Effectiveness of treatment of arterial hypertension in Central Europe from 1972 to 2022.

BACKGROUND: Hypertension is a leading cause of cardiovascular disease. This review examines the literature on hypertension control in the Czech Republic from 1972 to 2022 addressing limited data on its effectiveness. METHODS: A literature review was conducted covering the period from 1972 to 2022, utilizing MEDLINE (PubMed), Web of Science, and Scopus databases. Articles were selected based on title and abstract evaluations, with full-text reviews performed as needed. Thirteen studies involving 44,990 participants were included in this review. RESULTS: Control rates increased from 2.8% (men) and 5.2% (women) in 1985 to 32.3% (men) and 37.4% (women) from 2015 to 2018. Women showed better blood pressure control. Specialised centres achieved higher success (48%) than general practitioners (18.4%). Diabetic patients had a lower percentage (29.1%) of patients meeting their target values (<130/80 mmHg) compared to non-diabetic patients, who had a higher percentage (60.6%) meeting their target values (<140/90 mmHg). CONCLUSION: Hypertension treatment success rate in the Czech Republic improved significantly over the last 50 years and is currently comparable to that of other European countries with similar healthcare resources. However, it still remains suboptimal and lags behind the countries with the most successful treatment outcomes (Tab. 3, Fig. 1, Ref. 37). Text in PDF www.elis.sk Keywords: hypertension, treatment, effectiveness, Czech Republic, blood pressure.

Cascade of care for hypertension among apparently healthy and unhealthy individuals of 25-64 years in the Czech Republic.

BACKGROUND: Despite accessible diagnostics and treatment of hypertension, a high proportion of patients worldwide remain unaware of their diagnosis, and even more remain untreated. Several studies suggest that absence of comorbidities is a predictive factor for unawareness and consequently non-treatment of hypertension. There are only a few studies that have assessed the hypertension prevalence and management among apparently healthy individuals. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to assess and compare hypertension prevalence, awareness, treatment and control among apparently healthy individuals, patients with internal diseases, and patients with non-internal diseases. METHODS: Data from standardised blood pressure measurements conducted during the Czech European Health Examination Survey 2014 and information on health status and health care use collected during the Czech European Health Interview Survey 2014 were analyzed. We focused on participants aged 25-64. Data were weighted on sex and age to ensure an appropriate sex and age structure of the population. The χ2-test and binary logistic regression analyses were used to compare distribution of cascade of care for hypertension between the health-status groups of respondents. RESULTS: The final eligible sample consisted of 1121 participants. The prevalence of hypertension was 32.8% in the healthy group, 29.8% in the non-internal disease group and 52.4% in the internal disease group, (p < 0.001). Awareness was 54.1%, 59.1% and 85.2% respectively, (p < 0.001). Treatment was 44.2%, 52.6% and 86.4%, respectively, (p < 0.001). Among apparently healthy respondents 62.6% had their blood pressure measured by a medical professional in the last year, compared to 71.1% in the non-internal disease group and 91.7% in the internal disease group, (p < 0.001). Differences in hypertension control were not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Generally, our data show a discordance in hypertension management within the Czech population. Apparently healthy individuals are the least aware of their diagnosis and the highest proportion of them remain untreated.

Factors affecting participation in the colorectal cancer screening program: a cross-sectional population study.

PURPOSE: Fecal immunochemical test (FIT) once a year or colonoscopy once in 10 years is the option approved for colorectal cancer (CRC) screening for asymptomatic individuals aged ≥ 50 years in the Czech Republic. We analyzed participation in the screening program to determine possible improvements. METHODS: In this observational cross-sectional study, data were collected from 4044 randomly chosen individuals from the Czech population (1866 men, 2178 women) aged ≥ 50 years by questionnaires. Individuals who underwent colonoscopy within the last 10 years or/and FIT within the last 2 years were classified as participants in the screening. RESULTS: 1050 individuals underwent FIT, 464 colonoscopy, and 558 underwent both. Adjusted for age, gender, and education, a higher chance of participation in the screening was observed in groups of non-smokers (OR = 1.25; CI 1.05-1.48), ex-smokers (OR = 1.51; CI 1.26-1.83), consuming smoked meat products less than once a week (OR = 1.26; CI 1.09-1.45), practicing physical activity at least once a week (OR = 1.25; CI 1.03-1.51), hospitalized in the past 12 months (OR = 1.73; CI 1.47-2.05), or consulting a general practitioner (GP) in the past 12 months (OR = 2.26; CI 1.87-2.74). The chance of participation of individuals having a risk factor for CRC (obesity, smoking, diabetes, low physical activity, alcohol drinking) was not higher compared to those without the risk factors. CONCLUSION: Individuals with a tendency to a healthy lifestyle or being in recent contact with the healthcare system by various means, mainly visiting a GP, had a higher participation in the screening for CRC. Among groups with an increased risk for CRC, higher participation was not shown.

How to convince a patient refusing colonoscopy - a qualitative study.

The available literature suggests that the most significant barriers to undergoing colonoscopy in general include “fear of pain and discomfort”, “fear of bowel preparation”, as well as directly unrelated influences such as “lack of support from family and friends”, “busy family and work schedules”, “other health problems” and the current “fear of getting COVID-19 in hospital”. A marital union may play a positive role, previous cancer a negative one. Another important factor is that patients are not used to talking about their barriers spontaneously; a guided conversation is a useful tool. Respondents in this qualitative study addressed these barriers as significant in their answers.