Cy W Fixen1, Joseph J Saseen2, Joseph P Vande Griend2, Sunny A Linnebur3. 1. Department of Clinical Pharmacy, University of Colorado Skaggs School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Aurora, CO, USA. 2. Department of Clinical Pharmacy, University of Colorado Skaggs School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences and Department of Family Medicine, School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, USA. 3. University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Skaggs School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, 12850 E. Montview Blvd, Mailstop C238, Aurora, CO 80045, USA sunny.linnebur@ucdenver.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: In late 2013, the Joint National Committee (JNC 8) published hypertension treatment recommendations endorsing a goal blood pressure (BP) of < 150/90 mmHg starting at age 60 years. This was in contrast to other cardiovascular groups recommending age 80 years for this BP goal. This study examined mean BP in patients from age 60 years to 79 years with hypertension before and after publication of the JNC 8 recommendations. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study examined mean BP and number of antihypertensives for a period of 1 year before and after the release of the JNC 8 report. Patients aged 60-79 years with hypertension receiving care at a University of Colorado Hospital primary care clinic were included. Patients with diabetes, chronic kidney disease, or kidney transplant were excluded. A total of 150 BP measurements were included in each of the before and after time frames. The primary outcomes were change in mean BP and number of antihypertensives. RESULTS: A total of 171 patients met the criteria and were included in the study. Most had BPs in both the before and after time frames. Mean BP values were similar in the before and after groups (130.2/75.9 mmHg versus 131.5/76.6, respectively; p = 0.27/p = 0.46). Mean number of antihypertensives were similar in the before and after groups (1.95 versus 1.93, respectively; p = 0.79). CONCLUSIONS: Over 1 year at an academic health system, new recommendations from the JNC 8 did not affect mean BP or number of antihypertensives in older patients with hypertension. A similar investigation after more time or in patients with newly diagnosed hypertension may help determine the full impact.
OBJECTIVES: In late 2013, the Joint National Committee (JNC 8) published hypertension treatment recommendations endorsing a goal blood pressure (BP) of < 150/90 mmHg starting at age 60 years. This was in contrast to other cardiovascular groups recommending age 80 years for this BP goal. This study examined mean BP in patients from age 60 years to 79 years with hypertension before and after publication of the JNC 8 recommendations. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study examined mean BP and number of antihypertensives for a period of 1 year before and after the release of the JNC 8 report. Patients aged 60-79 years with hypertension receiving care at a University of Colorado Hospital primary care clinic were included. Patients with diabetes, chronic kidney disease, or kidney transplant were excluded. A total of 150 BP measurements were included in each of the before and after time frames. The primary outcomes were change in mean BP and number of antihypertensives. RESULTS: A total of 171 patients met the criteria and were included in the study. Most had BPs in both the before and after time frames. Mean BP values were similar in the before and after groups (130.2/75.9 mmHg versus 131.5/76.6, respectively; p = 0.27/p = 0.46). Mean number of antihypertensives were similar in the before and after groups (1.95 versus 1.93, respectively; p = 0.79). CONCLUSIONS: Over 1 year at an academic health system, new recommendations from the JNC 8 did not affect mean BP or number of antihypertensives in older patients with hypertension. A similar investigation after more time or in patients with newly diagnosed hypertension may help determine the full impact.
Authors: Walter T Ambrosius; Kaycee M Sink; Capri G Foy; Dan R Berlowitz; Alfred K Cheung; William C Cushman; Lawrence J Fine; David C Goff; Karen C Johnson; Anthony A Killeen; Cora E Lewis; Suzanne Oparil; David M Reboussin; Michael V Rocco; Joni K Snyder; Jeff D Williamson; Jackson T Wright; Paul K Whelton Journal: Clin Trials Date: 2014-06-05 Impact factor: 2.486
Authors: J A Staessen; R Fagard; L Thijs; H Celis; G G Arabidze; W H Birkenhäger; C J Bulpitt; P W de Leeuw; C T Dollery; A E Fletcher; F Forette; G Leonetti; C Nachev; E T O'Brien; J Rosenfeld; J L Rodicio; J Tuomilehto; A Zanchetti Journal: Lancet Date: 1997-09-13 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Daniel G Hackam; Robert R Quinn; Pietro Ravani; Doreen M Rabi; Kaberi Dasgupta; Stella S Daskalopoulou; Nadia A Khan; Robert J Herman; Simon L Bacon; Lyne Cloutier; Martin Dawes; Simon W Rabkin; Richard E Gilbert; Marcel Ruzicka; Donald W McKay; Tavis S Campbell; Steven Grover; George Honos; Ernesto L Schiffrin; Peter Bolli; Thomas W Wilson; Ross D Feldman; Patrice Lindsay; Michael D Hill; Mark Gelfer; Kevin D Burns; Michel Vallée; G V Ramesh Prasad; Marcel Lebel; Donna McLean; J Malcolm O Arnold; Gordon W Moe; Jonathan G Howlett; Jean-Martin Boulanger; Pierre Larochelle; Lawrence A Leiter; Charlotte Jones; Richard I Ogilvie; Vincent Woo; Janusz Kaczorowski; Luc Trudeau; Robert J Petrella; Alain Milot; James A Stone; Denis Drouin; Kim L Lavoie; Maxime Lamarre-Cliche; Marshall Godwin; Guy Tremblay; Pavel Hamet; George Fodor; S George Carruthers; George B Pylypchuk; Ellen Burgess; Richard Lewanczuk; George K Dresser; S Brian Penner; Robert A Hegele; Philip A McFarlane; Mukul Sharma; Debra J Reid; Sheldon W Tobe; Luc Poirier; Raj S Padwal Journal: Can J Cardiol Date: 2013-03-29 Impact factor: 5.223
Authors: Stevo Julius; Sverre E Kjeldsen; Michael Weber; Hans R Brunner; Steffan Ekman; Lennart Hansson; Tsushung Hua; John Laragh; Gordon T McInnes; Lada Mitchell; Francis Plat; Anthony Schork; Beverly Smith; Alberto Zanchetti Journal: Lancet Date: 2004-06-19 Impact factor: 79.321