4.3 Article

Current status and characteristics of hypertension treatment by primary physicians in Korea: Data from Korean epidemiology study on hypertension (KEY study)

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF HYPERTENSION
Volume 21, Issue 8, Pages 884-889

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1038/ajh.2008.191

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

BACKGROUND This study was designed to investigate the characteristics, control rate, and factors affecting BP control in hypertensive patients treated by primary physicians in Korea. METHODS The study was a multicenter, nationwide, cross-sectional, population-based survey conducted to identify the current status of hypertension treatment in Korean patients. A direct mail survey was sent to a random sample of 800 primary-care clinics across the nation. A total of 529 physicians in 510 clinics agreed to participate in this study (63.8%). Among the recruited 13,452 patients, 13,184 were included in the analysis. RESULTS BP was controlled in 6,723 patients (51.0%). However, the control rate was lower in patients with diabetes (21.6%) or chronic kidney disease (CKD) (19.9%). Furthermore, the mean systolic and diastolic BP levels were higher in patients with diabetes and/or CKD. The mean BP level was higher in patients undergoing combination therapy than those undergoing single-drug therapy. Male gender, cardiovascular comorbidities, long duration of hypertension, and unhealthy lifestyle were associated with poor control of hypertension. In multivariate analysis, diabetes (odds ratio: 5.57; 95% confidence interval: 5.05-6.13) and CKD (odds ratio: 3.40; 95% confidence interval: 2.54-4.54) were the most significant independent factors related to poor BP control. CONCLUSION BP control is still largely unsatisfactory, especially in patients with diabetes and kidney disease, who could benefit the most from effective BP control. The reasons for poor BP control and high BP levels in those patients need to be investigated to improve BP control in Korea.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available