PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
August 25, 2014American Journal of Hypertension199 citations

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Prevalence of Resistant Hypertension in Treated Hypertensive Populations

View Full Paper
DADmitrij AchelrodUWUlrich WenzelSFSimon Frey

Structured PICO

What is the prevalence of resistant hypertension in treated hypertensive populations?

P
Population
961,035 adult patients from 20 observational studies and 4 RCTs with treated hypertension
O
Outcome
Prevalence of resistant hypertension (RH)

Resistant hypertension is a frequent phenomenon, affecting approximately 13-16% of treated hypertensive populations, though true resistance is often difficult to distinguish from pseudo-resistance.

Limitations

  • Most studies were incapable of ruling out pseudo-resistance caused by white-coat effect, poor medication adherence, and suboptimal dosing

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Although treatment-resistant hypertension (RH) is a serious burden on population health, there exists uncertainty about its prevalence. Hence, the objectives of this work were to systematically review and critically appraise the literature and to conduct a meta-analysis on the prevalence of RH in treated hypertensive populations. METHODS: PubMed, Cochrane Library, CRD York databases, and study bibliographies were systematically searched for observational and interventional studies that report disease frequency in adult populations. The pooled prevalence was obtained through random-effect modeling. Furthermore, quality assessment, publication bias diagnostics, meta-regression, subgroup analysis by sex, and sensitivity analysis were performed. RESULTS: Out of 318 retrieved studies, 20 observational studies and 4 randomized control trials (RCTs) with a total population of 961,035 were included. The random-effect method for observational studies and RCTs yielded RH prevalence ratios of 13.72% (95% confidence interval (CI) = 11.19%-16.24%) and 16.32% (95% CI = 10.68%-21.95%), respectively. Yet, most studies were incapable of ruling out pseudo-resistance caused by white-coat effect, poor medication adherence, and suboptimal dosing. Differences in RH prevalence by sex were negligible. Meta-regression analysis showed that study-level characteristics had no statistically significant influence on RH prevalence. The inclusion of further studies in the sensitivity analysis concurred with the baseline results (13.19%; 95% CI = 10.89%-15.49%). CONCLUSIONS: Researchers should enhance comparability of future empirical evidence through homogeneous methodologies and comparable baseline populations. This meta-analysis concludes that RH is a frequent phenomenon and further harmonization in terms of RH definition and measurement would be necessary to clearly distinguish true treatment resistance from pseudo-resistance.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Achelrod et al. (2014) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a01016b831589f3542dfaa4https://doi.org/10.1093/ajh/hpu151
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper