Reconciling different measures of risk in the treatment of hypertension: a community-based study

Abstract

Background: There is disagreement as to how cardiovascular risk in hypertensive patients should be measured. In particular, whether absolute risk measurement alone is a realistic index on which to base treatment goals. Method: A cross-sectional study on 895 treated hypertensive patients in 18 general practices in the UK. Reporting on the distribution and magnitude of age- specific absolute risk. The percentage of individuals with controlled hypertension whose absolute risk exceeds their age/sex absolute risk standard and the percentage of individuals with uncontrolled hypertension whose risk is less than their age/sex absolute risk standard. Results: Overall, 62.8% (95% CI 59.6–66%) individuals had an absolute risk that exceeded 20% over 10 years. The magnitude of absolute risk was considerable (range 3.5–87.8%) and increasing absolute risk was significantly associated with age. Of those individuals with controlled hypertension 50.5% (95% CI 45.1–55.8%) had an absolute risk which exceeded their age/sex absolute risk standard. Conversely, 30.4% (95% CI 26.6–34.2%) of those with uncontrolled hypertension had an absolute risk that was less than their age/sex absolute risk standard. Conclusions: The distribution and magnitude of absolute risk is significantly associated with age. Appreciation of such a relationship is needed when setting realistic treatment goals according to an absolute risk standard, particularly in the elderly. In addition, the use an age/sex absolute risk standard is likely to further modify treatment goals in individuals at high and low absolute risk of cardiovascular disease.