This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 51/5/1275    most recent HYPERTENSIONAHA.107.107086v1 Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Google Scholar Articles by Ma, J. Articles by Stafford, R. S. PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Ma, J. Articles by Stafford, R. S. Pubmed/NCBI databases Medline Plus Health Information High Blood Pressure Related Collections Compliance/Adherence Primary prevention Secondary prevention

(Hypertension. 2008;51:1275.)
© 2008 American Heart Association, Inc.

Original Articles

Screening, Treatment, and Control of Hypertension in US Private Physician Offices, 2003–2004

From the Palo Alto Medical Foundation Research Institute (J.M.), Palo Alto, Calif; and the Program on Prevention Outcomes and Practices (R.S.S.), Stanford Prevention Research Center, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, Calif.

Correspondence to Jun Ma, Palo Alto Medical Foundation Research Institute, 795 El Camino Real (Ames Building), Stanford, CA 94301. E-mail maj{at}pamfri.org

Essential hypertension is the most common diagnosis in US primary care settings for middle-aged persons and seniors. Yet, data on hypertension screening, treatment, and control in such settings are limited. We analyzed National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey data to examine the rates of and factors associated with hypertension screening, treatment, and control during US office visits in 2003 and 2004. Blood pressure was measured in 56% (95% confidence limits: 52% to 59%) of all visits by patients 18 years of age and in 93% (95% confidence limits: 89% to 96%) of hypertensive patient visits. Among the latter, 62% (95% confidence limits: 55% to 69%) were treated. Diuretics were the most commonly prescribed antihypertensive agents (46%; 95% confidence limits: 41% to 50%), and combination therapy was reported in 58% (95% confidence limits: 54% to 63%) of treated visits. Only 39% (95% confidence limits: 34% to 43%) of treated visits were at recommended blood pressure goals. The odds of not being screened for hypertension were notably greater for visits with a provider other than a primary care physician or cardiologist (10.0; 95% confidence limits: 5.5 to 16.7) and for nonwell care visits (5.6; 95% confidence limits: 3.6 to 8.3). Greater odds of not being treated for hypertension were noted by geographic region (South versus Northeast: 2.6; 95% confidence limits: 1.2 to 5.6) and visit type (first time versus return visits; 1.6; 95% confidence limits: 1.1 to 2.4). The odds of not having blood pressure controlled were greater for patients with comorbidities (1.6; 95% confidence limits: 1.1 to 2.4). In conclusion, more intervention efforts are needed to further reduce the gaps and variations in routine practice in relation to evidence-based practice guidelines for hypertension screening, treatment, and control.

Key Words: hypertension screening • hypertension diagnosis • hypertension treatment • hypertension control • guideline adherence • NAMCS

This article has been cited by other articles:

				D. E. Wesson Is the Ethnic Disparity in CKD a Symptom of Dysfunctional Primary Care in the US? J. Am. Soc. Nephrol., July 1, 2008; 19(7): 1249 - 1251. [Full Text] [PDF]