Abstract
Objectives
Hypertension is common among patients with dyslipidemia but is often poorly treated. The objective of this analysis was to evaluate how a decision aid, used by primary care physicians to improve lipid therapy, impacted on the treatment of hypertension.
Study Design
Data were analyzed from patients enrolled in a randomized trial focusing primarily on the treatment of dyslipidemia. Patients received usual care or a coronary risk profile every three months to monitor the risk reduction following lifestyle changes and/or pharmacotherapy to treat dyslipidemia. Hypertension management was assessed based on a post hoc analysis of individuals whose blood pressure exceeded current national hypertension guidelines.
Results
There were 2,631 subjects who completed the study. Among 1,352 patients without diagnosed hypertension, 30% were above target on at least three consecutive visits. Among 1,279 individuals with known hypertension, 69% were above target on at least two consecutive visits. Overall, patients receiving risk profiles were more likely to receive appropriate antihypertensive therapy (OR = 1.40, 95% CI 1.11 – 1.78) compared to those receiving usual care. After adjustment for inter-physician variability and potential confounders, the use of the risk profile was associated with an increased likelihood of starting therapy (OR = 1.78, 95% CI 1.06 – 3.00) or modifying therapy (OR = 1.40, 95% CI 1.03 – 1.91).
Conclusions
In this clinical trial of dyslipidemia management, inadequately controlled hypertension was common, occurring in nearly 50% of individuals. Ongoing coronary risk assessment was associated with more appropriate blood pressure management. Cardiovascular risk assessment decision aids should be further evaluated in a randomized trial of hypertension therapy.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
De Backer G, Ambrosioni E, Borch-Johnsen K, et al. European guidelines on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice: Third Joint Task Force of European and other Societies on Cardiovascular Disease Prevention in Clinical Practice (constituted by representatives of eight societies and by invited experts). Eur Heart J. 2003;24:1601–10.
Chobanian AV, Bakris GL, Black HR, et al. The Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure. JAMA. 2003;289:2560–72.
Ramsay L, Williams B, Johnston G, MacGregor L, Potter J, Poulter N. Guidelines for management of hypertension: report of the third working party of the British Hypertension Society. J Hum Hypertens. 1999;13:569–92.
Khan NA, McAlister FA, Campbell NRC, et al. The 2004 Canadian recommendations for the management of hypertension: Part II - Therapy. Can J Cardiol. 2004;20:41–54.
New Zealand Guidelines Group (NZGG). Assessment and management of cardiovascular risk. New Zealand Guidelines Group. 2003.
Wolf-Maier K, Cooper RS, Kramer H, et al. Hypertension treatment and control in five European countries, Canada, and the United States. Hypertension. 2004;43:10–7.
Berlowitz DR, Ash AS, Hickey EC, et al. Inadequate management of blood pressure in a hypertensive population. N Engl J Med. 1998;339:1957–63.
Hyman DJ, Pavlik VN. Characteristics of patients with uncontrolled hypertension in the United States. N Engl J Med. 2001;1345:479–86.
Majumdar SR, Soumerai SB. Why most interventions to improve physician prescribing do not seem to work (commentary). CMAJ. 2003;169:30–1.
Majumdar SR, McAlister FA, Furberg CD. From knowledge to practice in chronic cardiovascular disease: A long and winding road. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004;43:1738–42.
Sabaté E. Adherence to long-term therapies. Evidence for action. ISBN 92 4 154599 2, 1–199. 2003. Switzerland, World Health Organization.
McManus RJ, Mant J, Roalfe A, et al. Targets and self monitoring in hypertension: randomised controlled trial and cost effectiveness analysis. Br Med J. 2005;331:466–7.
Mosca L, Linfante AH, Benjamin EJ, Berra K, Hayes SN, Walsh BW, et al. National study of physician awareness and adherence to cardiovascular disease and prevention guidelines. Circulation. 2005;111:499–510.
Pearson TA, Blair SN, Daniels SR, et al. AHA Guidelines for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease and stroke: 2002 update. Consensus Panel Guide to Comprehensive Risk Reduction for Adult Patients without Coronary or Other Atherosclerotic Vascular Diseases. Circulation. 2002;106:388–91.
Grover SA, Lowensteyn I, Joseph L, et al. Patient knowledge of coronary risk profile improves the effectiveness of dyslipidemia therapy: The CHECK-UP Study: A randomized controlled trial. Arch Intern Med. 2007;167:2296–303.
Fodor JG, Frohlich JJ, Genest Jr, McPherson PR, for the Working Group on Hypercholesterolemia and Other Dyslipidemia. Recommendations for the management and treatment of dyslipidemia. CMAJ.. 2000;162:1441–7.
Grover SA, Abrahamowicz M, Joseph L, Brewer C, Coupal L, Suissa S. The benefits of treating hyperlipidemia to prevent coronary heart disease: Estimating changes in life expectancy and morbidity. JAMA. 1992;267:816–22.
Grover SA, Paquet S, Levinton C, Coupal L, Zowall H. Estimating the benefits of modifying risk factors of cardiovascular disease. A comparison of primary vs. secondary prevention. Arch Intern Med. 1998;158:655–62.
Grover SA, Lowensteyn I, Esrey K, Steinert Y, Joseph L, Abrahamowicz M. How accurately do Canadian physicians assess the coronary risk of their patients? The preliminary results of the Coronary Health Assessment Study (CHAS). BMJ. 1995;310:975–8.
MacLean DR, Petrasovits A, Nargundkar M, et al. Canadian heart health surveys: a profile of cardiovascular risk. Survey methods and data analysis. CMAJ. 1992;146:1969–74.
Lee KJ, Thompson SG. Clustering by health professional in individually randomised trials. BMJ. 2005;330:142–4.
Sullivan LM, Dukes KA, Losina E. Tutorial in biostatistics. An introduction to hierarchical linear modelling. Stat Med. 1999;18:855–88.
Hall LML, Jung RT, Leese GP. Controlled trial of effect of documented cardiovascular risk scores on prescribing. BMJ. 2003;326:251–2.
Parkes G, Greenhalgh T, Griffin M, Dent R. Effect on smoking quit rate of telling patients their lung age: the Step2quit randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 2008 [Epub ahead of print].
Walsh JM, McDonald KM, Shojania KG, et al. Quality improvement strategies for hypertension management: a systematic review. Med Care. 2006;44:646–57.
Tu K, Davis D. Can we alter physician behavior by educational methods? Lessons learned from studies of the management and follow-up of hypertension. J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2002;22:11–22.
Hetlevik I, Holmen J, Kruger O. Implementing clinical guidelines in the treatment of hypertension in general practice. Evaluation of patient outcome related to implementation of a computer-based clinical decision support system. Scand J Prim Health Care. 1999;17:35–40.
Montgomery AA, Fahey T, Peters TJ, MacIntosh C, Sharp DJ. Evaluation of computer based clinical decision support system and risk chart for management of hypertension in primary care: randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 2000;320:686–90.
Logan AG, Milne BJ, Achber C, Campbell WP, Haynes RB. Work-site treatment of hypertension by specially trained nurses. A controlled trial. Lancet. 1979;2:1175–8.
Osterberg L, Blaschke T. Adherence to medication. N Engl J Med. 2005;353:487–97.
Lowensteyn I, Joseph L, Levinton C, Abrahamowicz M, Steinert Y, Grover SA. Can Computerized Risk Profiles Help Patients Improve Their Coronary Risk? The Results of The Coronary Health Assessment Study (CHAS). Prev Med. 1998;27:730–7.
Acknowledgements
The study was funded by Pfizer Canada. The study design was conceived by the principal investigator and the protocol was reviewed and modified by an independent steering committee (see appendices). The sponsor participated in discussions regarding study design and protocol development and provided logistical support during the trial. The investigators were responsible for data collection, data analysis, and preparation of the manuscript independently of the funding source. The sponsor was permitted to review the manuscript but all final decisions regarding content remained the responsibility of the principal investigator.
Conflict of Interests
Dr. Steven Grover, Dr. Ilka Lowensteyn, Mr. Mohammed Kaouache, Mr. Louis Coupal, and Ms. Sylvie Marchand have received research grants from Pfizer, Sanofii Aventis, and AstraZeneca. Dr. Grover has received speaker honoraria from Pfizer, Sanofi Aventis, and Orynx. As well, Dr. Grover has either been a consultant or participated on an advisory board for AstraZeneca, Sanofi Aventis, Pfizer and Merck. Dr. Ghislain Boudreau has ownership interests and is a full-time employee within the medical division of Pfizer Canada Inc. Dr. Lawrence Joseph has no conflict of interest.
The risk profiles in the manuscript are used by Clinemetrica Inc. for screening events and the McGill Cardiovascular Health Improvement Program for patient care.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
The study was funded by Pfizer Canada. The study design was conceived by the principal investigator and the protocol was reviewed and modified by an independent steering committee (see appendices). The sponsor participated in discussions regarding study design and protocol development and provided logistical support during the trial. The investigators were responsible for data collection, data analysis, and preparation of the manuscript independently of the funding source. The sponsor was permitted to review the manuscript, but all final decisions regarding content remained the responsibility of the principal investigator. Dr. Grover, Dr. Lowensteyn, Mr. Kaouache, Mr. Coupal, and Ms. Marchand have received research grants from Pfizer, Sanofii Aventis, and AstraZeneca. Dr. Grover has received speaker honoraria from Pfizer, Sanofi Aventis, and Orynx. In addition, Dr. Grover has either been a consultant or participated on an advisory board for AstraZeneca, Sanofi Aventis, Pfizer and Merck.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Grover, S.A., Lowensteyn, I., Joseph, L. et al. Discussing Coronary Risk with Patients to Improve Blood Pressure Treatment: Secondary Results from the CHECK-UP Study. J GEN INTERN MED 24, 33–39 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-008-0825-4
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-008-0825-4