Patient preferences for different methods of blood pressure measurement: is ethnicity relevant?

This is the author accepted manuscript. It is currently under an indefinite embargo pending publication by the Royal College of General Practitioners.$\textit{Background:}$ Ambulatory and/or home monitoring are recommended in the UK and North America for the diagnosis of hypertension but little is known about acceptability. $\textit{Aim:}$ To determine the acceptability of different methods of measuring blood pressure to people from different ethnic minority groups. $\textit{Design and setting:}$ Cross sectional study with focus groups in primary care. $\textit{Methods:}$ People with and without hypertension of different ethnicities were assessed for acceptability of clinic, home and ambulatory blood pressure measurement using completion rate, questionnaire and focus groups. $\textit{Results:}$ 770 participants were included comprising white British (n=300), South Asian (n=241) and African Caribbean (n=229). White British participants had significantly higher successful completion rates across all monitoring modalities compared to the other ethnic groups, especially for ambulatory monitoring: white British (277 completed, 92%[89-95%]) vs South Asian (171, 71%[65-76%], p<0.001 and African Caribbean (188, 82%[77-87%], p<0.001) respectively. There were significantly lower acceptability scores for minority ethnic participants across all monitoring methods compared to white British. Focus group results highlighted self-monitoring as most acceptable and ambulatory monitoring least without consistent differences by ethnicity. Clinic monitoring was seen as inconvenient and anxiety provoking but with the advantage of immediate professional input. $\textit{Conclusions:}$ Reduced acceptability and completion rates amongst minority ethnic groups raise important questions for the implementation and interpretation of blood pressure monitoring in general and ambulatory monitoring in particular. Selection of method for blood pressure monitoring should take into account clinical need and patient preference as well as consideration of potential cultural barriers to monitoring.National Institute for Health Research (Grant ID: PB-PG-1207-15042

Access to interpreting services in England: secondary analysis of national data

Background: Overcoming language barriers to health care is a global challenge. There is great linguistic diversity in the major cities in the UK with more than 300 languages, excluding dialects, spoken by children in London alone. However, there is dearth of data on the number of non-English speakers for planning effective interpreting services. The aim was to estimate the number of people requiring language support amongst the minority ethnic communities in England. Methods: Secondary analysis of national representative sample of subjects recruited to the Health Surveys for England 1999 and 2004. Results: 298,432 individuals from the four main minority ethnic communities (Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi and Chinese) who may be unable to communicate effectively with a health professional. This represents 2,520,885 general practice consultations per year where interpreting services might be required. Conclusion: Effective interpreting services are required to improve access and health outcomes of non-English speakers and thereby facilitate a reduction in health inequalities

Prevalence of uncontrolled hypertension in people with comorbidities in sub-Saharan Africa : a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: The burden of uncontrolled hypertension in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) is high and hypertension is known to coexist with other chronic diseases such as kidney disease, diabetes among others. This is the first systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the burden of uncontrolled hypertension among patients with comorbidities in SSA. Methods: A comprehensive search was conducted on MEDLINE, Excerpta Medica Database (Embase) and Web of Science to identify all relevant articles published between 1 January 2000 and 17 June 2021. We included studies that reported on the prevalence of uncontrolled hypertension among people in SSA who report taking antihypertensive treatment and have another chronic condition. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed to obtain the pooled estimate of the prevalence of uncontrolled hypertension among patients with comorbid conditions while on treatment across studies in SSA. Results: In all, 20 articles were included for meta-analyses. Eleven articles were among diabetic patients, five articles were among patients with HIV, two were among patients with stroke while chronic kidney disease and atrial fibrillation had one article each. The pooled prevalence of uncontrolled hypertension among patients with comorbidities was 78.6% (95% CI 71.1% to 85.3%); I² 95.9%, varying from 73.1% in patients with stroke to 100.0% in patients with atrial fibrillation. Subgroup analysis showed differences in uncontrolled hypertension prevalence by various study-level characteristics Conclusion: This study suggests a high burden of uncontrolled hypertension in people with comorbidities in SSA. Strategies to improve the control of hypertension among people with comorbidities are needed. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42019108218

Validation of the Edinburgh Claudication Questionnaire in 1st generation Black African-Caribbean and South Asian UK migrants: A sub-study to the Ethnic-Echocardiographic Heart of England Screening (E-ECHOES) study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>We determined the diagnostic accuracy of the Edinburgh Claudication Questionnaire (ECQ) in 1^stgeneration Black African-Caribbean UK migrants as previous diagnostic questionnaires have been found to be less accurate in this population. We also determined the diagnostic accuracy of translated versions of the ECQ in 1^stgeneration South Asian UK migrants, as this has not been investigated before.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Subjects were recruited from the Ethnic-Echocardiographic Heart of England Screening (E-ECHOES) study, a community based screening survey for heart failure in minority ethnic groups. Translated versions of the ECQ were prepared following a recognised protocol. All participants attending screening between October 2007 and February 2009 were asked to complete the ECQ in the language of their choice (English, Punjabi, Bengali, Urdu, Hindi or Gujarati). Subjects answering positively to experiencing leg pain or discomfort on walking were asked to return to have Ankle Brachial Pressure Index (ABPI) measured.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>154 out of 2831 subjects participating in E-ECHOES (5.4%) were eligible to participate in this sub-study, for which 74.3% returned for ABPI assessment. Non-responders were younger than participants (59[9] vs. 65[11] years; p = 0.015). Punjabi, English and Bengali questionnaires identified participants with Intermittent Claudication, so these questionnaires were assessed. The sensitivities (SN), specificities (SP), positive (PPV) and negative (NPV) predictive values were calculated. English: SN: 50%; SP: 68%; PPV: 43%; NPV: 74%. Punjabi: SN: 50%; SP: 87%; PPV: 43%; NPV: 90%. Bengali: SN: 33%; SP: 50%; PPV: 13%; NPV: 73%. There were significant differences in diagnostic accuracy between the 3 versions (Punjabi: 83.8%; Bengali: 45%; English: 62.2%; p < 0.0001). No significant differences were found in sensitivity and specificity between illiterate and literate participants in any of the questionnaires and there was no significant different difference between those under and over 60 years of age.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Our findings suggest that the ECQ is not as sensitive or specific a diagnostic tool in 1^stgeneration Black African-Caribbean and South Asian UK migrants than in the Edinburgh Artery Study, reflecting the findings of other diagnostic questionnaires in these minority ethnic groups. However this study is limited by sample size so conclusions should be interpreted with caution.</p

Ethnicity and differences between clinic and ambulatory blood pressure measurements.

BACKGROUND: This study investigated the relationship of ethnicity to the differences between blood pressure (BP) measured in a clinic setting and by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) in individuals with a previous diagnosis of hypertension (HT) and without a previous diagnosis of hypertension (NHT). METHODS: A cross-sectional comparison of BP measurement was performed in 770 participants (white British (WB, 39%), South Asian (SA, 31%), and African Caribbean (AC, 30%)) in 28 primary care clinics in West Midlands, United Kingdom. Mean differences between daytime ABPM, standardized clinic (mean of 3 occasions), casual clinic (first reading on first occasion), and last routine BP taken at the general practitioner practice were compared in HT and NHT individuals. RESULTS: Daytime systolic and diastolic ABPM readings were similar to standardized clinic BP (systolic: 128 (SE 0.9) vs. 125 (SE 0.9) mm Hg (NHT) and 132 (SE 0.7) vs. 131 (SE 0.7) mm Hg (HT)) and were not associated with ethnicity to a clinically important extent. When BP was taken less carefully, differences emerged: casual clinic readings were higher than ABPM, particularly in the HT group where the systolic differences approached clinical relevance (131 (SE 1.2) vs. 129 (SE 1.0) mm Hg (NHT) and 139 (SE 0.9) vs. 133 (SE 0.7) mm Hg (HT)) and were larger in SA and AC hypertensive individuals (136 (SE 1.5) vs. 133 (SE 1.2) mm Hg (WB), 141 (SE 1.7) vs. 133 (SE 1.4) mm Hg (SA), and 142 (SE 1.6) vs. 134 (SE 1.3) mm Hg (AC); mean differences: 3 (0-7), P = 0.03 and 4 (1-7), P = 0.01, respectively). Differences were also observed for the last practice reading in SA and ACs. CONCLUSIONS: BP differences between ethnic groups where BP is carefully measured on multiple occasions are small and unlikely to alter clinical management. When BP is measured casually on a single occasion or in routine care, differences appear that could approach clinical relevance.This report presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR).The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of HealthThis is a pre-copyedited, author-produced PDF of an article accepted for publication in American Journal of Hypertension following peer review. The version of record, Am J Hypertens (2014) doi: 10.1093/ajh/hpu211, is available online at: http://ajh.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2014/11/18/ajh.hpu211.long

Antihypertensive treatment in people of very old age with frailty: time for a paradigm shift?

The optimal management of hypertension in individuals aged 80 years or older with frailty remains uncertain due to multiple gaps in evidence. Complex health issues, polypharmacy, and limited physiological reserve make responding to antihypertensive treatments unpredictable. Patients in this age group may have limited life expectancy, so their quality of life should be prioritized when making treatment decisions. Further research is needed to identify which patients would benefit from more relaxed blood pressure targets and which antihypertensive medications are preferable or should be avoided. A paradigm shift is required in attitudes towards treatment, placing equal emphasis on deprescribing and prescribing when optimizing care. This review discusses the current evidence on managing hypertension in individuals aged 80 years or older with frailty, but further research is essential to address the gaps in knowledge and improve the care of this population

Prevalence of heart failure and atrial fibrillation in minority ethnic subjects: the Ethnic-Echocardiographic Heart of England Screening Study (E-ECHOES).

Limited data exists on the prevalence of heart failure amongst minority groups in the UK. To document the community prevalence and severity of left ventricular systolic dysfunction, heart failure, and atrial fibrillation, amongst the South Asian and Black African-Caribbean groups in the UK

The Unmet Need for Interpreting Provision in UK Primary Care

Background: With increasing globalisation, the challenges of providing accessible and safe healthcare to all are great. Studies show that there are substantial numbers of people who are not fluent in English to a level where they can make best use of health services. We examined how health professionals manage language barriers in a consultation.Methods and Findings: This was a cross-sectional study in 41 UK general practices. Health professionals completed a proforma for a randomly allocated consultation session. Seventy-seven (63%) practitioners responded, from 41(59%) practices. From 1008 consultations, 555 involved patients who did not have English as a first language; 710 took place in English; 222 were in other languages, the practitioner either communicating with the patient in their own language/using an alternative language. Seven consultations were in a mixture of English/patient's own language. Patients' first languages numbered 37 (apart from English), in contrast to health practitioners, who declared at least a basic level of proficiency in 22 languages other than English. The practitioner's reported proficiency in the language used was at a basic level in 24 consultations, whereas in 21, they reported having no proficiency at all. In 57 consultations, a relative/friend interpreted and in 6, a bilingual member of staff/community worker was used. Only in 6 cases was a professional interpreter booked. The main limitation was that only one random session was selected and assessment of patient/professional fluency in English was subjective.Conclusions: It would appear that professional interpreters are under-used in relation to the need for them, with bilingual staff/family and friends being used commonly. In many cases where the patient spoke little/no English, the practitioner consulted in the patient's language but this approach was also used where reported practitioner proficiency was low. Further research in different setting is needed to substantiate these findings