Key result
Antihypertensive treatment intensity fails to modify racial disparities in stroke prevalence.
Why the study?
Does antihypertensive medication treatment intensity modify racial and ethnic disparities in self-reported stroke prevalence among US adults with hypertension?
Cross-Sectional (n=10,005)
Does antihypertensive medication treatment intensity modify racial and ethnic disparities in self-reported stroke prevalence among US adults with hypertension?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
In a nationally representative sample of US adults with hypertension, differences in stroke prevalence existed across racial/ethnic and medication groups, but antihypertensive treatment intensity did not significantly modify racial/ethnic disparities in stroke.
Despite improvements in hypertension management, racial and ethnic disparities in stroke persist. Whether intervention intensity modifies stroke disparities remains unclear. We analyzed 10,005 adults aged ≥ 20 years with hypertension in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey from March 2013 to March 2020. Stroke history was self-reported. Antihypertensive therapy was categorized as untreated, monotherapy, or combination therapy. Multivariable logistic regression models adjusted for demographic, socioeconomic, and clinical variables and included a race/ethnicity × medication group interaction term. Outcomes were reported as odds ratios (OR) and accompanying 95% confidence intervals (CI). 5% of the studied population reported a history of stroke. After full adjustment, current smoking (OR = 1.80, 95% CI 1.27-2.56), history of cardiovascular disease (OR = 2.38, 95% CI 1.70-3.35), and Medicaid insurance (OR = 3.06, 95% CI 1.40-6.68) were independently associated with stroke. Descriptive differences in stroke prevalence varied across race/ethnicity and antihypertensive medication categories; however, the race/ethnicity x medication interaction was not statistically significant (p = 0.346). Among untreated participants, predicted stroke prevalence was 3.5% in Black participants and 2.8% in White participants, compared to 7.0% and 6.8%, respectively, among those receiving combination therapy. Compared with White participants, Asian participants demonstrated lower odds of stroke on combination therapy (adjusted OR 0.23, 95% CI 0.06-0.96) compared with untreated individuals (adjusted OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.22-1.09). Hispanic participants demonstrated lower odds of stroke relative to White participants across medication categories (adjusted OR = 0.57, 95% CI 0.37-0.90 combination therapy vs. adjusted OR = 0.66, 95% CI 0.48-0.92 untreated). Stroke prevalence differed by race/ethnicity and antihypertensive medication category; however, no statistically significant evidence was found that treatment intensity modified racial/ethnic disparities. Larger longitudinal studies incorporating blood pressure control, medication adherence, and hypertension severity are needed to better understand the relationship between antihypertensive treatment intensity and racial/ethnic differences in stroke risk.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Akomaning et al. (2026) conducted a cross-sectional in Hypertension (n=10,005). Antihypertensive medication intensity (monotherapy or combination therapy) across racial/ethnic groups vs. Untreated hypertension and White race/ethnicity reference groups was evaluated on Self-reported history of stroke (p=0.346). Antihypertensive treatment intensity did not significantly modify racial/ethnic disparities in self-reported stroke prevalence among US adults (interaction p = 0.346).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: