This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on Web of Science (24)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Topic Collections  • Treatment Adherence  • Drug Therapy  • Adherence  • Hypertension  • Alert me on articles by topic  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Arch Intern Med. 2003;163:2677-2678.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

GENERATIONS OF physicians have learned in lecture halls and clinics that normal blood pressure (BP) is less than 140/90 mm Hg. During the past 30 years, an unending stream of effective hypertension medications has been developed and marketed, and classic epidemiologic studies and clinical trials have demonstrated again and again the importance of aggressive treatment of hypertension.

IMPORTANCE OF SYSTOLIC BP

But what do we do when one number is at goal and the other is not? It is clear that in individuals younger than 50 years, diastolic BP (DBP) is the better predictor of future complications of hypertension, whereas in those 50 years and older, systolic BP (SBP) is a better predictor of future complication risk.¹ Most individuals with hypertension are 50 years or older, and for these patients, SBP control is a high priority, even in the face of a perfectly normal DBP reading.^2-3 In fact, Framingham data indicate that SBP alone . . . [Full Text of this Article]

NEED FOR MULTIPLE AGENTS

THE PROBLEM OF CLINICAL INERTIA

THE PSYCHOLOGY OF CLINICAL INERTIA

OFFICE SYSTEMS TO COMBAT CLINICAL INERTIA
Patrick J. O'Connor, MD, MPH
HealthPartners Research Foundation
PO Box 1524
Minneapolis, MN 55440-1524
(e-mail: patrick.j.oconnor@healthpartners.com)

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Quality Improvement Initiatives Improve Hypertension Care Among Veterans
Choma et al.
Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes 2009;2:392-398.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Does Reducing Physician Uncertainty Improve Hypertension Control?: Rationale and Methods
Pavlik et al.
Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes 2009;2:257-263.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Simulated Physician Learning Intervention to Improve Safety and Quality of Diabetes Care: A Randomized Trial
O'Connor et al.
Diabetes Care 2009;32:585-590.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

So Much to Do, So Little Time: Care for the Socially Disadvantaged and the 15-Minute Visit
Fiscella and Epstein
Arch Intern Med 2008;168:1843-1852.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Medication Nonadherence for Blood Pressure Control Is Primarily a Physician-Related Factor
Wexler and Feldman
Arch Intern Med 2008;168:1928-1929.
FULL TEXT  

The Role of Clinical Uncertainty in Treatment Decisions for Diabetic Patients with Uncontrolled Blood Pressure
Kerr et al.
ANN INTERN MED 2008;148:717-727.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Crossing the Quality Chasm for Diabetes Care: The Power of One Physician, His Team, and Systems Thinking
Solberg et al.
J Am Board Fam Med 2007;20:299-306.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Improving blood pressure control through provider education, provider alerts, and patient education: a cluster randomized trial.
Roumie et al.
ANN INTERN MED 2006;145:165-175.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Care Quality and Implementation of the Chronic Care Model: A Quantitative Study
Solberg et al.
Ann Fam Med 2006;4:310-316.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Clinical Decision-Making in Blood Pressure Management of Patients with Diabetes Mellitus: An Oklahoma Physicians Resource/Research Network (OKPRN) Study.
Cotton et al.
J Am Board Fam Med 2006;19:232-239.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Adding Value to Evidence-Based Clinical Guidelines
O'Connor
JAMA 2005;294:741-743.
FULL TEXT