OBJECTIVE: To determine whether social support affects blood pressure control in patients diagnosed with essential Hypertension. DESIGN: Observational, prospective study, with a year's follow-up. SERRING: Mariñamansa-A Cuña Health Centre, Ourense (Galicia), Spain. PARTICIPANTS: 236 patients diagnosed with essential hypertension in health centre controls. MEASUREMENTS: During the one-year follow-up the following clinical variables were measured: age, sex, blood pressure, severity of hypertension, tobacco consumption, alcohol consumption, presence of diabetes mellitus, hypercholesterolaemia, Body Mass Index and compliance with treatment. Social and family variables were: marital status, cultural level, economic and social status, type of family, stressful vital events and social support. RESULTS: Mean age was 63.51 (62.05-64.96); 66.1% were women. Predominant kind of family was nuclear (64.3%). 30.2% had low social network (0-1 social contacts). We found 22% poor functional social support. Social support remained stable throughout the study. Hypertense patients with poor social networks had, after control for possible confusing variables, their systolic pressure 9.59 mm Hg (2.6716,51) and diastolic pressure 4.29 mm Hg (0.448.15) higher than hypertense patients with broader social networks. CONCLUSION: Hypertense patients with a poor social network had higher blood pressure figures than hypertense patients with wider social networks.
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether social support affects blood pressure control in patients diagnosed with essential Hypertension. DESIGN: Observational, prospective study, with a year's follow-up. SERRING: Mariñamansa-A Cuña Health Centre, Ourense (Galicia), Spain. PARTICIPANTS: 236 patients diagnosed with essential hypertension in health centre controls. MEASUREMENTS: During the one-year follow-up the following clinical variables were measured: age, sex, blood pressure, severity of hypertension, tobacco consumption, alcohol consumption, presence of diabetes mellitus, hypercholesterolaemia, Body Mass Index and compliance with treatment. Social and family variables were: marital status, cultural level, economic and social status, type of family, stressful vital events and social support. RESULTS: Mean age was 63.51 (62.05-64.96); 66.1% were women. Predominant kind of family was nuclear (64.3%). 30.2% had low social network (0-1 social contacts). We found 22% poor functional social support. Social support remained stable throughout the study. Hypertensepatients with poor social networks had, after control for possible confusing variables, their systolic pressure 9.59 mm Hg (2.6716,51) and diastolic pressure 4.29 mm Hg (0.448.15) higher than hypertensepatients with broader social networks. CONCLUSION:Hypertensepatients with a poor social network had higher blood pressure figures than hypertensepatients with wider social networks.
Authors: C Menéndez-Villalva; M T Gamarra-Mondelo; A Alonso-Fachado; A Naveira-Castelo; A Montes-Martínez Journal: J Hum Hypertens Date: 2014-12-11 Impact factor: 3.012
Authors: Patricia Ortiz; Yajaira Vásquez; Esperanza Arévalo; Patrick Van der Stuyft; Esteban Londoño Agudelo Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-05-11 Impact factor: 4.614