ConsultantLive Members: Login | Register
 |  |
ConsultantLive SearchMedica Medline Drugs

Powered by SearchMedica

 
About Us
Blogs
Dermclinic
Photoclinic
Pediatric Center
Multimedia
Topics
What's Your Diagnosis?
 

Home » Hypertension

Consultant. Vol. 47 No. 6
Hypertension Q&A
Matters of the Heart—and Other Organs 

Blood Pressure: What's Optimal? What's Not?

By DONALD G. VIDT, MD-Series Editor | May 1, 2007
Cleveland Clinic Foundation
Dr Vidt is past chairman of--and now a consultant to--the department of nephrology and hypertension at the Cleveland Clinic Foundation. He is also professor of medicine at Ohio State University College of Medicine and Public Health in Columbus. Dr Vidt has been a member of the National High Blood Pressure Education Program and the writing group on 5 Joint National Committee reports on the prevention, detection, evaluation, and treatment of high blood pressure.

 

Q: What is "normal" blood pressure (BP)? Is it different from optimal BP?

A: This question is frequently raised by both clinicians and patients, particularly in view of the changing definitions of hypertension in the last several reports of the Joint National Committee on the Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure (JNC V, JNC VI, and JNC 7).1-3

For many years, a reading of 140/90 mm Hg served as the dividing line between normal and high BP and was used by many life insurance companies to determine the risk associated with hypertension. Observational studies have since demonstrated that the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) begins at BP levels as low as 115/75 mm Hg and doubles with each increment of 20/10 mm Hg. Prospective studies have repeatedly identified an increasing risk of CVD, stroke, and renal insufficiency at progressively higher levels of both systolic and diastolic BP. Furthermore, a positive, continuous, and independent association has been observed between BP and the incidence of CVD, stroke, heart failure, and end-stage renal disease.

As a result, the JNC V and JNC VI guidelines designated optimal BP as 120/80 mm Hg or lower, and normal BP as less than 130/80 mm Hg. They also included a high-normal BP category, which was defined as 130 to 139/85 to 90 mm Hg.

The newest classification. With the recognition of the consistent relationship between BP and the risk of CVD, independent of other risk factors, the authors of JNC 7 introduced a new classification of hypertension. The category of "prehypertension"—systolic BP of 120 to 139 mm Hg or diastolic BP of 80 to 89 mm Hg—was added to acknowledge the risk relationship across the entire BP range from 115/75 to 185/115 mm Hg. This new category signals the need for increased education of health care professionals and the public in order to reduce BP levels and prevent progression to sustained hypertension.

Normal BP is now considered to be below 120/80 and is synonymous with the previous designation of "optimal BP." Patients with sustained BP higher than 140/90 mm Hg are considered to have hypertension and are candidates for aggressive pharmacological therapy.

Management of prehypertension. Management is currently directed toward aggressive lifestyle modification, because at the time of publication of JNC 7, there were no prospective clinical trials that demonstrated reduced cardiovascular risk as a result of either lifestyle or drug treatment of prehypertension. Subsequently, a small prospective trial demonstrated that progression to sustained hypertension could be prevented during 2 years of pharmacologicaltreatment in patients with BPs of 130 to 139/85 to 89 mm Hg (which was considered high-normal BP at the time that the study was planned).4 Firm evidence from large prospective trials will be required before aggressive pharmacological therapy can be recommended for the more than 70 million persons who meet the current criteria for prehypertension.

Implications for your practice. I would be remiss if I did not remind clinicians that the diagnosis of hypertension should not be made on the basis of a single BP reading, unless that reading is extremely high or the patient has shown evidence of progressive target organ disease. Rather, a series of BP readings during a period of several weeks is appropriate; this should include out-of-office readings, which can now be obtained using a variety of automated and portable BP devices. The choice of antihypertensive agents and the aggressiveness of therapy will also relate, in part, to the presence of additional cardiovascular risk factors, such as hyperlipidemia, diabetes, cigarette smoking, sedentary lifestyle, and a family history of premature myocardial infarction or stroke.

Finally, JNC 7 has drawn its share of criticism relative to both its revised classification and its treatment recommendations. However, I encourage you to continue to use these recommendations pending future developments. Such developments may include classification and treatment recommendations based on global cardiovascular risk and guidelines that take into account all of the cardiovascular risk factors in a patient with new-onset hypertension.

 

Join the Conversation

Want to join the conversation? If you're a healthcare professional, we'd like to hear your comments. Just sign in or register today to become part of our growing, online community.





REFERENCES:
1.The Fifth Report of the Joint National Committee on the Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure (JNC V). Arch Intern Med. 1993;153:154-183.
2.The Sixth Report of the Joint National Committee on the Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure. Arch Intern Med. 1997; 157:2413-2446.
3. Chobanian AV, Bakris GL, Black HR, et al. Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure. The JNC 7 Report. Hypertension. 2003;42:1206-1252.
4. Julius S, Nesbitt SD, Egan BM, et al. Feasibility of treating prehypertension with an angiotensin-receptor blocker. N Engl J Med. 2006;15:1685-1697.


 
TOPIC INDEX

Asthma

Atrial Fibrillation

Cardiovascular

Cerebrovascular

Developmental/Genetic

Diabetes

Diabetes Type 2

Fibromyalgia

Geriatrics

GI Disorders

Gout

Health Care Reform

HIV/AIDS

Hypertension

Infection

Mental Health

 

Musculoskeletal

Nervous System

Nutritional/Metabolic 

Otorhinolaryngologic 

Pain

Pediatrics

Physical Abuse

Respiratory Tract 

Rheumatic Diseases

Seasonal Allergies

Skin Diseases

Sleep Disorders

Urologic Diseases

Vaccines

Women’s Health

All Topics

 


 
FROM PHYSICIANS PRACTICE
Key Differences between FQHCs and RHCs
Chastity Werner, RHIT, June 13, 2013
FQHCs and RHCs take up a unique niche among physician practices. And that affects compensation and billing.
Improving Care Coordination in Your Practice
Susanne Madden,  June 12, 2013
Practices are feverishly working to control the rising costs of healthcare - effective care coordination can help.
Refunding Overpayments: Two Options for Medical Practices
Ericka L. Adler,  June 12, 2013
Medicare and Medicaid providers must return overpayments once identified. Here are two different refund approaches for practices to consider when necessary.
Four Easy Ways to Boost Patient Time of Service Collections
Aubrey Westgate,  June 12, 2013
Simple ways your medical practice staff can increase the likelihood patients will pay when presenting for appointments.
iPad Alternatives for Mobile Physicians
Marisa Torrieri, June 11, 2013
As more physicians are seeing the merits of media tablets, the market is expanding, too.
 

 

 
MOST POPULAR
  • Most Popular
  • Most Emailed
  • Most Recent
  • Painful Red Ear
  • Facial Skin Problems—A Photo Essay
  • Go For The Glory Quiz: Persistent Oral Lesions, Nevus or Melanoma?, Altered Mental Status in Middle Age, An Itchy, Scaly Rash, Painful Blisters of the Hand
  • Scaly Plaque on the Nose
  • T-Wave Inversions: Sorting Through the Causes
  • Tuberculosis Diagnosis With Handheld Device
  • Physician, First Do No Harm—To Yourself
  • Making the Most of Antihypertensive Drug Combinations
  • Why Doctors Commit Suicide
  • Superficial Abrasion After a Fall From a Bicycle
  • Women Underrepresented in Antiretroviral Clinical Trials
  • Crohn’s Disease: New Scoring System Predicts Mild Disease
  • Iron-deficiency Anemia in IBD: These Patients Need Primary Care
  • Statins Plus Exercise: New Study Questions the Combination
  • Benign Congenital Nevus
Click here to subscribe to our newsletter
 
COMMENTS
  • Most Commented
  • Most Recent
  • Nodular Basal Cell Carcinoma
  • Short on Physicians, Long on Adverse Effects
  • Wanted: Physician Feedback on Medical Cannabis
  • Why Doctors Commit Suicide
  • Crusted Scabies
  • Scaly Plaque on the Nose
  • Short on Physicians, Long on Adverse Effects
  • Furuncle Caused by Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) Infection
  • Resistant Hypertension: Four Pearls for Your Practice
  • Nodular Basal Cell Carcinoma
Click here to subscribe to our newsletter


 
SearchMedica Search Result

Find peer-reviewed literature and websites for practicing medical professionals

CME on Hypertension
Evidence on Hypertension
Guidelines on Hypertension
Patient Education on Hypertension
Clinical Trials on Hypertension
Practical Articles on Hypertension
Research and Reviews on Hypertension
All "Hypertension" results



CancerNetwork | ConsultantLive | Diagnostic Imaging | Musculoskeletal Network | OBGYN.net | PediatricsConsultantLive |
Physicians Practice | Psychiatric Times | SearchMedica | Medical Resources

© 1996 - 2013 UBM Medica LLC, a UBM company
Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Advertising Information - Editorial Policy Statement - UBM Medica Network Privacy Policy