Guidelines for hypertension: are quality-assurance measures on target?

Abstract

Guideline committees recommend targets of treatment based on trial data on efficacy and effectiveness. Quality-assurance initiatives apply these parameters in the general practice setting. Therefore, targets must be feasible and achievable by the practicing physicians who are judged by these targets as goals for care. We evaluated 437 patients in the Rush University Hypertension Clinic using the Health Employer Data Information Set (HEDIS) measures for 2000 to assess goal achievement in a practice-based setting. We compared guideline achievement of uncomplicated hypertensive and diabetic subjects to standards dictated by HEDIS, the 6th Joint National Committee on the Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure (JNC VI), and the American Diabetic Association (ADA)/National Kidney Foundation (NKF). Overall, 276 (63%) patients achieved SBP goal, with 376 (86%) achieving DBP goal and 358 (59%) achieving both goals. However, in the 20% of patients who were diabetic, only 52% had a BP of <140 mm Hg and <90 mm Hg, whereas only 22% achieved the more stringent goals of JNC VI of <130 mm Hg systolic and <85 mm Hg diastolic and only 15% achieved the ADA/NKF goals of <130 mm Hg systolic and <80 mm Hg diastolic. Although goal was achievable in most uncomplicated hypertension, hypertension in diabetes was more difficult to control, despite being more likely to receive enhanced benefit from effective management. Goal-oriented strategy, especially in diabetic subjects, should be aggressively sought rather than relaxing goals to promote achievement.