Key result
Hypertension affects ~18% of rural adults alongside low awareness and poor control.
Cross-Sectional
This study highlights a significant burden of hypertension in rural Davanagere coupled with alarmingly low rates of awareness, treatment, and control, emphasizing the need for community-based screening and management programs.
Indicates substantial unmet needs in rural hypertension care; leaves open impact of screening programs on outcomes.
OBJECTIVE: To study the prevalence, awareness, treatment, and control of hypertension in the rural areas of Davanagere. TYPE OF STUDY: Cross-sectional community-based study. SETTING: Villages belonging to six sectors of the Davanagere Taluk. MATERIALS AND METHODS: General population above 18 years. METHODOLOGY: A community-based sample was chosen by a multistage sampling technique. Subjects were screened for hypertension by a house-to-house survey. Subjects with systolic blood pressure more than 140 and diastolic blood pressure more than 90 mm of Hg, on hypertensive treatment, and history of hypertension were classified as hypertensives. The data thus obtained was compiled and analyzed. RESULTS: The prevalence rate of hypertension in the study population was 18.3% (95% CI, 16.7-19.9%). Prevalence of hypertension was more in males 19.1% (95% CI, 16.7-21.5%) than in females 17.5% (95% CI, 14.9-20.1%); 11.6%, 5.6%, and 1.2% of the total subjects had Grade I, Grade II, and Grade III, respectively. Only 33.8% of them were aware of their hypertensive status. Hypertensives of 32.1% were on treatment, and 12.5% adequately controlled their BP. About 6.9% of the total hypertensives had severe hypertension. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Proportions, One way Analysis of Variance, Chi-square test.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gowda et al. (2010) conducted a cross-sectional in Hypertension. Hypertension was evaluated on Prevalence of hypertension (95% CI 16.7-19.9). Hypertension affected 18.3% (95% CI, 16.7-19.9%) of the rural adult population in Davanagere, with low awareness (33.8%) and poor control (12.5%).
Synapse has enriched one closely related paper. Consider it for comparative context: