Original Article

A Systematic Approach to Managing Hypertension and the Metabolic Syndrome in Primary Care

Authors: William H. Bestermann, MD, Daniel T. Lackland, DRPH, Jessica E. Riehle, Brent M. Egan, MD

Abstract

Objectives: Obesity is driving a high prevalence of hypertension and metabolic syndrome-related risk and disease. This report summarizes the impact of a standardized, evidence-based approach to managing high blood pressure and associated metabolic syndrome abnormalities that was developed and implemented by one Clinical Hypertension Specialist.


Methods: Longitudinal data on blood pressure, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), cardiovascular and renal comorbidities, and treatment medications were obtained on all 817 hypertensive patients seen from January 1, 2000 to June 30, 2003.


Results: The hypertensive patients were 72 ± 11 (SD) years old, and more than 55% of them were high risk based on target organ damage, clinical cardiovascular disease, or diabetes mellitus. Blood pressure was <140/90 mm Hg in 77% of all patients. Among the high-risk patients, mean blood pressure was 126 ± 14/71 ± 10 on 2.8 ± 1.4 antihypertensive medications, with 88% on angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers, 59% on diuretics, 49% on calcium channel blockers, and 36% on β-blockers. Among dyslipidemic hypertensives, LDL-C was controlled to <130 mg/dL in 84% (510/605) overall and to <100 mg/dL in 70% of the high-risk group (299/427). Among diabetic hypertensives, the mean HbA1c was 6.8%, with 64% (155/242) less than 7%. New patients demonstrated improved blood pressure, LDL-C, and hemoglobin A1c control over time as the management algorithm was applied.


Conclusions: A high prevalence of complicated hypertension was documented. Blood pressure, LDL-C, and HbA1c were controlled to goal in a high proportion of patients. The findings demonstrate that application of an evidence-based management algorithm can facilitate higher rates of cardiovascular risk factor control than are generally reported in primary care practices.


Key Points


* The prevalence of the metabolic syndrome, which includes abdominal obesity, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and dyslipidemia, is 10-fold higher in obese than lean individuals.


* The metabolic syndrome is associated with an approximate tripling of coronary heart disease risk.


* Treatment and control of multiple risk factors significantly reduced coronary heart disease, but multiple cardiovascular risk factors are often not controlled, despite the availability of effective therapy.


* Application of a standardized, evidence-based management algorithm can lead to much higher than usual control rates for multiple cardiovascular risk factors.

This content is limited to qualifying members.

Existing members, please login first

If you have an existing account please login now to access this article or view purchase options.

Purchase only this article ($25)

Create a free account, then purchase this article to download or access it online for 24 hours.

Purchase an SMJ online subscription ($75)

Create a free account, then purchase a subscription to get complete access to all articles for a full year.

Purchase a membership plan (fees vary)

Premium members can access all articles plus recieve many more benefits. View all membership plans and benefit packages.

References

1.Lackland DT, Bachman DL, Carter TD, et al. The geographic variation in stroke incidence in two areas of the Southeastern Stroke Belt: the Anderson and Pee Dee Stroke Study. Stroke 1998;29:2061–2068.
 
2.Burt VL, Cutler JA, Higgins M, et al. Trends in the prevalence, awareness, treatment and control of hypertension in the adult US population: data from the Health Examination and Nutrition Survey, 1960 to 1991. Hypertension 1995;26:60–69.
 
3.McFarlane SI, Jacober SJ, Winer N, et al. Control of cardiovascular risk factors in patients with diabetes and hypertension at urban academic medical centers. Diabetes Care 2002;25:718–723.
 
4.Hansen RC, Imperatore G, Bennett PH, et al. Components of the “metabolic syndrome” and incidence of type 2 diabetes. Diabetes 2002;51:3120–3127.
 
5.Ford ES, Giles WH, Dietz WH. Prevalence of the metabolic syndrome among US adults: Findings from the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. JAMA 2002;287:356–359.
 
6.Harris MI. Racial and ethnic differences in health care access and health outcomes for adults with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care 2001;24:454–459.
 
7.Egan BM, Lackland DT, Basile JN. American Society of Hypertension regional chapters: leveraging the impact of the clinical hypertension specialist in the local community. Am J Hypertension2002;15:372–379.
 
8.Hansson L, Lindholm LH, Niskanen L. Effect of angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibition compared with conventional therapy on cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in hypertension: the Captopril Prevention Project (CAPPP) randomized trial. Lancet 1999;353:611–616.
 
9.Heart Protection Study Collaborative Group. MRC/BHF Heart Protection Study of cholesterol lowering with simvastatin in 20,536 high-risk individuals: a randomized placebo-controlled trial. Lancet2002;360:7–33.
 
10.Krakoff LR. Hypertension Specialists: ready or not, here we come (editorial). Am J Hypertens1999;12:242–243.
 
11.Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation (HOPE) Study Investigators. Effects of an angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitor, ramipril, on cardiovascular events in high-risk patients. N Engl J Med2000;342:145–53.
 
12.Brown BG, Zhao XQ, Chait A. Simvastatin and niacin, antioxidant vitamins, or the combination for the prevention of coronary disease. N Engl J Med 2001;345:1583–1592.
 
13.United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study Group. United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study 24: A 6-year, randomized, controlled trial comparing sulfonylurea, insulin, and metformin therapy in patients with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes that could not be controlled with diet therapy. Ann Intern Med1998;128:165–175.
 
14.UK Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) Group. Effect of intensive blood-glucose control with metformin on complications in overweight patients with type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 34) Lancet1998;352:854–865.
 
15.Garratt KN, Brady PA, Hassinger NL. Sulfonylurea drugs increase early mortality in patients with diabetes mellitus after direct angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol1999;33:119–124.
 
16.Schiffrin EL, Bac Park J, Intengan HD. Correction of arterial structure and endothelial dysfunction in human essential hypertension by the angiotensin receptor antagonist Losartan. Circulation2000;101:1653–1665.
 
17.Lender D, Arauz-Pacheco C, Breen L. A double-blind comparison of the effects of amlodipine and enalapril on insulin sensitivity in hypertensive patients. Am J Hypertension 1999;12:298–303.
 
18.Berne C, Pollare T, Lithell H. Effects of antihypertensive treatment on insulin sensitivity with special reference to ACE inhibitors. Diabetes Care 1991;14(suppl 4):39–47.
 
19.Freeman DJ, Norrie J, Naveed S. Pravastatin and the development of diabetes mellitus—evidence for a protective treatment effect in the West of Scotland Coronary Prevention Study. Circulation2001;103:357–362.
 
20.Carlsen SM, Rossvoll O, Bjerve KS. Metformin improves blood lipid pattern in nondiabetic patients with coronary heart disease. J Internal Med 1996;239:227–233.
 
21.The Sixth Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation and Treatment of High Blood Pressure. Arch Int Med 1997;57:2413–2446.
 
22.Scherrer U, Sartori C. Defective nitric oxide synthesis: a link between metabolic insulin resistance, sympathetic overactivity and cardiovascular morbidity. Eur J Endocrin 2000;142:315–323.
 
23.Forgione MA, Leopold JA, Loscalzo J. Roles of endothelial dysfunction in coronary artery disease.Curr Opin Cardiol 2000;15:409–415.
 
24.Gokce N, Loscalzo J. Endothelial dysfunction and atherothrombosis, in Wilson PWF (ed): Atlas of Atherosclerosis-Risk Factors and Treatment. Singapore, Current Medicine Inc., 2000, ed 4, p 22.
 
25.Bakris GL, Williams M, Dworkin L, et al., for the National Kidney Foundation Hypertension and Diabetes Executive Committees Working Group. Preserving renal function in patients with hypertension and diabetes: a consensus approach. Am J Kid Dis 2000;36:646–661.
 
26.Executive Summary of the Third Report of The National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) Expert Panel on Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol in Adults (ATP III).JAMA 2001;285:2486–2497.
 
27.American Diabetes Association. Standards of medical care for patients with diabetes mellitus: position statement. Diabetes Care 2002:25(suppl 1):S33–S49.
 
28.Pawlson G. Comprehensive HEDIS measures for diabetic patients. Managed Care 9(8 suppl):5–10, 2000.
 
29.Ogden LG, He J, Lydick E, et al. Long-term absolute benefit of lowering blood pressure in hypertensive patients according to JNC VI risk stratification. Hypertension 2000;35:539–543.
 
30.JNC 7 Express: The Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on prevention, detection, evaluation, and treatment of high blood pressure. NIH Publication No. 03–5233, May 2003.
 
31.Wilson PW, Kannel WB, Silbershatz H, et al. Clustering of metabolic factors and coronary heart disease. Arch Int Med 1999;159:1104–1109.
 
32.Hyman DJ, Pavlik VN. Characteristics of patients with uncontrolled hypertension in the United States. N Engl J Med 2001;345:479–486.
 
33.Benetos A, Thomas F, Bean K, et al. Prognostic value of systolic and diastolic blood pressure in treated hypertensive men. Arch Int Med 2002;162:577–581.
 
34.Solomon AJ, Gersh BJ. Management of chronic stable angina: medical therapy, percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty, and coronary artery bypass graft surgery—lessons from the clinical trials. Ann Intern Med 1998;128:216–223.
 
35.Yusuf S. Two decades of progress in preventing vascular disease. Lancet 2002;360:2–3.
 
36.Herings RMC, De Boer A, Stricker BH. Hypoglycemia associated with use of inhibitors of angiotensin converting enzyme. Lancet 1995;345:1195–1198.
 
37.Thamer M, Ray NF, Taylor T. Association between antihypertensive drug use and hypoglycemia: a case-control study of diabetic users of insulin or sulfonylureas. Clin Ther 1999;21:1387–1400.
 
38.Lindholm LH, Ibsen H, Devereux RB, et al. Cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in patients with diabetes in the losartan intervention For endpoint reduction in hypertension study (LIFE): a randomised trial against atenolol. Lancet 2002;359:1004–1010.
 
39.Knowler WC, Barrett-Connor E, Fowler SE, et al. Reduction in the incidence ot type 2 diabetes with lifestyle intervention or metformin. N Engl J Med 2002;346:393–403.
 
40.Lee A, Morley JE. Metformin decreases food consumption and induces weight loss in subjects with obesity with type II non-insulin-dependent diabetes. Obes Res 1998;6:47–53.
 
41.Kieren JM, Verma S, Anderson TJ. Improved endothelial function with metformin in type 2 diabetes mellitus. J Am Coll Cardiol 2001;37:1344–1350.
 
42.Dahlof B, Devereux RB, Kjeldsen SE. Cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in the Losartan Intervention For Endpoint reduction in hypertension study (LIFE): a randomized trial against atenolol.Lancet 2002;359:995–1003.
 
43.Hansson L, Zanchetti A, Carruthers SG, et al. for the HOT Study Group. Effects of intensive blood-pressure lowering and low-dose aspirin in patients with hypertension: principal results of the Hypertension Optimal Treatment (HOT) trial. Lancet 1998;351:1755–1762.
 
44.United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) Group. Tight blood pressure control and risk of macrovascular and microvascular complications in type 2 diabetes: UKPDS 38. Brit Med J1998;317:703–713.
 
45.Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation Study Investigators. Effects of ramipril on cardiovascular and microvascular outcomes in people with diabetes mellitus: results of the HOPE study and MICRO-HOPE substudy. Lancet 2000;355:253–259.
 
46.Pyorala K, Pedersen TR, Kjekhus J, et al. Cholesterol lowering with simvastatin improves prognosis of diabetic patients with coronary heart disease. A subgroup analysis of the Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study. Diabetes Care 1997;20:614–620.