| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
From the Division of Cardiology, Ullevaal University Hospital, Oslo,
Norway (S.E.K.); the Department of Clinical Pharmacology, Sahlgrenska
University Hospital, Gothenburg (T.H.); and Clinical Hypertension Research,
University of Uppsala, Uppsala (L.H.), Sweden; the Division of Hypertension,
University of Michigan Medical Center (Ann Arbor) (K.J., S.J.); Mayo Clinic,
Jacksonville, Fla (W.E.H.); the Division of Cardiology, University of Texas
Health Science Center at San Antonio (M.Z.); and the Division of Renal
Diseases and Hypertension, University of Texas Health Science Center at
Houston (A.R.B, S.N.R.).
Correspondence to Sverre E. Kjeldsen, MD, PhD, Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Ullevaal Hospital, N-0407 Oslo, Norway. E-mail sverrekj{at}ulrik.uio.no
AbstractThe Hypertension Optimal
Treatment Study is a prospective trial conducted in 26 countries. The
aims are to (1) evaluate the relationship between three levels of
target office diastolic blood pressure (BP) (
© 1998 American Heart Association, Inc.
Scientific Contributions
Hypertension Optimal Treatment (HOT) Study
Home Blood Pressure in Treated Hypertensive Subjects
80,
85, or
90 mm Hg) and cardiovascular morbidity and
mortality in hypertensive patients and (2) examine the effects on
cardiovascular morbidity and mortality of 75 mg aspirin
daily versus placebo. A total of 19 193 patients between 50 and 80
years of age had been randomized by the end of April 1994. Treatment
was initiated with felodipine 5 mg daily, and additional therapy was
given in accordance with a set protocol. The present substudy of
926 patients performed in nine countries aimed to (1) compare home with
office BP in a representative subsample of the HOT
population after the titration of treatment was completed and (2)
clarify whether the separation into the target groups could be expanded
into the out-of-office setting. The differences between office and home
measurements in diastolic BP of 0.2 mm Hg (SD, 9;
95% confidence interval, -0.36 to 0.81; P=.40) and
systolic BP of 0.5 mm Hg (SD, 15; 95% confidence
interval, -0.53 to 1.46; P=.21) were not significant.
The group differences in home BP were 1.9 mm Hg (
80 versus
85) and 1.2 mm Hg (
85 versus
90) for diastolic
BP (F=11.69; ANOVA, P<.0001) and 2.6 and 2.1
mm Hg for systolic BP (F=8.44, P=.0002). Thus,
office and home BPs measured with the same semiautomatic device are
comparable in treated hypertensive subjects in the HOT Study, and the
separation into the target groups based on office readings prevails
at home.
Key Words: antihypertensive agents blood pressure monitoring cardiovascular diseases clinical trials hypertension, white coat
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
E. Lurbe and J. Redon Assessing ambulatory blood pressure in renal diseases: facts and concerns Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., November 1, 1999; 14(11): 2564 - 2568. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
|
Hypertension Home | Subscriptions | Archives | Feedback | Authors | Help | AHA Journals Home | Search Copyright © 1998 American Heart Association, Inc. All rights reserved. Unauthorized use prohibited. |