Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Original Article
  • Published:

Blood pressure levels, risk factors and antihypertensive treatments: lessons from the SHEAF study

Journal of Human Hypertension volume 15, pages 841–848 (2001)Cite this article

Abstract

Objectives: The SHEAF study (Self measurement of blood pressure at Home in the Elderly: Assessment and Follow-up) is a 3-year prospective cohort study of French elderly (⩾60 years) hypertensive patients designed to assess whether home blood pressure (HBP) measurement provides additional prognostic information over office blood pressure (OBP) in terms of cardiovascular mortality and morbidity. The objective of the present work is to describe the baseline data of the population enrolled in the SHEAF study with special emphasis on blood pressure control in treated hypertensives.

Methods:During the 2-week initial inclusion phase, baseline demographics, cardiovascular risk factors, antihypertensive treatments as well as office and home blood pressure were recorded. Baseline OBP was assessed using a mercury sphygmomanometer (three consecutive measurements during two visits performed 2 weeks apart). HBP was performed over a 4-day period (three consecutive measurements in the morning and in the evening).

Results:A total of 4939 (95%) of the 5211 patients included in the SHEAF study were treated with at least one antihypertensive drug. Their ages ranged from 60 to 99 years (mean age 70 ± 7 years); 49% were men, 12% had a previous history of coronary artery disease, 14% diabetes and 43% a treated dyslipidaemia. A total of 45% of the treated patients received a single antihypertensive drug, 34% two drugs, 21% three drugs or more. Overall 23% of treated hypertensives were normalised at the doctor’s office (systolic BP <140 mm Hg and diastolic BP <90 mm Hg) and 27% at home (home systolic BP <135 mm Hg and home diastolic BP <85 mm Hg). Poor blood pressure control was associated with age, an increasing presence of diabetes and prescription of several antihypertensives. The proportion of subjects with controlled blood pressure decrease with age from 26% (60–69 years) to 21% (⩾80 years). Blood pressure control of diabetic patients was particularly poor as only 19% had an OBP <140/90 mm Hg and 6% a blood pressure <130/85 mm Hg. The percentage of patients with controlled OBP decreased from 26% when receiving a single antihypertensive drug to 11% when receiving four antihypertensives or more.

Conclusion: In the SHEAF study, less than one-third of the patients had an OBP adequately controlled thus confirming previous studies performed in younger populations. Presence of associated cardiovascular risk factors including diabetes did not give rise to a better blood pressure control. When blood pressure control was assessed using HBP measurement similar results were found. As the beneficial effect of antihypertensive treatment has been particularly well established in the elderly, the data of this study underlines the need for a closer and more rigorous management of elderly hypertensives.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Lang Tet al,for the Epidemiology group of the Société Française d’Hypertension Artérielle and the IHPAF working physicians groupEffect of measuring blood pressure on one or two occasions on estimation of prevalence and therapeutic control of arterial hypertension in a French active population Hypertension (in press)

  2. The Sixth Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure Arch Intern Med 1997 157 2413–2446

  3. Collins R et alBlood pressure, stroke, and coronary heart disease. Part 2, short-term reductions in blood pressure: overview of randomised drug trials in their epidemiological context Lancet 1990 335 827–839

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Dahlöf B et alMorbidity and mortality in the Swedish trial in Old Patients with Hypertension (STOP-Hypertension) Lancet 1991 338 1281–1285

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Hansson Let al,for the STOP-Hypertension-2 study groupRandomised trial of old and new antihypertensive drugs in elderlypatients: cardiovascular mortality and morbidity the Swedish Trial in Old Patients with Hypertension-2 study Lancet 1999 354 1751–1756

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. SHEP Cooperative Research Group Prevention of stroke by antihypertensive drug therapy in older persons with isolated systolic hypertension: final results of the systolic hypertension in the elderly program JAMA 1991 265 3255–3264

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Staessen JA et al,for the Systolic Hypertension in Europe (Syst-Eur) Trial InvestigatorsRandomised double-blind comparison of placebo and active treatment for olderpatients with isolated systolic hypertension Lancet 1997 350 757–764

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. 1999 World Health Organization-International Society of Hypertension Guidelines for the Management of Hypertension Guidelines Subcommittee J Hypertens 1999 17 151–183

    Google Scholar 

  9. Cruickshank JM, Thorp JM, Zacharias FJ Benefits and potential harm of lowering high blood pressure Lancet 1987 i 581–584

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Sackett DL et alPatient compliance with antihypertensive regimens Patient’s Counsel Health Educ 1978 1 18–21

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Mancia G et alEffect of blood pressure measurement by the doctor onpatient’s blood pressure and heart rate Lancet 1983 2 695–698

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Pickering TG et alHow common is white coat hypertension? JAMA 1998 259 225–228

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Genès N et alComment évaluer la valeur pronostique de l’automesure tensionnelle chez l’hypertendu âgé; protocole de l’étude SHEAF Presse Med 1999 28 870–874

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. O’Brien E, Mee F, Atkins N, Thomas M Evaluation of three devices for self-measurement of blood pressure according to the revised British Hypertension Society Protocol: the Omron HEM-705 CP, Philips HP 5332 and Nissei DS-175 Blood Press Monit 1996 1 55–61

    Google Scholar 

  15. Simes RJ An improved Bonferroni procedure for multiple tests of significance Biometrika 1986 73 751–754

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Gosse Ph et alEvaluation du trandolapril seul ou en association à un inhibiteur calcique chez l’hypertendu âgé de plus de 60 ans Ann Cardiol Angéiol 1995 44 517–524

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Vaur L et alUse of electronic pill-boxes to assess risk of poor treatment compliance Am J Hypertens 1999 12 374–380

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. National High Blood Pressure Education Program Working Group National High Blood Pressure Education Program Working Group Report on Hypertension in the Elderly Hypertension 1994 23 275–285

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Colhoun HM, Dong W, Poulter NR Blood pressure screening, management and control in England: results from the Health Survey for England 1994 J Hypertens 1998 16 747–752

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Garg R, Yusut S, for the Collaborative Group on ACE Inhibitor Trials Overview of randomized trials of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors on mortality and morbidity inpatients with heart failure JAMA 1995 273 1450–1456

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Cleland JGF ACE inhibitors for myocardial infarction: how should they be used? Eur Heart J 1995 16 153–159

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Hansson Let al,for the Captopril Prevention Project (CAPP) study groupEffects of angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibition compared with conventional therapy on cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in hypertension: the Captopril Prevention Project (CAPP) randomized trial Lancet 1999 353 611–616

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Burt VL et alTrends in the prevalence, awareness, treatment and control of hypertension in the adult US population. Data from the health examination surveys, 1960 to 1991 Hypertension 1995 26 60–69

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Mancia G et alBlood-pressure control in the hypertensive population Lancet 1997 349 454–57

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Chamontin B et alEvolution du contrôle de l’hypertension artérielle en France de 1994 à 1999 Arch Mal Coeur 1999 92 12

    Google Scholar 

  26. UK Prospective Diabetes Study group Tight blood pressure control and risk of macrovascular and microvascular complications in type 2 diabetes: UKPDS 38 BMJ 1998 317 703–713

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Hansson Let al,for the HOT study groupEffects of intensive blood pressure lowering and low-dose aspirin inpatients with hypertension: principal results of the Hypertension Optimal Treatment (HOT) randomised trial Lancet 1988 351 1755–1762

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Herpin D et alEtude HOT: qualité du contrôle tensionnel après 2 ans de suivi despatients Arch Mal Coeur 1997 90 1175–1179

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Girvin B, Johnston GD The implications of non compliance with antihypertensive medication Drugs 1996 52 186–195

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Médecine Interne et Cardiologie, Grenoble, CHU, France

    JM Mallion

  2. Laboratoire Aventis, Paris, France

    N Genès & L Vaur

  3. Orgamétrie, Wasquehal, France

    P Clerson

  4. Médecine Interne, Hôpital de la Timone, Marseille, France

    B Vaïsse

  5. Service d’Hypertension Artérielle, Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou, Paris, France

    G Bobrie

  6. Informatique Médicale, Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou, Paris, France

    G Chatellier

Authors
  1. JM Mallion
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. N Genès
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. L Vaur
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. P Clerson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. B Vaïsse
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. G Bobrie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. G Chatellier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to N Genès.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Mallion, J., Genès, N., Vaur, L. et al. Blood pressure levels, risk factors and antihypertensive treatments: lessons from the SHEAF study. J Hum Hypertens 15, 841–848 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.jhh.1001280

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.jhh.1001280

Keywords

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links