Michelle C Odden1, Carmen A Peralta2, Dan R Berlowitz3, Karen C Johnson4, Jeffrey Whittle5, Dalane W Kitzman6, Srinivasan Beddhu7, John W Nord7, Vasilios Papademetriou8, Jeff D Williamson9, Nicholas M Pajewski10. 1. School of Biological and Population Health Sciences, Oregon State University, Corvallis. 2. Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco. 3. Bedford Veterans Affairs Hospital, Bedford, Massachusetts4School of Public Health, Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts. 4. Department of Preventive Medicine, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis. 5. Department of Medicine, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee7Primary Care Division, Clement J. Zablocki Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Milwaukee, Wisconsin. 6. Section on Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina. 7. Veterans Affairs Salt Lake City Healthcare System, Salt Lake City, Utah10Department of Medicine, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City. 8. Georgetown University, Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Washington, DC. 9. Section on Geriatric Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina. 10. Division of Public Health Sciences, Department of Biostatistical Sciences, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina.
Abstract
Importance: Intensive blood pressure (BP) control confers a benefit on cardiovascular morbidity and mortality; whether it affects physical function outcomes is unknown. Objective: To examine the effect of intensive BP control on changes in gait speed and mobility status. Design, Setting, and Participants: This randomized, clinical trial included 2636 individuals 75 years or older with hypertension and no history of type 2 diabetes or stroke who participated in the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT). Data were collected from November 8, 2010, to December 1, 2015. Analysis was based on intention to treat. Interventions: Participants were randomized to intensive treatment with a systolic BP target of less than 120 mmHg (n = 1317) vs standard treatment with a BP target of less than 140 mm Hg (n = 1319). Main Outcomes and Measures: Gait speed was measured using a 4-m walk test. Self-reported information concerning mobility was obtained from items on the Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey and the EQ-5D. Mobility limitation was defined as a gait speed less than 0.6 meters per second (m/s) or self-reported limitations in walking and climbing stairs. Results: Among the 2629 participants in whom mobility status could be defined (996 women [37.9%]; 1633 men [62.1%]; mean [SD] age, 79.9 [4.0] years), median (interquartile range) follow-up was 3 (2-3) years. No difference in mean gait speed decline was noted between the intensive- and standard-treatment groups (mean difference, 0.0004 m/s per year; 95% CI, -0.005 to 0.005; P = .88). No evidence of any treatment group differences in subgroups defined by age, sex, race or ethnicity, baseline systolic BP, chronic kidney disease, or a history of cardiovascular disease were found. A modest interaction was found for the Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey Physical Component Summary score, although the effect did not reach statistical significance in either subgroup, with mean differences of 0.004 (95% CI, -0.002 to 0.010) m/s per year among those with scores of at least 40 and -0.008 (95% CI, -0.016 to 0.001) m/s per year among those with scores less than 40 (P = .03 for interaction). Multistate models allowing for the competing risk of death demonstrated no effect of intensive treatment on transitions to mobility limitation (hazard ratio, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.92-1.22). Conclusions and Relevance: Among adults 75 years or older in SPRINT, treating to a systolic BP target of less than 120 mm Hg compared with a target of less than 140 mm Hg had no effect on changes in gait speed and was not associated with changes in mobility limitation. Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01206062.
RCT Entities:
Importance: Intensive blood pressure (BP) control confers a benefit on cardiovascular morbidity and mortality; whether it affects physical function outcomes is unknown. Objective: To examine the effect of intensive BP control on changes in gait speed and mobility status. Design, Setting, and Participants: This randomized, clinical trial included 2636 individuals 75 years or older with hypertension and no history of type 2 diabetes or stroke who participated in the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT). Data were collected from November 8, 2010, to December 1, 2015. Analysis was based on intention to treat. Interventions: Participants were randomized to intensive treatment with a systolic BP target of less than 120 mm Hg (n = 1317) vs standard treatment with a BP target of less than 140 mm Hg (n = 1319). Main Outcomes and Measures: Gait speed was measured using a 4-m walk test. Self-reported information concerning mobility was obtained from items on the Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey and the EQ-5D. Mobility limitation was defined as a gait speed less than 0.6 meters per second (m/s) or self-reported limitations in walking and climbing stairs. Results: Among the 2629 participants in whom mobility status could be defined (996 women [37.9%]; 1633 men [62.1%]; mean [SD] age, 79.9 [4.0] years), median (interquartile range) follow-up was 3 (2-3) years. No difference in mean gait speed decline was noted between the intensive- and standard-treatment groups (mean difference, 0.0004 m/s per year; 95% CI, -0.005 to 0.005; P = .88). No evidence of any treatment group differences in subgroups defined by age, sex, race or ethnicity, baseline systolic BP, chronic kidney disease, or a history of cardiovascular disease were found. A modest interaction was found for the Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey Physical Component Summary score, although the effect did not reach statistical significance in either subgroup, with mean differences of 0.004 (95% CI, -0.002 to 0.010) m/s per year among those with scores of at least 40 and -0.008 (95% CI, -0.016 to 0.001) m/s per year among those with scores less than 40 (P = .03 for interaction). Multistate models allowing for the competing risk of death demonstrated no effect of intensive treatment on transitions to mobility limitation (hazard ratio, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.92-1.22). Conclusions and Relevance: Among adults 75 years or older in SPRINT, treating to a systolic BP target of less than 120 mm Hg compared with a target of less than 140 mm Hg had no effect on changes in gait speed and was not associated with changes in mobility limitation. Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01206062.
Authors: M Di Bari; M Pahor; L V Franse; R I Shorr; J Y Wan; L Ferrucci; G W Somes; W B Applegate Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2001-01-01 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: Joan Vermeulen; Jacques C L Neyens; Erik van Rossum; Marieke D Spreeuwenberg; Luc P de Witte Journal: BMC Geriatr Date: 2011-07-01 Impact factor: 3.921
Authors: Nicholas M Pajewski; Jeff D Williamson; William B Applegate; Dan R Berlowitz; Linda P Bolin; Glenn M Chertow; Marie A Krousel-Wood; Nieves Lopez-Barrera; James R Powell; Christianne L Roumie; Carolyn Still; Kaycee M Sink; Rocky Tang; Clinton B Wright; Mark A Supiano Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2016-01-11 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Behnam Sabayan; Anna M Oleksik; Andrea B Maier; Mark A van Buchem; Rosalinde K E Poortvliet; Wouter de Ruijter; Jacobijn Gussekloo; Anton J M de Craen; Rudi G J Westendorp Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2012-11-05 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Adam P Bress; Rikki M Tanner; Rachel Hess; Lisandro D Colantonio; Daichi Shimbo; Paul Muntner Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2015-11-09 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: M Packer; M R Bristow; J N Cohn; W S Colucci; M B Fowler; E M Gilbert; N H Shusterman Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1996-05-23 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Taylor J Krivanek; Seth A Gale; Brittany M McFeeley; Casey M Nicastri; Kirk R Daffner Journal: J Alzheimers Dis Date: 2021 Impact factor: 4.472
Authors: Simin Mahinrad; Shawn Kurian; Chaney R Garner; Sanaz Sedaghat; Alexander J Nemeth; Nicola Moscufo; James P Higgins; David R Jacobs; Jeffrey M Hausdorff; Donald M Lloyd-Jones; Farzaneh A Sorond Journal: Circulation Date: 2019-11-21 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: William B White; Dorothy B Wakefield; Nicola Moscufo; Charles R G Guttmann; Richard F Kaplan; Richard W Bohannon; Douglas Fellows; Charles B Hall; Leslie Wolfson Journal: Circulation Date: 2019-10-14 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Daniel T Lackland; Robert M Carey; Adriana B Conforto; Clive Rosendorff; Paul K Whelton; Philip B Gorelick Journal: Stroke Date: 2018-02-21 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Cristiano S Gomes; Catherine M Pirkle; Juliana F S Barbosa; Afshin Vafaei; Saionara M A Câmara; Ricardo O Guerra Journal: J Cross Cult Gerontol Date: 2018-12