Mangiavillano Xavier1, Tréfond Jéromine1,2, Plaquevent-Hostache Guillaume3, Tanguy Gilles1,2, Bœuf-Gibot Sylvaine1,2, Mulliez Aurélien4, Vorilhon Philippe5,6,7. 1. Department of General Medicine, UFR Medicine, Clermont Auvergne University, 28, place Henri Dunant, 63000, Clermont-Ferrand, France. 2. Université Clermont Auvergne, Unité de recherche ACCePPT, Clermont-Ferrand, France. 3. Cardio-Pneumology Medical Clinic, 63830, Durtol, France. 4. Clinical Research and Innovation Delegation, Clermont-Ferrand University Hospital, 58 Rue Montalembert, 63003, Clermont-Ferrand, France. 5. Department of General Medicine, UFR Medicine, Clermont Auvergne University, 28, place Henri Dunant, 63000, Clermont-Ferrand, France. pvorilhon2@wanadoo.fr. 6. Université Clermont Auvergne, Unité de recherche ACCePPT, Clermont-Ferrand, France. pvorilhon2@wanadoo.fr. 7. Clinical Research and Innovation Delegation, Clermont-Ferrand University Hospital, 58 Rue Montalembert, 63003, Clermont-Ferrand, France. pvorilhon2@wanadoo.fr.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Home blood-pressure measurement (HBPM) is recommended for the diagnosis of hypertension and monitoring of patients with hypertension. Since 2013, the French National Health Insurance Body (FNHIB) has promoted HBPM to general practitioners (GPs). The objective of the study was to evaluate the practice of HBPM by French GPs to diagnose and monitor hypertension, 3 years after the beginning of the FNHIB campaign. METHODS: We conducted a postal survey from 7 March to 31 May 2016. All of the 1040 GPs practising in the Auvergne region in France were invited to participate, using a self-reporting questionnaire. We obtained information on the characteristics of the GPs, and their practice regarding the use of HBPM. Use of HBPM was reported as "never, occasionally, regularly and systematically". Frequency of HBMP use was analysed using multivariate ordered logistic regression model. RESULTS: A total of 569 (54.7%) GPs responded to the survey. They were 50.3 (± 11.5) years old, 241 (43.0%) were female, and 352 (62.7%) worked in urban areas. Among them, 530 (94.5%) reported the use of HBPM for diagnosis and 519 (92.5%) for monitoring hypertension. To diagnose hypertension, younger GPs (OR = 0.97; 95% CI: 0.95-0.98), GPs practising in a group (OR = 1.45; 95% CI: 1.00-2.10) and in an MHC (OR = 2.09; 95% CI: 1.15-3.78), as compared to GPs with individual practices, and Clinical Tutors, as compared to non-Clinical Tutors, (OR = 1.92; 95% CI: 1.33-2.79) reported more frequent use of HBPM. To manage hypertension, female GPs, as compared to male GPs, (OR=1.47; 95% CI: 1.04-2.06), younger GPs (OR = 0.98; 95% CI: 0.97-0.99), and Clinical Tutors (OR = 1.90; 95% CI: 1.31-2.75) reported more frequent use of HBPM. CONCLUSIONS: Our survey reveals that 3 years after the introduction of the FNHIB incentives, the use of HBPM by participating GPs to diagnose and manage hypertension is well established. A larger survey of GPs from other regions would make it possible to verify whether our results can be extrapolated to France as a whole.
BACKGROUND: Home blood-pressure measurement (HBPM) is recommended for the diagnosis of hypertension and monitoring of patients with hypertension. Since 2013, the French National Health Insurance Body (FNHIB) has promoted HBPM to general practitioners (GPs). The objective of the study was to evaluate the practice of HBPM by French GPs to diagnose and monitor hypertension, 3 years after the beginning of the FNHIB campaign. METHODS: We conducted a postal survey from 7 March to 31 May 2016. All of the 1040 GPs practising in the Auvergne region in France were invited to participate, using a self-reporting questionnaire. We obtained information on the characteristics of the GPs, and their practice regarding the use of HBPM. Use of HBPM was reported as "never, occasionally, regularly and systematically". Frequency of HBMP use was analysed using multivariate ordered logistic regression model. RESULTS: A total of 569 (54.7%) GPs responded to the survey. They were 50.3 (± 11.5) years old, 241 (43.0%) were female, and 352 (62.7%) worked in urban areas. Among them, 530 (94.5%) reported the use of HBPM for diagnosis and 519 (92.5%) for monitoring hypertension. To diagnose hypertension, younger GPs (OR = 0.97; 95% CI: 0.95-0.98), GPs practising in a group (OR = 1.45; 95% CI: 1.00-2.10) and in an MHC (OR = 2.09; 95% CI: 1.15-3.78), as compared to GPs with individual practices, and Clinical Tutors, as compared to non-Clinical Tutors, (OR = 1.92; 95% CI: 1.33-2.79) reported more frequent use of HBPM. To manage hypertension, female GPs, as compared to male GPs, (OR=1.47; 95% CI: 1.04-2.06), younger GPs (OR = 0.98; 95% CI: 0.97-0.99), and Clinical Tutors (OR = 1.90; 95% CI: 1.31-2.75) reported more frequent use of HBPM. CONCLUSIONS: Our survey reveals that 3 years after the introduction of the FNHIB incentives, the use of HBPM by participating GPs to diagnose and manage hypertension is well established. A larger survey of GPs from other regions would make it possible to verify whether our results can be extrapolated to France as a whole.
Entities:
Keywords:
Arterial hypertension; Blood pressure; Cross-sectional survey; General practitioners; Guidelines; Home blood pressure measurement
Authors: András Tislér; Andrea Dunai; András Keszei; Bertalan Fekete; Taha El Hadj Othmane; Péter Torzsa; Alexander G Logan Journal: J Hypertens Date: 2006-09 Impact factor: 4.844
Authors: Janusz Kaczorowski; Martin G Myers; Mark Gelfer; Martin Dawes; Eric J Mang; Angelique Berg; Claudio Del Grande; Dragan Kljujic Journal: Can Fam Physician Date: 2017-03 Impact factor: 3.275
Authors: Enrique Martín-Rioboó; Luis A Pérula de Torres; José R Banegas; José M Lobos-Bejarano; Carlos Brotons Cuixart; Emilio I García Criado; Pilar Martin-Carrillo; María Martín-Rabadán Muro; M Isabel Egocheaga Cabello; Antoni Maiques Galán Journal: J Hypertens Date: 2018-05 Impact factor: 4.844