scholarly journals Prevalence of postural hypotension in primary, community and institutional care: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sinead TJ McDonagh ◽  
Natasha Mejzner ◽  
Christopher E Clark
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Blood Pressure ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Postural Hypotension ◽  
Blood Pressure Measurement ◽  
Institutional Care ◽  
Consensus Definition ◽  
Meta Regression ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Meta Analyses

Abstract Background: Postural hypotension (PH), the reduction in blood pressure when rising from sitting or lying to standing, is a risk factor for falls, cognitive decline and mortality. However, it is not often tested for in primary care. PH prevalence varies according to definition, population, care setting and measurement method. The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of PH across different care settings and disease subgroups. Methods: Systematic review, meta-analyses and meta-regression. We searched Medline and Embase to October 2019 for studies based in primary, community or institutional care settings reporting PH prevalence. Data and study level demographics were extracted independently by two reviewers. Pooled estimates for mean PH prevalence were compared between care settings and disease subgroups using random effects meta-analyses. Predictors of PH were explored using meta-regression. Quality assessment was undertaken using an adapted Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Results: 1816 studies were identified; 61 contributed to analyses. Pooled prevalences for PH using the consensus definition were 17% (95% CI, 14-20%; I2=99%) for community cohorts, 19% (15-25%; I2=98%) for 23 primary care cohorts and 31% (15-50%; I2=0%) for 3 residential care or nursing homes cohorts (P=0.16 between groups). By condition, prevalences were 20% (16-23%; I2=98%) with hypertension (20 cohorts), 21% (16-26%; I2=92%) with diabetes (4 cohorts), 25% (18-33%; I2=88%) with Parkinson’s disease (7 cohorts) and 29% (25-33%; I2=0%) with dementia (3 cohorts), compared to 14% (12-17%; I2=99%) without these conditions (P<0.01 between groups). Multivariable meta-regression modelling identified increasing age and diabetes as predictors of PH (P<0.01, P=0.13, respectively; R2=36%). PH prevalence was not affected by blood pressure measurement device (P=0.65) or sitting or supine resting position (P=0.24), however, when the definition of PH did not fulfil the consensus description, but fell within its parameters, prevalence was underestimated (P=0.01) irrespective of study quality (P=0.04). Conclusions: PH prevalence in populations relevant to primary care is substantial and the definition of PH used is important. Our findings emphasise the importance of considering checking for PH, particularly in vulnerable populations, to enable interventions to manage it. These data should contribute to future guidelines relevant to the detection and treatment of PH. PROSPERO:CRD42017075423.

scholarly journals Prevalence of postural hypotension in primary, community and institutional care: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sinead T. J. McDonagh ◽  
Natasha Mejzner ◽  
Christopher E. Clark
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Blood Pressure ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Postural Hypotension ◽  
Blood Pressure Measurement ◽  
Institutional Care ◽  
Consensus Definition ◽  
Meta Regression ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Meta Analyses

Abstract Background Postural hypotension (PH), the reduction in blood pressure when rising from sitting or lying 0to standing, is a risk factor for falls, cognitive decline and mortality. However, it is not often tested for in primary care. PH prevalence varies according to definition, population, care setting and measurement method. The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of PH across different care settings and disease subgroups. Methods Systematic review, meta-analyses and meta-regression. We searched Medline and Embase to October 2019 for studies based in primary, community or institutional care settings reporting PH prevalence. Data and study level demographics were extracted independently by two reviewers. Pooled estimates for mean PH prevalence were compared between care settings and disease subgroups using random effects meta-analyses. Predictors of PH were explored using meta-regression. Quality assessment was undertaken using an adapted Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Results One thousand eight hundred sixteen studies were identified; 61 contributed to analyses. Pooled prevalences for PH using the consensus definition were 17% (95% CI, 14–20%; I2 = 99%) for 34 community cohorts, 19% (15–25%; I2 = 98%) for 23 primary care cohorts and 31% (15–50%; I2 = 0%) for 3 residential care or nursing homes cohorts (P = 0.16 between groups). By condition, prevalences were 20% (16–23%; I2 = 98%) with hypertension (20 cohorts), 21% (16–26%; I2 = 92%) with diabetes (4 cohorts), 25% (18–33%; I2 = 88%) with Parkinson’s disease (7 cohorts) and 29% (25–33%, I2 = 0%) with dementia (3 cohorts), compared to 14% (12–17%, I2 = 99%) without these conditions (P < 0.01 between groups). Multivariable meta-regression modelling identified increasing age and diabetes as predictors of PH (P < 0.01, P = 0.13, respectively; R2 = 36%). PH prevalence was not affected by blood pressure measurement device (P = 0.65) or sitting or supine resting position (P = 0.24), however, when the definition of PH did not fulfil the consensus description, but fell within its parameters, prevalence was underestimated (P = 0.01) irrespective of study quality (P = 0.04). Conclusions PH prevalence in populations relevant to primary care is substantial and the definition of PH used is important. Our findings emphasise the importance of considering checking for PH, particularly in vulnerable populations, to enable interventions to manage it. These data should contribute to future guidelines relevant to the detection and treatment of PH. PROSPERO:CRD42017075423.

scholarly journals Prevalence of Postural Hypotension in Primary, Community and Institutional Care: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sinead TJ McDonagh ◽  
Natasha Mejzner ◽  
Christopher E Clark
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Blood Pressure ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Postural Hypotension ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Blood Pressure Measurement ◽  
Institutional Care ◽  
Consensus Definition ◽  
Meta Regression ◽  
Meta Analyses

Abstract Background: Postural hypotension (PH), the reduction in blood pressure when rising from sitting or lying to standing, is a risk factor for falls, cognitive decline and mortality. However, it is not often tested for in primary care despite these associated risks. PH prevalence varies according to definition, population, care setting and measurement method. The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of PH across different care settings and disease subgroups.Methods: A systematic review, meta-analyses and meta-regression were undertaken. We searched Medline and Embase to October 2019 for studies based in primary, community or institutional care settings reporting PH prevalence. Data and study level demographics were extracted independently by two reviewers. Pooled estimates for mean prevalence of PH were compared between care settings and disease subgroups using random effects meta-analyses. Predictors of PH were explored using meta-regression. Quality assessment of included studies was undertaken using an adapted version of the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.Results: 1816 studies were identified; 61 contributed to analyses. Pooled prevalences for PH using the consensus definition were 17% (95% CI, 14-20%) in the community, 19% (15-25%) in primary care and 31% (15-50%) in residential care or nursing homes (P=0.16 between groups). By condition, prevalences were 20% (16-24%) with hypertension, 21% (16-26%) with diabetes, 25% (18-33%) with Parkinson’s disease and 29% (25-33%) with dementia, compared to 14% (12-17%) without these conditions (P<0.01 between groups). Multivariable meta-regression modelling identified increasing age and diabetes as predictors of PH (P<0.01, P=0.13, respectively; R2=36%). PH prevalence was not affected by blood pressure measurement device (P=0.65) or sitting or supine resting position (P=0.24), however, when the definition of PH did not fulfil the consensus description, but fell within its parameters, prevalence was underestimated (P=0.01) irrespective of study quality (P=0.04).Conclusions: The prevalence of PH in populations relevant to primary care is substantial. The definition used is important when testing for PH. Our findings emphasise the importance of considering checking for PH, particularly in vulnerable populations, to enable interventions to manage it. These data should contribute to future guidelines relevant to the detection and treatment of postural hypotension.PROSPERO: CRD42017075423.

Lycopene Supplementation and Blood Pressure: Systematic Review and Meta-analyses of Randomized Trials

2021 ◽  
pp. 100521
Author(s):  
Mahnaz Rezaei kelishadi ◽  
Omid Asbaghi ◽  
Behzad Nazarian ◽  
Fatemeh Naeini ◽  
Mojtaba Kaviani ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Blood Pressure ◽  
Randomized Trials ◽  
Meta Analyses

Abstract P052: The Effect of Re-designing Workflow and Introducing Automated Blood Pressure Devices in Community-based Primary Care Clinics

Circulation ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 125 (suppl_10) ◽  
Author(s):  
Romsai T Boonyasai ◽  
Greg P Prokopowicz ◽  
Jeanne Charleston ◽  
Kathryn A Carson ◽  
Gary J Noronha ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Blood Pressure ◽  
Primary Care ◽  
Blood Pressure Measurement ◽  
Clinical Inertia ◽  
Intervention Period ◽  
Post Intervention ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Primary Care Clinics ◽  
Clinic Staff ◽  
Measurement Protocol

BACKGROUND: Prior studies report that poor technique and terminal digit preference (TDP) can distort blood pressure (BP) estimates in clinical settings. These limitations may bias population BP estimates, increase clinician workload, and contribute to clinical inertia. HYPOTHESIS: We hypothesized that BP measurement training with an automated blood pressure measurement (aBPM) device would reduce TDP, reduce the number of times clinicians repeat staff-obtained measurements, and reduce average BP estimates within each site. METHODS: We replaced aneroid BP measurement devices in 6 community-based primary care clinics with aBPM devices (Omron HEM-907XL) and trained clinic staff with a standardized BP measurement protocol using 1 hour presentations and follow-up visits. We report mean weekly BP measured in the 8 weeks pre- and 4 weeks post-intervention at the first intervention site. Results are analyzed using chi-squared and paired t-tests. RESULTS: Clinic staff recorded 5796 BP readings in the 8 week pre-intervention period and 2321 readings in the 4 weeks post-intervention period. TDP and clinician workload improved after the intervention. Pre-intervention, 1941 of 4833 (40.2%) of systolic BP and 2199 of 4833 (45.5%) of diastolic BP ended in zero, in contrast to 216 of 2158 (10.0%) of systolic and 219 of 2158 (10.2%) of diastolic readings post-intervention (P<.001 for both SBP and DBP). Clinicians repeated BP obtained by staff in 963 of 5796 (16.6%) of visits pre-intervention but only in 163 of 2321 (7.0%) of visits post-intervention (P<.001). TDP persisted when clinicians repeated staff-obtained BP readings post-intervention: 58 of 163 (35.6%) systolic and 65 of 163 (35.7%) diastolic BP ended in zero (P=.32 for SBP and P=.35 for DBP in comparison with pre-intervention BP readings). Overall, BP estimates changed modestly following the intervention. Post-intervention, mean systolic BP rose 1.4 mmHg (P=.004) and diastolic BP declined 3.1 mmHg (P<.001). Among clinician-repeated BP readings, systolic BP rose 2.4 mmHg (P=.12 for pre/post change) and diastolic BP declined 0.4 mmHg (P=.72 for pre/post change). CONCLUSIONS: A standardized BP measurement protocol used with an aBPM device in community-based primary care settings can reduce TDP and clinician workload but is associated with only modest change in population BP estimates.

scholarly journals An analysis of blood pressure screening of 21 112 participants in Armenia: May Measurement Month 2018

2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (Supplement_H) ◽  
pp. H14-H16
Author(s):  
Parounak Zelveian ◽  
Avag Avagyan ◽  
Arsen Minasyan ◽  
Samvel Hayrumyan ◽  
Svetlana Gourgenyan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Blood Pressure ◽  
Blood Pressure Measurement ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Disability Adjusted Life ◽  
Life Years ◽  
Public Areas ◽  
Temporary Solution ◽  
Global Initiative ◽  
Definition Of

Abstract Elevated blood pressure (BP) is a growing burden worldwide and is the leading cause of mortality and disability-adjusted life years all over the world. May Measurement Month (MMM) is a global initiative aimed to raise awareness of high BP and to act as a temporary solution to the lack of screening programmes worldwide. An opportunistic cross-sectional survey of volunteers aged ≥18 was carried out in May to July 2018. Blood pressure measurement, the definition of hypertension (HTN) and statistical analysis followed the standard MMM protocol. The study was conducted in public areas (17 sites in Yerevan and 22 in regions), both indoor and outdoor, as well as in 78 primary care centres. A total of 21 112 individuals were screened during MMM18, of which 20 732 had three BP measurements available. The mean age of screened individuals was 46.2 ± 17.3 years, 57.8% were female. At the time of screening, 26.1% were on antihypertensive medication. After imputation, the percentage of participants with HTN was 38.7%, and 76.7% of them were aware of their high BP. Of participants receiving treatment, 47.1% had a controlled BP. MMM18 was the largest BP screening campaign undertaken in Armenia. We found that the proportion of HTN is substantial in Armenia, which may be a vital contributor to the growing burden of non-communicable diseases. Our results also suggest that untreated HTN is common and when treated still not adequately controlled in Armenia. The current situation, with an insufficient control rate of HTN, must be changed as soon as possible.

scholarly journals May Measurement Month 2018: an analysis of blood pressure screening results from Ecuador

2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (Supplement_H) ◽  
pp. H53-H55
Author(s):  
Ernesto Peñaherrera ◽  
Thomas Beaney ◽  
Anca Chis Ster ◽  
Neil R Poulter ◽  
Jose Villalba ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Blood Pressure ◽  
Antihypertensive Medication ◽  
Blood Pressure Measurement ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Raising Awareness ◽  
Health Centres ◽  
Temporary Solution ◽  
Global Initiative ◽  
Definition Of

Abstract Elevated blood pressure (BP) is a growing burden worldwide, leading to over 10 million deaths each year. May Measurement Month (MMM) is a global initiative by the International Society of Hypertension (ISH) aimed at raising awareness of high BP and to act as a temporary solution to the lack of screening programmes worldwide. An opportunistic cross-sectional survey of volunteers aged ≥18 was carried out in May 2018. A volunteer cross-sectional survey was carried out in May 2017 across 33 health centres. Blood pressure measurement, the definition of hypertension (HTN) (mean of the 2nd and 3rd BP measurement ≥ 140/90 mmHg or who were medicated for high BP), and statistical analysis followed the standard MMM protocol. In total, 11 922 individuals (53.7% female) were screened during MMM18. After multiple imputation, 4563 (38.3%) had HTN. Of individuals not receiving antihypertensive medication, 1302 (15.0%) were hypertensive. Of individuals receiving antihypertensive medication, 933 (28.6%) had uncontrolled BP. MMM18 was the largest BP screening campaign done in Ecuador. Hypertension was detected in 38.4% of those screened and almost 4 out of 10 were either not on treatment or were not controlled to the BP goal. These results suggest that appropriate screening can help to identify a significant number of people with high BP. These data should attract the attention of doctors and health care system in Ecuador.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document