To provide updated, evidence-based recommendations for the diagnosis and assessment of adults with high blood pressure.
For persons in whom a high blood pressure value is recorded, a diagnosis of hypertension is dependent on the appropriate measurement of blood pressure, the level of the blood pressure elevation, the approach used to monitor blood pressure (office, ambulatory or home/self), and the duration of follow-up. In addition, the presence of cardiovascular risk factors and target organ damage should be assessed to determine the urgency, intensity and type of treatment. For persons diagnosed as having hypertension, estimating the overall risk of adverse cardiovascular outcomes requires an assessment for other vascular risk factors and hypertensive target organ damage.
MEDLINE searches were conducted from November 2004 to October 2005 to update the 2005 recommendations. Reference lists were scanned, experts were polled, and the personal files of the authors and subgroup members were used to identify other studies. Identified articles were reviewed and appraised using prespecified levels of evidence by content and methodological experts. As per previous years, the authors only included studies that had been published in the peer-reviewed literature and did not include evidence from abstracts, conference presentations or unpublished personal communications.
The present document contains recommendations for blood pressure measurement, diagnosis of hypertension, and assessment of cardiovascular risk for adults with high blood pressure. These include the accurate measurement of blood pressure, criteria for the diagnosis of hypertension and recommendations for follow-up, assessment of overall cardiovascular risk, routine and optional laboratory testing, assessment for renovascular and endocrine causes, home and ambulatory blood pressure monitoring, and the role of echocardiography for those with hypertension. Key features of the 2006 recommendations include continued emphasis on an expedited diagnosis of hypertension, an in-depth review of the role of global risk assessment in hypertension therapy, and the use of home/self blood pressure monitoring for patients with masked hypertension (subjects with hypertension who have a blood pressure that is normal in clinic but elevated on home/self measurement).
All recommendations were graded according to the strength of the evidence and were voted on by the 45 members of the Canadian Hypertension Education Program Evidence-Based Recommendations Task Force. All recommendations reported herein received at least 95% consensus. These guidelines will continue to be updated annually.
Cites: Can J Cardiol. 2002 Jun;18(6):625-4112107420
Cites: CMAJ. 2005 Aug 30;173(5):480-316129865
Cites: Can J Cardiol. 2001 May;17(5):543-5911381277
Cites: JAMA. 2001 Jul 11;286(2):180-711448281
Cites: Am J Hypertens. 2001 Nov;14(11 Pt 1):1099-10511724207
To provide updated, evidence-based recommendations for the management of hypertension in adults.
For lifestyle and pharmacological interventions, evidence from randomized, controlled trials and systematic reviews of trials was preferentially reviewed. Changes in cardiovascular morbidity and mortality were the primary outcomes of interest. For lifestyle interventions, blood pressure (BP) lowering was accepted as a primary outcome given the lack of long-term morbidity/mortality data in this field. For treatment of patients with kidney disease, the development of proteinuria or worsening of kidney function was also accepted as a clinically relevant primary outcome.
MEDLINE searches were conducted from November 2004 to October 2005 to update the 2005 recommendations. In addition, reference lists were scanned and experts were contacted to identify additional published studies. All relevant articles were reviewed and appraised independently by content and methodological experts using prespecified levels of evidence.
Lifestyle modifications to prevent and/or treat hypertension include the following: perform 30 min to 60 min of aerobic exercise four to seven days per week; maintain a healthy body weight (body mass index of 18.5 kg/m2 to 24.9 kg/m2) and waist circumference (less than 102 cm for men and less than 88 cm for women); limit alcohol consumption to no more than 14 standard drinks per week in men or nine standard drinks per week in women; follow a diet that is reduced in saturated fat and cholesterol and that emphasizes fruits, vegetables and low-fat dairy products; restrict salt intake; and consider stress management in selected individuals. Treatment thresholds and targets should take into account each individual's global atherosclerotic risk, target organ damage and comorbid conditions. BP should be lowered to less than 140/90 mmHg in all patients, and to less than 130/80 mmHg in those with diabetes mellitus or chronic kidney disease (regardless of the degree of proteinuria). Most adults with hypertension require more than one agent to achieve these target BPs. For adults without compelling indications for other agents, initial therapy should include thiazide diuretics. Other agents appropriate for first-line therapy for diastolic hypertension with or without systolic hypertension include beta-blockers (in those younger than 60 years), angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors (in nonblack patients), long-acting calcium channel blockers or angiotensin receptor antagonists. Other agents for first-line therapy for isolated systolic hypertension include long-acting dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers or angiotensin receptor antagonists. Certain comorbid conditions provide compelling indications for first-line use of other agents: in patients with angina, recent myocardial infarction or heart failure, beta-blockers and ACE inhibitors are recommended as first-line therapy; in patients with diabetes mellitus, ACE inhibitors or angiotensin receptor antagonists (or in patients without albuminuria, thiazides or dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers) are appropriate first-line therapies; and in patients with nondiabetic chronic kidney disease, ACE inhibitors are recommended. All hypertensive patients should have their fasting lipids screened, and those with dyslipidemia should be treated using the thresholds, targets and agents recommended by the Canadian Hypertension Education Program Working Group on the management of dyslipidemia and the prevention of cardiovascular disease. Selected patients with hypertension, but without dyslipidemia, should also receive statin therapy and/or acetylsalicylic acid therapy.
All recommendations were graded according to strength of the evidence and voted on by the 45 members of the Canadian Hypertension Education Program Evidence-Based Recommendations Task Force. All recommendations reported here achieved at least 95% consensus. These guidelines will continue to be updated annually.
Cites: N Engl J Med. 2000 Jan 20;342(3):145-5310639539
Cites: Lancet. 2006 Jan 21;367(9506):209; author reply 21016427487
Cites: Can J Cardiol. 2000 Sep;16(9):1094-10211021953
Cites: Can J Cardiol. 2001 May;17(5):543-5911381277
Cites: Am J Med. 2001 Nov;111(7):553-811705432
Cites: N Engl J Med. 2002 Feb 7;346(6):393-40311832527
Cites: Can J Cardiol. 2002 Jun;18(6):625-4112107420
This paper provides an overview of the emerging role of Aboriginal people in Sustainable Forest Management (SFM) in Canada over the past decade. The 1996 Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples (RCAP) provided guidance and recommendations for improving Aboriginal peoples' position in Canadian society, beginning with strengthening understanding and building relationships between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal parties. This paper explores the extent to which advances in Aboriginal/non-Aboriginal relationships and Aboriginal forestry have been made as a result of RCAP's call for renewed relationships based on co-existence among nations. Such changes have begun to alter the context in which Aboriginal/non-Aboriginal relationships exist with respect to SFM. While governments themselves have generally not demonstrated the leadership called for by RCAP in taking up these challenges, industry and other partners are demonstrating some improvements. A degree of progress has been achieved in terms of lands and resources, particularly with co-management-type arrangements, but a fundamental re-structuring needed to reflect nation-to-nation relationships has not yet occurred. Other factors related to increasing Aboriginal participation in SFM, such as the recognition of Aboriginal and treaty rights, are also highlighted, along with suggestions for moving Aboriginal peoples' SFM agenda forward in the coming years.
This article focuses on anchoring effects in the process of peer reviewing research proposals. Anchoring effects are commonly seen as the result of flaws in human judgment, as cognitive biases that stem from specific heuristics that guide people when they involve their intuition in solving a problem. Here, the cognitive biases will be analyzed from a sociological point of view, as interactional and aggregated phenomena. The article is based on direct observations of ten panel groups evaluating research proposals in the natural and engineering sciences for the Swedish Research Council. The analysis suggests that collective anchoring effects emerge as a result of the combination of the evaluation techniques that are being used (grading scales and average ranking) and the efforts of the evaluators to reach consensus in the face of disagreements and uncertainty in the group. What many commentators and evaluators have interpreted as an element of chance in the peer review process may also be understood as partly a result of the dynamic aspects of collective anchoring effects.
Over the past decade, the need for healthcare delivery systems to identify and address patient safety issues has been propelled to the forefront. A Canadian survey, for example, demonstrated patient safety to be a major concern of frontline nurses (Nicklin & McVeety 2002). Three crucial patient safety elements, current knowledge, resources, and context of care have been identified by the World Health Organization (WHO 2009). To develop strategies to respond to the scope and mandate of the WHO report within the Canadian context, a pan-Canadian academic-policy partnership has been established.
This newly formed Pan-Canadian Partnership, the Queen's Joanna Briggs Collaboration for Patient Safety (referred throughout as "QJBC" or "the Partnership"), includes the Queen's University School of Nursing, Accreditation Canada, the Canadian Patient Safety Institute (CPSI), the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, and is supported by an active and committed advisory council representing over 10 national organizations representing all sectors of the health continuum, including patients/families advocacy groups, professional associations, and other bodies. This unique partnership is designed to provide timely, focused support from academia to the front line of patient safety. QJBC has adopted an "integrated knowledge translation" approach to identify and respond to patient safety priorities and to ensure active engagement with stakeholders in producing and using available knowledge. Synthesis of evidence and guideline adaptation methodologies are employed to access quantitative and qualitative evidence relevant to pertinent patient safety questions and subsequently, to respond to issues of feasibility, meaningfulness, appropriateness/acceptability, and effectiveness.
This paper describes the conceptual grounding of the Partnership, its proposed methods, and its plan for action. It is hoped that our journey may provide some guidance to others as they develop patient safety models within their own arenas.
In recent years images of independence, active ageing and staying at home have come to characterise a successful old age in western societies. 'Telecare' technologies are heavily promoted to assist ageing-in-place and a nexus of demographic ageing, shrinking healthcare and social care budgets and technological ambition has come to promote the 'telehome' as the solution to the problem of the 'age dependency ratio'. Through the adoption of a range of monitoring and telecare devices, it seems that the normative vision of independence will also be achieved. But with falling incomes and pressure for economies of scale, what kind of independence is experienced in the telehome? In this article we engage with the concepts of 'technogenarians' and 'shared work' to illuminate our analysis of telecare in use. Drawing on European-funded research we argue that home-monitoring based telecare has the potential to coerce older people unless we are able to recognise and respect a range of responses including non-use and 'misuse' in daily practice. We propose that re-imagining the aims of telecare and redesigning systems to allow for creative engagement with technologies and the co-production of care relations would help to avoid the application of coercive forms of care technology in times of austerity.