Hypertension Registry at the Bangkok Hospital Medical Center: The First 7 Months’ Experience

Main Article Content

Surachai Rungtanapirom
Jitraporn Khankam, RN
Naphat Benjakhunprasit, RN
Atittaya Sitthiphattarakul, RN
Pornchai Tantivanon
Akarawat Kiatdum

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The Hypertension Registry at the Bangkok Hospital Medical Center was established in June 2012. It aimed to raise awareness of the availability of appropriate hypertension health services, to optimize the quality of care, and to systematically build a database of clinical outcomes. The purpose of this article is to highlight the main data collected from patients with hypertension who took part in the Hypertension Registry Programme. These fi ndings will help improve services and will lead to better clinical outcomes in the future.


MATERIALS AND METHOD: A retrospective review was conducted of all the participants in the Hypertension Registry from June 2012 to December 2012. Descriptive data is presented as absolute numbers and percentages.


RESULTS: A total of 647 patients with hypertension were registered, half of all registrants were overweight, 51.9% had dyslipidemia and 34.8% had diabetes. The most frequent investigations done to assess cardiovascular risk were electrocardiograms (EKG) 34.4%; chest x-rays 27.9%; Ankle Brachial Index (ABI) 19.5%; and urine microalbumin (MAU) 18.1%. In 3.9% of cases no antihypertensive medication was required and 53.5% of patients were prescribed a single item of medication. Angiotensin-receptor blockers (ARB) were the most frequently prescribed antihypertensive medication. Up to 90% of cases were well controlled and achieved a systolic blood pressure (SBP) < 140 mmHg. and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) < 90 mmHg.


CONCLUSION: The Hypertension Registry at the Bangkok Hospital Medical Center provides multiple advantages in collecting relevant information to further optimize the quality of hypertensive services offered and to improve the quality of life of patients with hypertension.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
1.
Rungtanapirom S, Khankam J, Benjakhunprasit N, Sitthiphattarakul A, Tantivanon P, Kiatdum A. Hypertension Registry at the Bangkok Hospital Medical Center: The First 7 Months’ Experience. BKK Med J [Internet]. 2013Feb.20 [cited 2020Dec.5];50:1. Available from: https://he02.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/bkkmedj/article/view/218037
Section
Original Article

References

1. Chobanian AV, Bakris GL, Black HR, et al. The Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure: the JNC 7 report. JAMA 2003;289:2560-72.
2. Mancia G, De Backer G, Dominiczak A , et al. 2007 ESH-ESC Practice Guidelines for the Management of Arterial Hypertension: ESH-ESC Task Force on the Management of Arterial Hypertension. J Hypertens 2007;25:1751-62.
3. Whitworth JA; World Health Organization, International Society of Hypertension Writing Group. 2003 World Health Organization (WHO)/International Society of Hypertension (ISH) statement on management of hypertension. J Hypertens 2003;21:1983-92.
4. Thai Hypertension Society Writing Group. Thai Guidelines on the treatment of hypertension update 2012. (Accessed January 2013, at https://www.thaihypertension.org/files/ 216_1.Hypertension_Guideline_2012.pdf.)
5. Yingchoncharoen T, Limpijankit T, Jongjirasiri S, et al. Arterial stiffness contributes to coronary artery disease risk prediction beyond the traditional risk score (RAMA-EGAT score). Heart Asia 2012;4:177-82 doi: 10.1136/heartasia-2011-010079.
6. Yambe T, Yoshizawa M, Saijo Y, et al. Brachio-ankle pulse wave velocity and cardio-ankle vascular index (CAVI). Biomed Pharmacother 2004;58:S95-8.
7. Arterial Stiffness Index “CAVI”; CAVI (Cardio-Ankle Vascular Index). (Accessed January 2013, at https://www. fukuda.co.jp/english/products/special_features/vasera/ cavi.html)
8. Gojaseni P, Phaopha A, Chailimpamontree W, et al. Prevalence and risk factors of microalbuminuria in Thai nondiabetic hypertensive patients. Vasc Health Risk Manag 2010;6:157-65.