Necessity of a systematic annual consultation in primary care to better improve detection and control of hypertension?

IF 2.1 4区 医学 Q3 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS Acta cardiologica Pub Date : 2024-10-08 DOI:10.1080/00015385.2024.2413222
F Le Bas, M Massenet, X Humbert
{"title":"Necessity of a systematic annual consultation in primary care to better improve detection and control of hypertension?","authors":"F Le Bas, M Massenet, X Humbert","doi":"10.1080/00015385.2024.2413222","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In 2015, more than 11 million patients treated for arterial hypertension in France. According to several studies in the general population, about 50% of hypertensive subjects are treated and about 20% are treated and controlled. There is very few data in general medicine. Our work has studied how hypertension control may have differed in general medicine.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A cross-sectional observational study was carried out in a rural health centre (Domfront, Normandy, France) on subjects aged 40 to 65 years in 2018. A subject was considered to be hypertensive if his blood pressure (taken in the office in routine care) was greater than 140/90 or if it was treated with antihypertensive drugs.</p><p><strong>Outcomes: </strong>Of 1,925 subjects, there were 54.3% women, aged 54.6 ± 7.1 years. The mean blood pressure was 127 ± 13/76 ± 8 mmHg, 60.6% (682/1,127) were overweight and 5.0% (96/1,925) were diabetic. 646 (33.6%) were hypertensive and 410 hypertensive (63.5%) were treated. 39.0% (252/646) were treated and controlled.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>In general medicine, blood pressure control seems to be better than in the general population, whereas the general practitioner is often the first contact with the healthcare system. Poor blood pressure control in the general population can be explained by the lack of general medicine consultation for untreated hypertensive subjects. A systematic annual consultation in general practice could be proposed for this specific population.</p>","PeriodicalId":6979,"journal":{"name":"Acta cardiologica","volume":" ","pages":"1-3"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta cardiologica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00015385.2024.2413222","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: In 2015, more than 11 million patients treated for arterial hypertension in France. According to several studies in the general population, about 50% of hypertensive subjects are treated and about 20% are treated and controlled. There is very few data in general medicine. Our work has studied how hypertension control may have differed in general medicine.

Methods: A cross-sectional observational study was carried out in a rural health centre (Domfront, Normandy, France) on subjects aged 40 to 65 years in 2018. A subject was considered to be hypertensive if his blood pressure (taken in the office in routine care) was greater than 140/90 or if it was treated with antihypertensive drugs.

Outcomes: Of 1,925 subjects, there were 54.3% women, aged 54.6 ± 7.1 years. The mean blood pressure was 127 ± 13/76 ± 8 mmHg, 60.6% (682/1,127) were overweight and 5.0% (96/1,925) were diabetic. 646 (33.6%) were hypertensive and 410 hypertensive (63.5%) were treated. 39.0% (252/646) were treated and controlled.

Discussion: In general medicine, blood pressure control seems to be better than in the general population, whereas the general practitioner is often the first contact with the healthcare system. Poor blood pressure control in the general population can be explained by the lack of general medicine consultation for untreated hypertensive subjects. A systematic annual consultation in general practice could be proposed for this specific population.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
是否有必要在初级保健中开展系统的年度咨询,以更好地发现和控制高血压?
背景:2015 年,法国有 1100 多万名动脉高血压患者接受了治疗。根据多项针对普通人群的研究,约50%的高血压患者接受了治疗,约20%的患者接受了治疗并得到控制。全科医学方面的数据很少。我们的工作是研究高血压控制在普通医学中的不同情况:我们在一家农村医疗中心(法国诺曼底多姆芳德)开展了一项横断面观察研究,研究对象为 2018 年年龄在 40 岁至 65 岁之间的患者。如果受试者的血压(在诊室进行常规测量)高于140/90,或接受过降压药物治疗,则被视为高血压:在 1,925 名受试者中,54.3% 为女性,年龄为 54.6 ± 7.1 岁。平均血压为 127 ± 13/76 ± 8 mmHg,60.6%(682/1127)超重,5.0%(96/1925)患有糖尿病。646人(33.6%)患有高血压,410人(63.5%)接受过治疗。39.0%(252/646)的高血压得到了治疗和控制:讨论:在全科医学中,血压控制似乎比普通人群要好,而全科医生往往是与医疗保健系统接触的第一人。普通人群血压控制不佳的原因可能是普通内科缺乏对未经治疗的高血压患者的咨询。针对这一特殊人群,可以建议全科医生每年进行一次系统的咨询。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Acta cardiologica
Acta cardiologica 医学-心血管系统
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
12.50%
发文量
115
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Acta Cardiologica is an international journal. It publishes bi-monthly original, peer-reviewed articles on all aspects of cardiovascular disease including observational studies, clinical trials, experimental investigations with clear clinical relevance and tutorials.
期刊最新文献
The association between peak tricuspid regurgitation velocity and 1-year heart failure readmission in hospitalised patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. Left ventricular myocardial deformation in patients on maintenance haemodialysis. Accessory mitral valve tissue causing left ventricular outflow obstruction. Multimodality imaging for the diagnosis of right atrial capillary haemangioma. Association between the triglyceride-glucose index and the severity of coronary artery disease in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and coronary artery disease: a retrospective study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1