RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Available information on the prevalence and management of hypertension in the Canadian population dates back to 1986-1992 and probably does not reflect the current status of this major risk factor for cardiovascular disease. We sought to evaluate the current prevalence and management of hypertension among adults in the province of Ontario. METHODS: Potential respondents from randomly selected dwellings within target neighbourhoods in 16 municipalities were contacted at their homes to request participation in the study. For potential respondents who agreed to participate, blood pressure was measured with an automated device. Estimation weights were used to obtain representative estimates of population parameters. Responses were weighted to the total adult population in Ontario of 7,996,653. RESULTS: From 6436 eligible dwellings, contact was made with 4559 potential participants, of whom 2992 agreed to participate. Blood pressure measurements were obtained for 2551 of these respondents (age 20-79 years). Hypertension, defined as systolic blood pressure of 140 mm Hg or more, diastolic blood pressure of 90 mm Hg or more, or treatment with an antihypertensive medication, was identified in 21.3% of the population overall (23.8% of men and 19.0% of women). Prevalence increased with age, from 3.4% among participants 20-39 years of age to 51.6% among those 60-79 years of age. Hypertension was more common among black people and people of South Asian background than among white people; hypertension was also associated with higher body mass index. Among participants with hypertension, 65.7% were undergoing treatment with control of hypertension, 14.7% were undergoing treatment but the hypertension was not controlled, and 19.5% were not receiving any treatment (including 13.7% who were unaware of their hypertension). The extent of control of hypertension did not differ significantly by age, sex, ethnic background or comorbidities. INTERPRETATION: In Ontario, the overall prevalence of hypertension is high in the older population but appears not to have increased in recent decades. Hypertension management has improved markedly among all age groups and for both sexes.
Asunto(s)
Hipertensión/epidemiología , Hipertensión/prevención & control , Adulto , Distribución por Edad , Anciano , Estudios de Cohortes , Estudios Transversales , Etnicidad/estadística & datos numéricos , Femenino , Encuestas Epidemiológicas , Humanos , Hipertensión/complicaciones , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Ontario/epidemiología , Prevalencia , Factores de Riesgo , Distribución por SexoRESUMEN
Venous leg ulcer pain experienced during compression bandaging is poorly understood. A prospective, pilot cohort study was initiated to determine the feasibility of conducting a large-scale, repeated measures cohort study of venous leg ulcer pain and to document and describe the venous leg ulcer pain experience during the first 5 weeks of treatment with compression bandages. Eligible individuals admitted to a nurse-led community leg ulcer service in one Canadian community were recruited for the 5-week study. Pain assessment tools (ie, numerical rating scale and short form McGill Pain Questionnaire) were evaluated by 20 venous ulcer patients (mean age = 73.7 years) and their nurses for ease of use during one baseline and five weekly follow-up visits. Health-related quality of life (HRQL) information was obtained. Nurses reported on ease of integrating pain data collection into regular clinical care. Each pain assessment tool was audited for completion. Most participants found the pain assessment tools easy to use, but nurses reported lengthened visit times with some participants as a result of tool administration difficulties, particularly the visual analogue scale (VAS). Overall completeness of pain assessment tools ranged from 85.0% (visual analogue scale) to 96.3% (present pain intensity and word descriptor list). The vast majority of patients (18) reported ulcer pain at baseline. Total mean scores for all pain assessment tools used decreased over time, but most patients reported pain throughout the study. The most common pain descriptors used were "aching," "stabbing," "sharp," "tender," and "tiring." Health-related quality of life was low and did not change during the 5-week study. The results of this study suggest that the vast majority of venous ulcer patients experience pain and that it is feasible to examine this pain in individuals receiving care in the community over time.
Asunto(s)
Actitud Frente a la Salud , Dolor/etiología , Dolor/psicología , Úlcera Varicosa/complicaciones , Actividades Cotidianas , Anciano , Vendajes , Enfermería en Salud Comunitaria , Comorbilidad , Estudios de Factibilidad , Femenino , Humanos , Estudios Longitudinales , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Evaluación en Enfermería , Investigación Metodológica en Enfermería , Ontario/epidemiología , Dolor/diagnóstico , Dolor/epidemiología , Manejo del Dolor , Dimensión del Dolor , Proyectos Piloto , Estudios Prospectivos , Calidad de Vida , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del Tratamiento , Úlcera Varicosa/enfermeríaRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To identify and compare the psychometric, clinical sensibility, and pain-specific properties of leg ulcer pain assessment tools for use as a guide for clinicians and researchers. DESIGN: Pain assessment tools were selected for appraisal based on 4 inclusion criteria: (1) designed specifically to measure either quality and/or intensity of pain, (2) used in at least 2 different diseases and/or pain-inducing interventions in adults, (3) generic, and (4) patient self-reporting. The tools were appraised against psychometric properties, clinical sensibility attributes, and pain-specific issues. Two reviewers independently reviewed each abstract, with a third reviewer resolving any disagreements. Then the first 2 reviewers independently assessed the selected tools using the predetermined appraisal criteria. RESULTS: Of 54 identified pain assessment tools, 5 (the pain ruler, the numerical rating scale, the visual analogue scale, the verbal descriptor scale, and the short-form McGill Pain Questionnaire) met the inclusion criteria. Each tool met the appraisal criteria to varying degrees. CONCLUSIONS: The use of a pain assessment tool to measure leg ulcer pain is recommended. Clinicians must decide independently which factors are most important when selecting a tool. Although a specific pain assessment approach cannot yet be recommended, a 2-step pain assessment process is most practical. To optimize pain management, further study is needed to ensure that leg ulcer pain is accurately and reliably assessed.