Miriam Veenhuizen1, Oliver Todd2, Atul Anand3,4, Will Whiteley5. 1. Edinburgh Medical School, University of Edinburgh, UK. 2. Academic Unit for Ageing and Stroke Research, University of Leeds, UK. 3. BHF/University Centre for Cardiovascular Science, University of Edinburgh, UK. 4. Edinburgh Delirium Research Group, Department of Geriatric Medicine, University of Edinburgh, UK. 5. Centre for Brain Sciences, University of Edinburgh, UK.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: At all ages, randomised trials demonstrate lower mortality and cardiovascular disease incidence with blood pressure (BP) lowering. However, this may not generalise to older people with frailty. We aimed to determine the acceptability to clinicians of key aspects of trial designs using different BP targets and strategies to better manage hypertension in the context of frailty. METHODS: We conducted a multinational survey of clinicians managing hypertension in older people, distributed using an online survey link amongst professional societies and social networks. Questions described case histories of patients who were frail with different systolic blood pressures (SBP), treatment target, strategy and target trial population. RESULTS: In total, 114 responses were received (48 primary care, 66 secondary care). A majority would consider recruiting patients to a trial of relaxing treatment in those whose SBP < 130 mm Hg; a majority would consider recruiting to a trial intensifying treatment in patients with SBP > 150 mm Hg. Respondents elected to intensify treatment by: choosing the next step by NICE guidelines, adding a new treatment agent at full dose, or adding two agents at half dose. CONCLUSION: A majority of clinicians surveyed would recruit older people to a trial intensifying treatment where SBP is more than 150 mm Hg and where patients have high cardiovascular risk or to a trial relaxing treatment where the SBP is below 130 mm Hg and where the patient has frailty.
INTRODUCTION: At all ages, randomised trials demonstrate lower mortality and cardiovascular disease incidence with blood pressure (BP) lowering. However, this may not generalise to older people with frailty. We aimed to determine the acceptability to clinicians of key aspects of trial designs using different BP targets and strategies to better manage hypertension in the context of frailty. METHODS: We conducted a multinational survey of clinicians managing hypertension in older people, distributed using an online survey link amongst professional societies and social networks. Questions described case histories of patients who were frail with different systolic blood pressures (SBP), treatment target, strategy and target trial population. RESULTS: In total, 114 responses were received (48 primary care, 66 secondary care). A majority would consider recruiting patients to a trial of relaxing treatment in those whose SBP < 130 mm Hg; a majority would consider recruiting to a trial intensifying treatment in patients with SBP > 150 mm Hg. Respondents elected to intensify treatment by: choosing the next step by NICE guidelines, adding a new treatment agent at full dose, or adding two agents at half dose. CONCLUSION: A majority of clinicians surveyed would recruit older people to a trial intensifying treatment where SBP is more than 150 mm Hg and where patients have high cardiovascular risk or to a trial relaxing treatment where the SBP is below 130 mm Hg and where the patient has frailty.
Authors: Bryan Williams; Giuseppe Mancia; Wilko Spiering; Enrico Agabiti Rosei; Michel Azizi; Michel Burnier; Denis L Clement; Antonio Coca; Giovanni de Simone; Anna Dominiczak; Thomas Kahan; Felix Mahfoud; Josep Redon; Luis Ruilope; Alberto Zanchetti; Mary Kerins; Sverre E Kjeldsen; Reinhold Kreutz; Stephane Laurent; Gregory Y H Lip; Richard McManus; Krzysztof Narkiewicz; Frank Ruschitzka; Roland E Schmieder; Evgeny Shlyakhto; Costas Tsioufis; Victor Aboyans; Ileana Desormais Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2018-09-01 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Paul K Whelton; Robert M Carey; Wilbert S Aronow; Donald E Casey; Karen J Collins; Cheryl Dennison Himmelfarb; Sondra M DePalma; Samuel Gidding; Kenneth A Jamerson; Daniel W Jones; Eric J MacLaughlin; Paul Muntner; Bruce Ovbiagele; Sidney C Smith; Crystal C Spencer; Randall S Stafford; Sandra J Taler; Randal J Thomas; Kim A Williams; Jeff D Williamson; Jackson T Wright Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2017-11-13 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Amir Qaseem; Timothy J Wilt; Robert Rich; Linda L Humphrey; Jennifer Frost; Mary Ann Forciea; Nick Fitterman; Michael J Barry; Carrie A Horwitch; Alfonso Iorio; Robert M McLean Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2017-01-17 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Dena Ettehad; Connor A Emdin; Amit Kiran; Simon G Anderson; Thomas Callender; Jonathan Emberson; John Chalmers; Anthony Rodgers; Kazem Rahimi Journal: Lancet Date: 2015-12-24 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Nigel S Beckett; Ruth Peters; Astrid E Fletcher; Jan A Staessen; Lisheng Liu; Dan Dumitrascu; Vassil Stoyanovsky; Riitta L Antikainen; Yuri Nikitin; Craig Anderson; Alli Belhani; Françoise Forette; Chakravarthi Rajkumar; Lutgarde Thijs; Winston Banya; Christopher J Bulpitt Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2008-03-31 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: James P Sheppard; Jenni Burt; Mark Lown; Eleanor Temple; Rebecca Lowe; Rosalyn Fraser; Julie Allen; Gary A Ford; Carl Heneghan; F D Richard Hobbs; Sue Jowett; Shahela Kodabuckus; Paul Little; Jonathan Mant; Jill Mollison; Rupert A Payne; Marney Williams; Ly-Mee Yu; Richard J McManus Journal: JAMA Date: 2020-05-26 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Eleni Rapsomaniki; Adam Timmis; Julie George; Mar Pujades-Rodriguez; Anoop D Shah; Spiros Denaxas; Ian R White; Mark J Caulfield; John E Deanfield; Liam Smeeth; Bryan Williams; Aroon Hingorani; Harry Hemingway Journal: Lancet Date: 2014-05-31 Impact factor: 79.321