Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Analysing the concept of diagnostic inertia in hypertension: a cross-sectional study.
Pallares-Carratalá, V; Bonig-Trigueros, I; Palazón-Bru, A; Lorenzo-Piqueres, A; Valls-Roca, F; Orozco-Beltrán, D; Gil-Guillen, V F.
Afiliação
  • Pallares-Carratalá V; Health Surveillance Department, Mutual Society of Castellón, Castellón, Spain.
  • Bonig-Trigueros I; Department of Medicine, Jaume I University, Castellón, Spain.
  • Palazón-Bru A; Internal Medicine Service, La Plana Hospital, Vila-real, Spain.
  • Lorenzo-Piqueres A; Department of Clinical Medicine, Miguel Hernández University, San Juan de Alicante, Spain.
  • Valls-Roca F; Research Unit, Elda General Hospital, Elda, Spain.
  • Orozco-Beltrán D; Teaching Unit of Primary Health Care, Generalitat Valenciana, Castellón, Spain.
  • Gil-Guillen VF; Health Centre of Benigánim, Generalitat Valenciana, Benigánim, Spain.
Int J Clin Pract ; 70(7): 619-24, 2016 Jul.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27163781
ABSTRACT

AIMS:

The aim of this study was to quantify diagnostic inertia (DI) when the physician fails to diagnose hypertension and determine its associated factors.

METHODS:

This cross-sectional, observational study involved all patients without a diagnosis of hypertension who had their blood pressure (BP) measured at least three times during the second half of 2010 (N = 48,605). Patients with altered mean BP figures (≥ 140/90 mmHg) were considered to experience DI. Secondary variables gender, atrial fibrillation, diabetes mellitus, dyslipidemia, cardiovascular disease, age and the physician having attended a cardiovascular training course (ESCARVAL). Associated factors were assessed by multivariate logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS:

Diagnostic inertia was present in 6450 patients (13.3%, 95% CI 13.0-13.6%). Factors significantly associated with DI were male gender (OR = 1.46, 95% CI 1.37-1.55, p < 0.001), atrial fibrillation (OR = 0.73, 95% CI 0.58-0.92, p = 0.007), the ESCARVAL cardiovascular course (OR = 0.88, 95% CI 0.81-0.96, p = 0.005), diabetes mellitus (OR = 0.93, 95% CI 0.87-0.99, p = 0.016), cardiovascular disease (OR = 0.77, 95% CI 0.67-0.88, p < 0.001) and older age (years) (18-44→OR = 1; 45-59→OR = 12.45, 95% CI 11.11-13.94; 60-74→OR = 18.11, 95% CI 16.30-20.12; ≥ 75→OR = 20.43, 95% CI 18.34-22.75; p < 0.001). The multivariate model had an area under the ROC curve of 0.81 (95% CI 0.80-0.81, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS:

This study will help clinical researchers differentiate between the two forms of DI (interpretation of a positive screening test and interpretation of positive diagnostic criteria). The results found here in patients with hypertension suggest that this problem is prevalent, and that a set of associated factors can explain the outcome well (AUC>0.80).
Assuntos

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Hipertensão Tipo de estudo: Diagnostic_studies / Etiology_studies / Observational_studies / Prevalence_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Adolescent / Adult / Aged / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2016 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Hipertensão Tipo de estudo: Diagnostic_studies / Etiology_studies / Observational_studies / Prevalence_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Adolescent / Adult / Aged / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2016 Tipo de documento: Article