Cargando…

Consistency of Recommendations for Evaluation and Management of Hypertension

IMPORTANCE: Hypertension is very common, but guideline recommendations for hypertension have been controversial, are of increasing interest, and have profound implications. OBJECTIVE: To systematically assess the consistency of recommendations regarding hypertension management across clinical practi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Alper, Brian S., Price, Amy, van Zuuren, Esther J., Fedorowicz, Zbys, Shaughnessy, Allen F., Oettgen, Peter, Elwyn, Glyn, Qaseem, Amir, Kunnamo, Ilkka, Gupta, Urvi, Carter, Deborah D., Mittelman, Michael, Berg-Nelson, Carla, Mayer, Martin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: American Medical Association 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6902818/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31755945
http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.15975
_version_ 1783477738415325184
author Alper, Brian S.
Price, Amy
van Zuuren, Esther J.
Fedorowicz, Zbys
Shaughnessy, Allen F.
Oettgen, Peter
Elwyn, Glyn
Qaseem, Amir
Kunnamo, Ilkka
Gupta, Urvi
Carter, Deborah D.
Mittelman, Michael
Berg-Nelson, Carla
Mayer, Martin
author_facet Alper, Brian S.
Price, Amy
van Zuuren, Esther J.
Fedorowicz, Zbys
Shaughnessy, Allen F.
Oettgen, Peter
Elwyn, Glyn
Qaseem, Amir
Kunnamo, Ilkka
Gupta, Urvi
Carter, Deborah D.
Mittelman, Michael
Berg-Nelson, Carla
Mayer, Martin
author_sort Alper, Brian S.
collection PubMed
description IMPORTANCE: Hypertension is very common, but guideline recommendations for hypertension have been controversial, are of increasing interest, and have profound implications. OBJECTIVE: To systematically assess the consistency of recommendations regarding hypertension management across clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This cross-sectional study of hypertension management recommendations included CPGs that had been published as of April 2018. Two point-of-care resources that provided graded recommendations were included for secondary analyses. Discrete and unambiguous specifications of the population, intervention, and comparison states were used to define a series of reference recommendations. Three raters reached consensus on coding the direction and strength of each recommendation made by each CPG. Three independent raters reached consensus on the importance of each reference recommendation. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The main outcomes were rates of consistency for direction and strength among CPGs. Sensitivity analyses testing the robustness were conducted by excluding recommendation statements that were described as insufficient evidence, excluding single recommendation sources, and stratifying by importance of recommendations. RESULTS: The analysis included 8 CPGs with a total of 71 reference recommendations, 68 of which had clear recommendations from 2 or more CPGs. Across CPGs, 22 recommendations (32%) were consistent in direction and strength, 18 recommendations (27%) were consistent in direction but inconsistent in strength, and 28 recommendations (41%) were inconsistent in direction. The rate of consistency was lower in secondary analyses. When insufficient evidence ratings were excluded, there was still substantial inconsistency, and a leave-one-out sensitivity analysis suggested the inconsistency could not be attributed to any single recommendation source. Inconsistency in direction was more common for recommendations deemed to be of lower importance (11 of 20 recommendations [55%]), but 17 of 48 high-importance recommendations (35%) had inconsistency in direction. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Hypertension is a common chronic condition with widespread expectations surrounding guideline-based care, yet CPGs have a high rate of inconsistency. Further investigations should determine the reasons for inconsistency, the implications for recommendation development, and the role of synthesis across recommendations for optimal guidance of clinical care.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6902818
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher American Medical Association
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-69028182019-12-24 Consistency of Recommendations for Evaluation and Management of Hypertension Alper, Brian S. Price, Amy van Zuuren, Esther J. Fedorowicz, Zbys Shaughnessy, Allen F. Oettgen, Peter Elwyn, Glyn Qaseem, Amir Kunnamo, Ilkka Gupta, Urvi Carter, Deborah D. Mittelman, Michael Berg-Nelson, Carla Mayer, Martin JAMA Netw Open Original Investigation IMPORTANCE: Hypertension is very common, but guideline recommendations for hypertension have been controversial, are of increasing interest, and have profound implications. OBJECTIVE: To systematically assess the consistency of recommendations regarding hypertension management across clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This cross-sectional study of hypertension management recommendations included CPGs that had been published as of April 2018. Two point-of-care resources that provided graded recommendations were included for secondary analyses. Discrete and unambiguous specifications of the population, intervention, and comparison states were used to define a series of reference recommendations. Three raters reached consensus on coding the direction and strength of each recommendation made by each CPG. Three independent raters reached consensus on the importance of each reference recommendation. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The main outcomes were rates of consistency for direction and strength among CPGs. Sensitivity analyses testing the robustness were conducted by excluding recommendation statements that were described as insufficient evidence, excluding single recommendation sources, and stratifying by importance of recommendations. RESULTS: The analysis included 8 CPGs with a total of 71 reference recommendations, 68 of which had clear recommendations from 2 or more CPGs. Across CPGs, 22 recommendations (32%) were consistent in direction and strength, 18 recommendations (27%) were consistent in direction but inconsistent in strength, and 28 recommendations (41%) were inconsistent in direction. The rate of consistency was lower in secondary analyses. When insufficient evidence ratings were excluded, there was still substantial inconsistency, and a leave-one-out sensitivity analysis suggested the inconsistency could not be attributed to any single recommendation source. Inconsistency in direction was more common for recommendations deemed to be of lower importance (11 of 20 recommendations [55%]), but 17 of 48 high-importance recommendations (35%) had inconsistency in direction. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Hypertension is a common chronic condition with widespread expectations surrounding guideline-based care, yet CPGs have a high rate of inconsistency. Further investigations should determine the reasons for inconsistency, the implications for recommendation development, and the role of synthesis across recommendations for optimal guidance of clinical care. American Medical Association 2019-11-22 /pmc/articles/PMC6902818/ /pubmed/31755945 http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.15975 Text en Copyright 2019 Alper BS et al. JAMA Network Open. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC-BY-NC-ND License.
spellingShingle Original Investigation
Alper, Brian S.
Price, Amy
van Zuuren, Esther J.
Fedorowicz, Zbys
Shaughnessy, Allen F.
Oettgen, Peter
Elwyn, Glyn
Qaseem, Amir
Kunnamo, Ilkka
Gupta, Urvi
Carter, Deborah D.
Mittelman, Michael
Berg-Nelson, Carla
Mayer, Martin
Consistency of Recommendations for Evaluation and Management of Hypertension
title Consistency of Recommendations for Evaluation and Management of Hypertension
title_full Consistency of Recommendations for Evaluation and Management of Hypertension
title_fullStr Consistency of Recommendations for Evaluation and Management of Hypertension
title_full_unstemmed Consistency of Recommendations for Evaluation and Management of Hypertension
title_short Consistency of Recommendations for Evaluation and Management of Hypertension
title_sort consistency of recommendations for evaluation and management of hypertension
topic Original Investigation
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6902818/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31755945
http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.15975
work_keys_str_mv AT alperbrians consistencyofrecommendationsforevaluationandmanagementofhypertension
AT priceamy consistencyofrecommendationsforevaluationandmanagementofhypertension
AT vanzuurenestherj consistencyofrecommendationsforevaluationandmanagementofhypertension
AT fedorowiczzbys consistencyofrecommendationsforevaluationandmanagementofhypertension
AT shaughnessyallenf consistencyofrecommendationsforevaluationandmanagementofhypertension
AT oettgenpeter consistencyofrecommendationsforevaluationandmanagementofhypertension
AT elwynglyn consistencyofrecommendationsforevaluationandmanagementofhypertension
AT qaseemamir consistencyofrecommendationsforevaluationandmanagementofhypertension
AT kunnamoilkka consistencyofrecommendationsforevaluationandmanagementofhypertension
AT guptaurvi consistencyofrecommendationsforevaluationandmanagementofhypertension
AT carterdeborahd consistencyofrecommendationsforevaluationandmanagementofhypertension
AT mittelmanmichael consistencyofrecommendationsforevaluationandmanagementofhypertension
AT bergnelsoncarla consistencyofrecommendationsforevaluationandmanagementofhypertension
AT mayermartin consistencyofrecommendationsforevaluationandmanagementofhypertension