Why the study?
Hypertension prevalence remains high in sub-Saharan Africa, but epidemiologic data are lacking in regions such as Madagascar.
The prevalence of hypertension in Toliara, Madagascar was 18.73%, with very low rates of treatment and control, highlighting a significant public health gap in the region.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Highlights hypertension treatment gap in Madagascar; supports known associations but leaves open causal validation.
Introduction In recent decades, the prevalence of hypertension has decreased in high-income countries but remains high in sub-Saharan Africa. However, epidemiologic data are still lacking in some regions, such as Madagascar. This study shows the reality of hypertension and cardiovascular health in Africa's remotest regions. Our aim was to report the prevalence of hypertension and its associated factors in a city in Madagascar. Materials and methods This was a cross-sectional descriptive and analytical study conducted in 2019, including adults aged ≥ 18 years residing in the city of Toliara, located in the south of Madagascar. Hypertension was defined according to the recommendations of the European Society of Cardiology and the European Society of Hypertension. Results Of the 331 individuals included in the study, 62 (18.73%) had hypertension. The prevalence was 22.70% in men (n = 37) and 14.88% in women (n = 25), and 61.54% in those aged ≥ 60 years. Grade 1 hypertension was found in 45.16% (n = 28) and both systolic and diastolic hypertension in 43.55% (n = 27). The rates of treated and controlled hypertension were 45.16% (n = 28) and 17.74% (n = 11), respectively. After statistical adjustment, advanced age (p = 0.001) and short sleep duration (p = 0.004) were significant associated factors. Conclusions The prevalence of hypertension was low. The associated factors were well described in the literature. The rates of treated and controlled hypertension were very low, reflecting a failure of our healthcare system.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Randrianarisoa et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: