O41 CLINICAL INERTIA IN PATIENTS WITH RESISTANT HYPERTENSION CONTROLLED BY AMBULATORY BLOOD PRESSURE MEASUREMENTS

Background and objective: Uncontrolled hypertension, especially among high cardiovascular risk patients like those with resistant hypertension (r-HTN), remains a significant public health concern. Clinical inertia, the failure to initiate or intensify therapy, is a major contributor to uncontrolled hypertension, including in r-HTN patients. We aimed to assess the prevalence of clinical inertia and its associated characteristics in r-HTN patients. Methods: A retrospective analysis of consecutive Ambulatory Blood Pressure Measurements (ABPM) in patients between August 2016 and August 2023 in a Cordoba, Argentina tertiary center was performed. r-HTN was defined by ABPM when optimal or best-tolerated doses of three drugs failed to control blood pressure (BP) or the patient received four or more drugs regardless of BP control. Therapeutic inertia was diagnosed when uncontrolled BP persisted without pharmacological changes in the subsequent visit to the ABPM. Failure to exclude secondary causes of hypertension constituted diagnostic inertia. Results: 168 patients were included; mean age 66 years (Range 33-87), 55% females. r-HTN prevalence was 31.5% (53/168). Overall uncontrolled BP was 61.9% (104/168), with r-HTN patients exhibiting higher rates (75% vs 55.7%; p=0.014) of uncontrolled BP. Therapeutic inertia was 28.6% (48/168), being more frequent in r-HTN patients (41.5% vs 22.6%; p=0.012). Patients with therapeutic inertia had a greater number of comorbidities (1.2 ± 1.0 vs. 0.7 ± 1.0; p=0.003), diabetes (52% vs. 33%; p=0.024), more anti-hypertensive drugs (3.4 ± 0.6 vs. 3.2 ± 0.7; p=0.039), and higher BP values during ABPM. In a multiple regression model, only SBP24 independently predicted therapeutic inertia (p<0.01). Diagnostic inertia was 86.3% (145/168), lower in r-HTN patients (75.5% vs 91.3%; p=0.006). Patients with diagnostic inertia had lower BMI (30.0 ± 4.7 vs 31.2 ± 9.8; p=0.043), coronary artery disease (10% vs 26%; p=0.034), and fewer anti-HTN drugs (3.2 ± 0.6 vs 3.7 ± 0.9; p=0.002). Conclusion: Clinical inertia in resistant hypertension patients is highly prevalent, emphasizing the necessity of improving inertia to enhance blood pressure control and patient outcomes. Table 2. - Clinical variables associated with the diagnosis of therapeutical inertia.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Hypertension
Published
2024-09-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1097/01.hjh.0001062628.02358.a1
Primary Topic
Blood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

O41 CLINICAL INERTIA IN PATIENTS WITH RESISTANT HYPERTENSION CONTROLLED BY AMBULATORY BLOOD PRESSURE MEASUREMENTS

Teresita Cornavaca, Francisco Bernabeu, Matias Zanuzzi, César A. Romero
Journal of Hypertension
Blood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
article

O41 CLINICAL INERTIA IN PATIENTS WITH RESISTANT HYPERTENSION CONTROLLED BY AMBULATORY BLOOD PRESSURE MEASUREMENTS

Teresita Cornavaca, Francisco Bernabeu, Matias Zanuzzi, César A. Romero
article en

Abstract

Background and objective: Uncontrolled hypertension, especially among high cardiovascular risk patients like those with resistant hypertension (r-HTN), remains a significant public health concern. Clinical inertia, the failure to initiate or intensify therapy, is a major contributor to uncontrolled hypertension, including in r-HTN patients. We aimed to assess the prevalence of clinical inertia and its associated characteristics in r-HTN patients. Methods: A retrospective analysis of consecutive Ambulatory Blood Pressure Measurements (ABPM) in patients between August 2016 and August 2023 in a Cordoba, Argentina tertiary center was performed. r-HTN was defined by ABPM when optimal or best-tolerated doses of three drugs failed to control blood pressure (BP) or the patient received four or more drugs regardless of BP control. Therapeutic inertia was diagnosed when uncontrolled BP persisted without pharmacological changes in the subsequent visit to the ABPM. Failure to exclude secondary causes of hypertension constituted diagnostic inertia. Results: 168 patients were included; mean age 66 years (Range 33-87), 55% females. r-HTN prevalence was 31.5% (53/168). Overall uncontrolled BP was 61.9% (104/168), with r-HTN patients exhibiting higher rates (75% vs 55.7%; p=0.014) of uncontrolled BP. Therapeutic inertia was 28.6% (48/168), being more frequent in r-HTN patients (41.5% vs 22.6%; p=0.012). Patients with therapeutic inertia had a greater number of comorbidities (1.2 ± 1.0 vs. 0.7 ± 1.0; p=0.003), diabetes (52% vs. 33%; p=0.024), more anti-hypertensive drugs (3.4 ± 0.6 vs. 3.2 ± 0.7; p=0.039), and higher BP values during ABPM. In a multiple regression model, only SBP24 independently predicted therapeutic inertia (p<0.01). Diagnostic inertia was 86.3% (145/168), lower in r-HTN patients (75.5% vs 91.3%; p=0.006). Patients with diagnostic inertia had lower BMI (30.0 ± 4.7 vs 31.2 ± 9.8; p=0.043), coronary artery disease (10% vs 26%; p=0.034), and fewer anti-HTN drugs (3.2 ± 0.6 vs 3.7 ± 0.9; p=0.002). Conclusion: Clinical inertia in resistant hypertension patients is highly prevalent, emphasizing the necessity of improving inertia to enhance blood pressure control and patient outcomes. Table 2. - Clinical variables associated with the diagnosis of therapeutical inertia.

Journal of HypertensionVol. 42(Suppl 3)
Emory University (US), Hospital Privado (AR)
Openalex Percentile: Top 72%
Blood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.