Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 May 1;28(5):e157-e162.
doi: 10.37765/ajmc.2022.89146.

Evaluating alternative methods of comparing antihypertensive treatment intensity

Affiliations

Evaluating alternative methods of comparing antihypertensive treatment intensity

Carole E Aubert et al. Am J Manag Care. .

Abstract

Objectives: To change blood pressure treatment, clinicians can modify medication count or dose. However, existing studies have measured count modification, which may miss clinically important dose change in the absence of count change. This research demonstrates how dose modification captures more information about management than medication count alone.

Study design: Retrospective cohort study.

Methods: We included patients 65 years and older with established primary care at the Veterans Health Administration (July 2011-June 2013). We captured medication count and standardized dose change over 90 to 120 days using a validated pharmacy fill algorithm. We determined frequency of dose change without count change (and vice versa), no change in either, change in same direction ("concordant"), and change in opposite direction ("discordant"). We compared change according to systolic blood pressure (SBP) and compared concordance using a minimum threshold definition of dose change of at least 50% (instead of any change) of baseline dose modification.

Results: Among 440,801 patients, 64.2% had dose change; 22.0%, count change; 35.6%, no change in either; 42.4%, dose change without count modification; and 0.2%, count change without dose modification. Discordance occurred in 2.1% of observations. Using the minimum threshold definition of change, 68.7% had no change in either dose or count. Treatment was more frequently changed at SBP greater than 140 mm Hg.

Conclusions: Measuring change in antihypertensive treatment using medication count frequently missed an isolated dose change in treatment modification and less often misclassified regimen modifications where there was no modification in total dose. In future research, measuring dose modification using our new algorithm would capture change in hypertension treatment intensity more precisely than current methods.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

DECLARATIONS

Conflict of interest: The authors declare that they do not have a conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Proportions of changes for each possible combination of dose and medication count modification, according to intensity of dose change to define treatment modification, visit intervals (N=440,801 patients for 90–120 days, and N=499,207 patients for 365–395 days), and baseline SBP. The figure displays the proportions of change for each possible combination of dose change (or no change) and medication count change (or no change). No change was defined as no change in either medication dose or count. A concordant change was defined as a dose and medication count change in the same direction. A discordant change was defined as a dose increase with medication count reduction, or a dose decrease with medication count increase. “Dose change only” refers to a dose change without any medication count modification. “Medication count change only” refers to a medication count change without dose modification (or with dose modification <25% or <50% of baseline dose for the second and third columns of the first panel). Abbreviations: N, number; SBP, systolic blood pressure.

References

    1. Onder G, van der Cammen TJ, Petrovic M, Somers A, Rajkumar C. Strategies to reduce the risk of iatrogenic illness in complex older adults. Age Ageing. 2013;42(3):284–291. - PubMed
    1. Gueyffier F, Bulpitt C, Boissel JP, et al. Antihypertensive drugs in very old people: a subgroup meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. INDANA Group. Lancet. 1999;353(9155):793–796. - PubMed
    1. Staessen JA, Gasowski J, Wang JG, et al. Risks of untreated and treated isolated systolic hypertension in the elderly: meta-analysis of outcome trials. Lancet. 2000;355(9207):865–872. - PubMed
    1. Sprint Research Group Wright JT Jr., Williamson JD, et al. A Randomized Trial of Intensive versus Standard Blood-Pressure Control. The New England journal of medicine. 2015;373(22):2103–2116. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Beckett NS, Peters R, Fletcher AE, et al. Treatment of hypertension in patients 80 years of age or older. N Engl J Med. 2008;358(18):1887–1898. - PubMed

Publication types

Substances