4.3 Article

The importance of frequent return visits and hypertension control among US young adults: a multidisciplinary group practice observational study

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL HYPERTENSION
卷 19, 期 12, 页码 1288-1297

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/jch.13096

关键词

clinical management of high blood pressure; hypertension-general; primary care issues

资金

  1. Clinical and Translational Science Award program
  2. National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) [UL1TR000427]
  3. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute of the NIH [K23HL112907]
  4. National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases of the NIH [K23AR062381]
  5. UW Health Innovation Program
  6. University of Wisconsin (UW) School of Medicine and Public Health from The Wisconsin Partnership Program

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Young adults (aged 18 to 39years) have the lowest hypertension control rates compared with older adults. Shorter follow-up encounter intervals are associated with faster hypertension control rates in older adults; however, optimal intervals are unknown for young adults. The study objective was to evaluate the relationship between ambulatory blood pressure encounter intervals (average number of provider visits with blood pressures over time) and hypertension control rates among young adults with incident hypertension. A retrospective analysis was conducted of patients aged 18 to 39 years (n = 2990) with incident hypertension using Kaplan-Meier survival and Cox proportional hazards analyses over 24months. Shorter encounter intervals were associated with higher hypertension control: <1month (91%), 1 to 2 months (76%), 2 to 3 months (65%), 3 to 6 months (40%), and >6months (13%). Young adults with shorter encounter intervals also had lower medication initiation, supporting the effectiveness of lifestyle modifications. Sustainable interventions for timely young adult follow-up are essential to improve hypertension control in this hard-to-reach population.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据