Prevalence and factors affecting home blood pressure documentation in routine clinical care: a retrospective study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Home blood pressure (BP) is closely linked to patient outcomes. However, the prevalence of its documentation has not been examined. The objective of this study was to analyze the prevalence and factors affecting documentation of home BP in routine clinical care.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A retrospective study of 142,973 encounters of 9,840 hypertensive patients with diabetes from 2000 to 2005 was performed. The prevalence of recorded home BP and the factors associated with its documentation were analyzed. We assessed validity of home BP information by comparing the difference between home and office BP to previously published prospective studies.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Home BP was documented in narrative notes for 2.08% of encounters where any blood pressure was recorded and negligibly in structured data (EMR flowsheets). Systolic and diastolic home BP in narrative notes were lower than office BP readings by 9.6 and 2.5 mm Hg, respectively (p < 0.0001 for both), consistent with prospective data. Probability of home BP documentation increased by 23.0% for each 10 mm Hg of office systolic BP (p < 0.0001), by 6.2% for each $10,000 in median income of zip code (p = 0.0055), and by 17.7% for each decade in the patient's age (p < 0.0001).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Home BP readings provide a valid representation of the patient's condition, yet are seldom documented despite their potential utility in both patient care and research. Strong association between higher patient income and home BP documentation suggests that the cost of the monitors may be a limiting factor; reimbursement of home BP monitoring expenses should be pursued.</p

Hypertensive patients' use of blood pressure monitors stationed in pharmacies and other locations: a cross-sectional mail survey

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Blood pressure (BP) monitors are commonly stationed in public places such as pharmacies, but it is uncertain how many people with hypertension currently use them. We sought to estimate the proportion of hypertensive patients who use these types of monitors and examine whether use varies by demographic or health characteristics.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We conducted a cross-sectional mail survey of hypertensive adults enrolled in a practice based research network of 24 primary care practices throughout the state of North Carolina. We analyzed results using descriptive statistics and examined bivariate associations using chi-square and independent associations using logistic regression.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>We received 530 questionnaires (76% response rate). Of 333 respondents (63%) who reported checking their BP in locations other than their doctor's office or home, 66% reported using a monitor stationed in a pharmacy. Younger patients more commonly reported using pharmacy monitors (48% among those < 45 years vs 35% of those over 65, p = 0.04). Blacks reported using them more commonly than whites (48% vs 39%, p = 0.03); and high school graduates more often than those with at least some college (50% vs 37%, p = 0.02). In multivariate analysis, younger age (aOR 1.49; 95% CI 1.00–2.21 for those age 45 to 65 years vs those > 65 years old) and high school education (aOR 1.74; 95% CI 1.13–2.58) were associated with use of pharmacy-stationed monitors, but Black race was not. Patients with diabetes, heart disease, or stroke were not more likely to use pharmacy-stationed monitors.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Hypertensive patients' use of BP monitors located in pharmacies is common. Younger patients, Blacks, and those with high school education were slightly more likely to report using them. Because use of these monitors is so common, efforts to ensure their accuracy are important.</p

Application of Direct Renin Inhibition to Chronic Kidney Disease

Chronic kidney disease has serious implications with a high risk for progressive loss of renal function, increased cardiovascular events as well as a substantial financial burden. The renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) is activated in chronic kidney disease, especially in diabetes and hypertension, which are the leading causes of chronic kidney disease. Angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) decrease the rate of progression of diabetic and non-diabetic nephropathy and are recommended therapy for chronic kidney disease. Key clinical trials supporting the use of ACE inhibitors and ARBs in chronic kidney disease are discussed. Recent developments in our understanding of RAAS biology and the use of direct renin inhibition are reviewed in the context of their potential impact on the prevention and management of chronic kidney disease. Despite the clinical success of ACE inhibitors and ARBs the rates of mortality and progression to renal failure remain high in these patient populations. ACE inhibitor or ARB monotherapy, in doses commonly used in clinical practice does not result in complete suppression of the RAAS. Aliskiren, a direct renin inhibitor, offers a novel approach to inhibit the RAAS in chronic kidney disease. High dose ARB therapy or combination therapies with ACE inhibitors and ARBs have shown beneficial effects on surrogate markers of chronic kidney disease. Early data based on urinary protein excretion rates as a surrogate marker for renal function suggest a possibly novel role for aliskiren alone or in combination with ARBs in chronic kidney disease

Cause of Death and Predictors of All-Cause Mortality in Anticoagulated Patients With Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation : Data From ROCKET AF

M. Kaste on työryhmän ROCKET AF Steering Comm jäsen.Background-Atrial fibrillation is associated with higher mortality. Identification of causes of death and contemporary risk factors for all-cause mortality may guide interventions. Methods and Results-In the Rivaroxaban Once Daily Oral Direct Factor Xa Inhibition Compared with Vitamin K Antagonism for Prevention of Stroke and Embolism Trial in Atrial Fibrillation (ROCKET AF) study, patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation were randomized to rivaroxaban or dose-adjusted warfarin. Cox proportional hazards regression with backward elimination identified factors at randomization that were independently associated with all-cause mortality in the 14 171 participants in the intention-to-treat population. The median age was 73 years, and the mean CHADS(2) score was 3.5. Over 1.9 years of median follow-up, 1214 (8.6%) patients died. Kaplan-Meier mortality rates were 4.2% at 1 year and 8.9% at 2 years. The majority of classified deaths (1081) were cardiovascular (72%), whereas only 6% were nonhemorrhagic stroke or systemic embolism. No significant difference in all-cause mortality was observed between the rivaroxaban and warfarin arms (P=0.15). Heart failure (hazard ratio 1.51, 95% CI 1.33-1.70, P= 75 years (hazard ratio 1.69, 95% CI 1.51-1.90, P Conclusions-In a large population of patients anticoagulated for nonvalvular atrial fibrillation, approximate to 7 in 10 deaths were cardiovascular, whereasPeer reviewe

Antiinflammatory Therapy with Canakinumab for Atherosclerotic Disease

Background: Experimental and clinical data suggest that reducing inflammation without affecting lipid levels may reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease. Yet, the inflammatory hypothesis of atherothrombosis has remained unproved. Methods: We conducted a randomized, double-blind trial of canakinumab, a therapeutic monoclonal antibody targeting interleukin-1β, involving 10,061 patients with previous myocardial infarction and a high-sensitivity C-reactive protein level of 2 mg or more per liter. The trial compared three doses of canakinumab (50 mg, 150 mg, and 300 mg, administered subcutaneously every 3 months) with placebo. The primary efficacy end point was nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or cardiovascular death. RESULTS: At 48 months, the median reduction from baseline in the high-sensitivity C-reactive protein level was 26 percentage points greater in the group that received the 50-mg dose of canakinumab, 37 percentage points greater in the 150-mg group, and 41 percentage points greater in the 300-mg group than in the placebo group. Canakinumab did not reduce lipid levels from baseline. At a median follow-up of 3.7 years, the incidence rate for the primary end point was 4.50 events per 100 person-years in the placebo group, 4.11 events per 100 person-years in the 50-mg group, 3.86 events per 100 person-years in the 150-mg group, and 3.90 events per 100 person-years in the 300-mg group. The hazard ratios as compared with placebo were as follows: in the 50-mg group, 0.93 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.80 to 1.07; P = 0.30); in the 150-mg group, 0.85 (95% CI, 0.74 to 0.98; P = 0.021); and in the 300-mg group, 0.86 (95% CI, 0.75 to 0.99; P = 0.031). The 150-mg dose, but not the other doses, met the prespecified multiplicity-adjusted threshold for statistical significance for the primary end point and the secondary end point that additionally included hospitalization for unstable angina that led to urgent revascularization (hazard ratio vs. placebo, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.73 to 0.95; P = 0.005). Canakinumab was associated with a higher incidence of fatal infection than was placebo. There was no significant difference in all-cause mortality (hazard ratio for all canakinumab doses vs. placebo, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.06; P = 0.31). Conclusions: Antiinflammatory therapy targeting the interleukin-1β innate immunity pathway with canakinumab at a dose of 150 mg every 3 months led to a significantly lower rate of recurrent cardiovascular events than placebo, independent of lipid-level lowering. (Funded by Novartis; CANTOS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01327846.

What is the Cost of Measuring a Blood Pressure?

Rationale: Blood Pressure measurement has transitioned to the oscillometric method in most hospitals in the United States, however out-patient offices mainly use the auscultatory technique. Objective: To determine time taken to measure blood pressure by an automatic oscillometric device compared to an auscultatory measurement device and to determine what each measurement costs. Methods: Blood Pressures were measured in a single primary care office by medical assistants (MA) for patients seen for office visits. Timed measurements were performed using an automated oscillometric Welch Allyn Connex Vital Signs Monitor (WA) and manually using a Tycos device. A minimum of 400 readings were taken with each method. Results: The average time to manually measure BP was 58.6 seconds, whereas the WA average was 39.8 seconds, 18.8 seconds faster (p&lt;0.05). There was an improvement in measurement time with MA experience with the WA device (p&lt;0.05). The average MA cost to measure a single BP using the manual method was $0.35 vs. the WA method ($0.24) or a savings of $0.11 per measurement. The improvement with experience of WA method reduced cost to$0.17 per measurement. Conclusion: The oscillometric method saved 17cents per measurement potentially saving $1,119 per year for our primary care practice

Rapid oscillometric blood pressure measurement compared to conventional oscillometric measurement Correspondence and requests for reprints to

Background There have been few reports studying the necessary interval between blood pressure measurements, after the initial rest period. Methods Blood pressure was measured in 50 patients ( ) using the conventional oscillometric technique COT ( ) and the rapid oscillometric technique ROT . Results The difference between COT and ROT was y1.1/ y 0.1 mmHg, which was not significantly different ( ) p = 0.8/ 1.0 and the pulse difference was y0.8 beats ( ) per minute p = 0.8 . Conclusions It is concluded that a 15-second interval between blood pressure readings is as accurate as a one-minute interval providing that these measurements are started after a 5-minute rest period

How to use home blood pressure monitors in clinical practice

status: publishe