and blood pressure status. Methods: The study sample included hypertensive adults (n = 5,478) who have been told by a health professional to take prescribed medication for their health condition. Respondents were classified as either HDS users or HDS nonusers. Depending on the kind of supplement used, HDS users were further divided into three mutually exclusive groups: hypertension HDS users, nonhypertension HDS users, and those who used both kinds of supplements. Supplements groupings were based on reports in the literature. Blood pressure status definition was based on Eighth Joint National Committee (JNC 8) recommendations. Adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were obtained from logistic models. Results: Overall HDS use prevalence was 62%. Current medication use did not significantly differ between patients reporting no HDS use and those reporting HDS use (aOR: 1.45; 95% CI: 0.78-2.69). No observable differences were found in current medication use between patients reporting no HDS use and those taking nonhypertension HDS or both kinds of supplements. Use of hypertension HDS was associated with improved blood pressure (aOR: 1.90; 95% CI: 1.07-3.36) compared with no HDS use. Conclusion: In a nationally representative U.S. sample, HDS use did not compromise current use of prescribed medication and was associated with improved blood pressure control. More research is needed to better understand why HDS use is associated with better blood pressure control

Systematic Review of the “Pragmatism” of Pragmatic Critical Care Trials

OBJECTIVES:. To assess the pragmatism of published critical care randomized controlled trials self-described as pragmatic using a validated tool. DATA SOURCES:. Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval Online database and PubMed interface from inception to November 1, 2021. STUDY SELECTION:. We performed a systematic search of randomized controlled trials evaluating interventions for critically ill adults that self-identified as pragmatic in title or abstract. DATA EXTRACTION:. Reviewers independently performed study selection and data extraction in duplicate; discrepancies were resolved by consensus. Pragmatism was assessed independently in duplicate by trained reviewers using the Pragmatic-Explanatory Continuum Indicator Summary 2 (PRECIS-2), a validated tool designed to represent how explanatory/pragmatic a trial is on the pragmatic to explanatory continuum. Trials were scored in nine domains on a 5-point continuum (from 1 = very explanatory to 5 = very pragmatic). Discrepancies of greater than 2 points were adjudicated by consensus discussion. DATA SYNTHESIS:. The search resulted in 284 studies; 56 met eligibility criteria. Forty-one of the trials had a discrepancy in at least one domain that required consensus discussion, most commonly in domains of eligibility and follow-up. Twelve studies (21.4%) were scored as “overall pragmatic,” defined as score of greater than 4 in five domains provided the scores in the remaining domains were three. The overall PRECIS-2 score of self-identified pragmatic studies increased from 1995 to 2021 suggesting increasing pragmatism over time. Pragmatic trials were more likely to have a waiver of informed consent (p = 0.05). CONCLUSIONS:. The number and pragmatism of self-identified pragmatic trials have increased, particularly in the past decade. However, less than one-quarter of these trials that use the term pragmatic in title or abstract were retrospectively rated as pragmatic. Our results support the concept that trials are designed on a spectrum of pragmatic to explanatory. Advances in the design and reporting of critical care trials are needed to ensure their real-world applicability

Tackling brain and muscle dysfunction in acute respiratory distress syndrome survivors: National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Workshop Report

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is associated with long-term impairments in brain and muscle function that significantly impact the quality of life of those who survive the acute illness. The mechanisms underlying these impairments are not yet well understood, and evidence-based interventions to minimize the burden on patients remain unproven. The National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) of the National Institutes of Health assembled a workshop in April 2023 to review the state of the science regarding ARDS-associated brain and muscle dysfunction, to identify gaps in current knowledge, and to determine priorities for future investigation. The workshop included presentations by scientific leaders across the translational science spectrum and was open to the public as well as the scientific community. This report describes the themes discussed at the workshop as well as recommendations to advance the field toward the goal of improving the health and wellbeing of ARDS survivors