Literature DB >> 3306204

Epidemiologic considerations in defining hypertension.

E J Roccella, A E Bowler, M Horan.   

Abstract

Definitions of hypertension have historically been based on at least one of three concepts. The first approach identifies thresholds of hypertension based on the frequency of occurrence in the population. The statistical approach designates a point in the distribution (e.g., the 95th percentile), as the threshold for hypertension. This distribution method identifies different limits for hypertension depending on the age, sex, and race, of the population, all of which affect the average pressure. Although distribution curves do not by themselves identify thresholds for intervention, they are useful for examining changes in population groups over time. The second approach to defining hypertension relates pressures to the risk of morbidity and mortality and is characterized by a continuously graded curve with no clear categorical thresholds. Studies correlating both diastolic and systolic pressures with cardiovascular complications demonstrate continuous risks from lowest to highest values for both sexes, all ages, and both blacks and whites in the United States. The blood pressure-risk relationship provides a compelling rationale for treatment but does not by itself define thresholds for the initiation of therapy. The third approach uses data from clinical intervention trials to identify thresholds where the benefits of therapy outweigh the costs and side effects of long-term treatment. Although results of large randomized trials have clearly demonstrated reductions in morbidity and mortality by lowering blood pressures, consensus on the lowest threshold within the mild range for which antihypertensive drug treatment is recommended has not been reached. Because an optimal definition of hypertension must encompass all three approaches and the resultant classification scheme must be sufficient for all purposes, attempts to refine and improve upon the presently recommended thresholds will undoubtedly continue.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1987        PMID: 3306204     DOI: 10.1016/s0025-7125(16)30808-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Clin North Am        ISSN: 0025-7125            Impact factor:   5.456


  8 in total

1.  Measurement and interpretation of blood pressure.

Authors:  C D Goonasekera; M J Dillon
Journal:  Arch Dis Child       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 3.791

2.  Essential hypertension: when and how to initiate treatment.

Authors:  R W Swanson; R Spooner
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  1989-09       Impact factor: 3.275

3.  Detection of hypertension.

Authors:  J C Demanet
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  1988       Impact factor: 9.546

4.  Diagnosis of hypertension.

Authors:  E D Cooke; C E Fleming; J Brown; P Turner; S J Wooding
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  1993-01       Impact factor: 5.386

5.  Comparison of lisinopril and nitrendipine on the pulsatility index in mild essential arterial hypertension.

Authors:  D Duprez; M De Buyzere; F Brusselmans; A Maas; D L Clement
Journal:  Cardiovasc Drugs Ther       Date:  1992-08       Impact factor: 3.727

6.  Bidirectional regulation of Na+,K(+)-ATPase activity by dopamine and an alpha-adrenergic agonist.

Authors:  F Ibarra; A Aperia; L B Svensson; A C Eklöf; P Greengard
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  1993-01-01       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 7.  Significant effects of mild endogenous hormonal changes in humans: considerations for low-dose testing.

Authors:  F Brucker-Davis; K Thayer; T Colborn
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 9.031

8.  Characterizing the Neutrophilic Inflammation in Chronic Rhinosinusitis With Nasal Polyps.

Authors:  Jian-Wen Ruan; Jie-Fang Zhao; Xue-Li Li; Bo Liao; Li Pan; Ke-Zhang Zhu; Qi-Miao Feng; Jin-Xin Liu; Zi-E Yu; Jia Song; Hai Wang; Zheng Liu
Journal:  Front Cell Dev Biol       Date:  2021-12-17
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.