4.5 Article

Patient knowledge of blood pressure target is associated with improved blood pressure control in chronic kidney disease

Journal

PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING
Volume 88, Issue 2, Pages 184-188

Publisher

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2012.02.015

Keywords

Kidney disease; Patient knowledge; Blood pressure

Funding

  1. NIH, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases [T32 DK007569, K23 DK080952-2S1, K24 DK062849]
  2. American Kidney Fund, Clinical Scientist in Nephrology Fellowship Grant

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To describe patient hypertension knowledge and associations with blood pressure measurements. Methods: Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) were asked about the impact of high blood pressure on kidneys and their 'target blood pressure goal. Systolic blood pressure was measured using automated sphygmomanometers. Results: In 338 adults with hypertension and pre-dialysis CKD, the median [IQR] age was 59 [47,68] years, 45% [n = 152] were women, and 18% [n = 62] were non-white. Lower systolic blood pressure (SBP) was associated with female sex (SBP mmHg median [IQR] 132 [117,149] women vs. 137 [124,152] men; p = 0.04), less advanced CKD (SBP 134 [122,147] stages 1-2 vs. 132 [118,148] stage 3 vs. 140 [125.156] stages 4-5; p = 0.01), and patient ability to correctly identify SBP goal (SBP 134 [119,150] correct vs. 141 [125,154] incorrect; p = 0.05). In adjusted analysis, knowledge of blood, pressure goal remained independently associated with lower SBP (-9.96 mmHg [-19.97, -1.95] in correct respondents vs. incorrect; p < 0.001). Conclusion: Patient knowledge of goal blood pressure is independently associated with improved blood pressure control. Practice implications: Interventions to improve patient knowledge of specific blood pressure targets may have an important role in optimizing blood pressure management. (C) 2012 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available