↓ Skip to main content

Randomized Trial of Guiding Hypertension Management Using Central Aortic Blood Pressure Compared With Best-Practice Care

Overview of attention for article published in Hypertension, September 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
6 news outlets
twitter
13 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
131 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
103 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Randomized Trial of Guiding Hypertension Management Using Central Aortic Blood Pressure Compared With Best-Practice Care
Published in
Hypertension, September 2013
DOI 10.1161/hypertensionaha.113.02001
Pubmed ID
Authors

James E. Sharman, Thomas H. Marwick, Deborah Gilroy, Petr Otahal, Walter P. Abhayaratna, Michael Stowasser

Abstract

Arm cuff blood pressure (BP) may overestimate cardiovascular risk. Central aortic BP predicts mortality and could be a better method for patient management. We sought to determine the usefulness of central BP to guide hypertension management. This was a prospective, open-label, blinded-end point study in 286 patients with hypertension randomized to treatment decisions guided by best-practice usual care (n=142; using office, home, and 24-hour ambulatory BP) or, in addition, by central BP intervention (n=144; using SphygmoCor). Therapy was reviewed every 3 months for 12 months, and recommendations were provided to each patient and his/her doctor on antihypertensive medication titration. Outcome measures were as follows: medication quantity (daily defined dose), quality of life, and left ventricular mass (3-dimensional echocardiography). There was 92% compliance with recommendations on medication titration, and quality of life improved in both groups (post hoc P<0.05). For usual care, there was no change in daily defined dose (all P>0.10), but with intervention there was a significant stepwise decrease in daily defined dose from baseline to 3 months (P=0.008) and each subsequent visit (all P<0.001). Intervention was associated with cessation of medication in 23 (16%) patients versus 3 (2%) in usual care (P<0.001). Despite this, there were no differences between groups in left ventricular mass index, 24-hour ambulatory BP, home systolic BP, or aortic stiffness (all P>0.05). We conclude that guidance of hypertension management with central BP results in a significantly different therapeutic pathway than conventional cuff BP, with less use of medication to achieve BP control and no adverse effects on left ventricular mass, aortic stiffness, or quality of life.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 103 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Italy 1 <1%
Argentina 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 100 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 18%
Researcher 16 16%
Student > Master 14 14%
Student > Bachelor 8 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 6%
Other 19 18%
Unknown 21 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 45 44%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 6%
Engineering 5 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 4%
Neuroscience 2 2%
Other 14 14%
Unknown 27 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 56. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 May 2023.
All research outputs
#751,880
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Hypertension
#357
of 7,138 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,322
of 214,768 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Hypertension
#6
of 113 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,138 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 214,768 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 113 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.