Why the study?
To raise awareness of blood pressure control and obtain screening data from a young university population that is frequently disregarded in screening campaigns.
Blood pressure screening in young university students reveals a small but relevant proportion of individuals with uncontrolled hypertension, highlighting the value of screening campaigns in this demographic.
University BP screening may detect elevated readings in young adults; leaves open whether targeted campaigns improve long-term outcomes.
Objective: In order to raise the awareness of the importance of controlling blood pressure (BP), the Spanish Society of Hypertension (SEH-LELHLA) repeated 2108 on behalf of the International Society of Hypertension (ISH) the May Measurement Month (MMM). Ours was one of several groups of SEH-LELHA specifically recruiting subjects at a university environment with the objective of obtaining data from a young population frequently disregarded in screening campaigns. Design and method: Cross-sectional, descriptive study performed by approximately 90 medical students during MMM18. According to the international protocol, our survey included 1,009 volunteer adults (>=18 years). BP was assessed three consecutive times, the mean of the second and third measurement was used. Hypertension was defined as systolic BP >= 140 mmHg or diastolic BP >= 90 mmHg, or both, or on the basis of receiving antihypertensive drugs. The participants received a questionnaire about lifestyle, demographic and environmental characteristics. We measured the association between BP control, HTN prevalence and demographic factors using standard statistical methods. Results: A total of 995 subjects entered the analysis after removal of 14 erroneous inputs. We divided the participants into the group of 582 students (“S”, 58.5%) with an age <30 years (mean age 21.6 years) and the group of normal population (“NP”) with 413 (41.5%) subjects (mean age 58.0 years). Students showed lower systolic and diastolic BP (SBP 115 vs. 126 mmHg, p < 0.001 and 72 vs. 79 mmHg, p < 0.001), but higher heart rate (76 vs. 73 lpm, p = 0.001). Of only 38 (6.5%) patients in S reporting antihypertensive treatment, 6 (15.6%) were inadequately controlled. In the resting 544 individuals (93.5%) of not treated students, 25 (4.6%) presented uncontrolled BP values. The rate of uncontrolled HTN in the treated group of NP was 36.9% (48/130 subjects), compared to 17.7% (50/283) of participants without treatment. Globally, 129 participants (13.0%) were referred to Primary Care for checking BP. Conclusions: Our study confirms the importance of screening campaigns even in young subjects where uncontrolled HTN is not expected and underlines the relevance of the collaboration between HTN societies (SHE-LEHLA, ISH) and Universities.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rodilla et al. (2019) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: