Context Prior analyses of National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES)
data through 1991 have suggested that hypertension prevalence is declining,
but more recent self-reported rates of hypertension suggest that the rate
is increasing.
Objective To describe trends in the prevalence, awareness, treatment, and control
of hypertension in the United States using NHANES data.
Design, Setting, and Participants Survey using a stratified multistage probability sample of the civilian
noninstitutionalized population. The most recent NHANES survey, conducted
in 1999-2000 (n = 5448), was compared with the 2 phases of NHANES III conducted
in 1988-1991 (n = 9901) and 1991-1994 (n = 9717). Individuals aged 18 years
or older were included in this analysis.
Main Outcome Measures Hypertension, defined as a measured blood pressure of 140/90 mm Hg or
greater or reported use of antihypertensive medications. Hypertension awareness
and treatment were assessed with standardized questions. Hypertension control
was defined as treatment with antihypertensive medication and a measured blood
pressure of less than 140/90 mm Hg.
Results In 1999-2000, 28.7% of NHANES participants had hypertension, an increase
of 3.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0%-8.3%) from 1988-1991. Hypertension
prevalence was highest in non-Hispanic blacks (33.5%), increased with age
(65.4% among those aged ≥60 years), and tended to be higher in women (30.1%).
In a multiple regression analysis, increasing age, increasing body mass index,
and non-Hispanic black race/ethnicity were independently associated with increased
rates of hypertension. Overall, in 1999-2000, 68.9% were aware of their hypertension
(nonsignificant decline of −0.3%; 95% CI, −4.2% to 3.6%), 58.4%
were treated (increase of 6.0%; 95% CI, 1.2%-10.8%), and hypertension was
controlled in 31.0% (increase of 6.4%; 95% CI, 1.6%-11.2%). Women, Mexican
Americans, and those aged 60 years or older had significantly lower rates
of control compared with men, younger individuals, and non-Hispanic whites.
Conclusions Contrary to earlier reports, hypertension prevalence is increasing in
the United States. Hypertension control rates, although improving, continue
to be low. Programs targeting hypertension prevention and treatment are of
utmost importance.
Hypertension is a major risk factor for cardiovascular disease morbidity
and mortality.1-3 The
National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), conducted by the
National Center for Health Statistics, provides periodic information on the
health of the US population. Based on earlier analyses of NHANES data, with
the possible exception of black men aged 50 years or older, hypertension prevalence
has decreased between 1960 and 1991.4 In addition,
during this time, the entire population-based blood pressure (BP) distribution
shifted downward.5
In apparent contrast with these favorable trends, according to the Behavioral
Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS), self-reported hypertension was 24.9%
in 1999 compared with 22.9% in 1991.6 This
increase may represent an increase in awareness, but because the BRFSS does
not include BP measurements, the current hypertension prevalence rate in the
community is not known.
Despite the overwhelming evidence that hypertension control is associated
with a significant reduction in cardiovascular events,7-9 less
than 25% of the US population with hypertension had their BP controlled in
1988-1991.10 The goal of the US Department
of Health and Human Services that 50% of Americans with hypertension have
their BP controlled by the year 2000 was not met, and this goal has been reestablished
to be achieved by 2010.11,12 Recent
trends in hypertension control in the US population are not known.
We analyzed NHANES data to determine trends in the prevalence, awareness,
treatment, and control of hypertension in the United States between 1988 and
2000.
NHANES is a stratified multistage probability sample of the civilian
noninstitutionalized US population. The third NHANES was conducted in 2 phases
between 1988 and 1994; the first phase in 1988-1991 and the second phase in
1991-1994.13 The most recent NHANES was conducted
in 1999 and 2000.12 Although each of the surveys
has an overall similar design, the 1999-2000 survey has a smaller sample size
and is the first part of the continuous NHANES.14 This
may lead to a higher SE for variables measured in the 1999-2000 survey.15 All participants provided informed consent and the
data were approved by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Institutional
Review Board as ensuring confidentiality.14 For
this analysis, we included data on all participants aged 18 years or older.
This includes age, sex, and self-assigned race/ethnicity (non-Hispanic whites,
non-Hispanic blacks, Mexican Americans, and other racial groups, including
non–Mexican American Hispanic whites and blacks). In addition, body
mass index (BMI; calculated as weight in kilograms divided by the square of
height in meters) and BP measurements and hypertension and diabetes mellitus
history were included.
A certified operator performed BP measurements using a mercury sphygmomanometer
and a standardized procedure in each survey during the home interview and
during the physical examination at home or at a mobile examination center.
A cuff size appropriate for the participant's arm circumference was used.
Quality control was ensured by operator recertification, procedural checklists,
and data review.16,17 In the 1999-2000
phase, 9.7% had fewer than 3 BP readings compared with 0.5% in the 1991-1994
phase and 0.4% in the 1988-1991 phase (P<.01).
A small (<1%) and similar number of participants in all 3 phases reported
that they had never had a BP measurement. Those interviewed but not examined
were not included in the analysis (n = 1076 in 1988-1991, n = 790 in 1991-1994,
and n = 472 in 1999-2000).
Each survey used similar questions for hypertension history. We considered
a participant to be hypertensive if the average systolic BP (SBP) was 140
mm Hg or higher or the average diastolic BP (DBP) was 90 mm Hg or higher or
if the participant was currently receiving antihypertensive medications. The
same criteria were used for both diabetic and nondiabetic participants. Participants
were considered to be aware of their hypertension if they answered "yes" to
the interview question "Have you ever been told by a doctor or health professional
that you had hypertension, also called high blood pressure?" Participants
were considered to be treated if they answered "yes" to the interview question
"Because of your high blood pressure/hypertension are you now taking prescribed
medicine?" Participants were considered to have their hypertension controlled
if they were receiving antihypertensive medications and their average SBP
was less than 140 mm Hg and average DBP was less than 90 mm Hg. A separate
control variable was defined for diabetic participants. Participants were
considered diabetic if they answered "yes" to at least 1 of these interview
questions: "Have you ever been told by a doctor that you have diabetes or
sugar diabetes?" or "Are you now taking insulin?" or "Are you now taking diabetes
pills to lower blood sugar?" Diabetic participants were considered to have
controlled hypertension if they were receiving antihypertensive medication
and their mean BP was below the recommended target. Because of the change
in recommendations between 1988 and 2000 to a lower target BP in diabetic
individuals, we defined control in those with diabetes based on 2 criteria
for BP: a mean SBP of less than 140 mm Hg and a mean DBP of less than 90 mm
Hg, and a mean SBP of less than 130 mm Hg and a mean DBP of less than 85 mm
Hg.18
Each survey oversampled African Americans, Mexican Americans, and individuals
aged 60 years or older.14,19 To
adjust for oversampling, special sampling weights were included in our analysis.
These weights also adjusted for nonresponse bias and poststratification population
totals.20 To obtain estimates of the sampling
errors, a Taylor linear approximation method and jackknife 1 procedures were
used in each of the 3 surveys.19,21,22 In
consideration of the complex sample design, SAS version 8.02 (SURVEYMEANS,
SURVEYREG)23 and WesVar version 4.2 (Westat
Inc, Rockville, Md) software were used. For statistical analyses of differences
over time, data from the 1999-2000 survey were compared with 1988-1991 data
rather than the entire NHANES III survey to provide more comparable sample
sizes. The test for a linear trend over the 3 phases of the NHANES survey
is the same as for a comparison of the first and last surveys. In accordance
with the Joint Policy on Variance Estimation, estimates with a coefficient
of variation larger than 0.30 or a sample size smaller than the recommended
size for the design effect or the estimated proportion were considered unreliable.15,24 Hypothesis testing was not performed
on unreliable estimates. Age adjustment and population estimates were calculated
using the standard 2000 US population estimates, with a population breakdown
by 10-year increments.25 The following age
groups were used in this analysis in accordance with the 1999-2000 survey's
analytic guidelines: 18-39 years, 40-59 years, and 60 years or older.15 Tests for trend were performed using the t test for comparisons of weighted means (to adjust for sampling weights)
between the 1988-1991 and 1999-2000 data. We used a conservative approach
for statistical significance (α = .01) to help account for multiple
comparisons. Multiple regression analysis was performed with hypertension
as the outcome variable and age, sex, race/ethnicity, and BMI as predictors
to calculate the independent association between the predictors and the outcome
variables. This analysis was performed separately for each of the 3 phases.
Results were nonstandardized. We used SAS SURVEYREG and WesVar to account
for survey design and sampling weights. The increase in hypertension prevalence
attributable to BMI was determined by running the regression model and performing
analysis of covariance to determine the independent associations between hypertension
and BMI.
Table 1 provides the sample
sizes by sex, race/ethnicity, and age. Average age of the participants, sex,
racial/ethnic distribution, and mean SBP and DBP were similar in each of the
3 phases (Table 2.) Participants
in 1999-2000 had a higher BMI (P<.001) and a higher
prevalence of diabetes than in 1988-1991 (P<.001).
In 1999-2000, the age-adjusted hypertension prevalence was 28.7% (Table 3), an absolute increase of 3.7%
compared with 1988-1991. Non-Hispanic blacks had the highest prevalence of
hypertension (P = .04 for 1988-1991, P = .001 for 1991-1994, and P = .01 for 1999-2000)
and Mexican Americans had the lowest rates (P<.001
for all 3) in all 3 surveys, and rates for all racial/ethnic groups tended
to increase between 1988 and 2000. Hypertension prevalence increased to a
greater extent in individuals aged 60 years or older than in younger individuals.
Non-Hispanic black women had the greatest increase in hypertension prevalence
and non-Hispanic white men had the smallest (7.2% of non-Hispanic black women
vs 1.0% of non-Hispanic white men). Hypertension prevalence in all age, sex,
and race/ethnicity groups is shown in Figure
1. Based on the 1999-2000 survey, among both men and women, hypertension
prevalence in those aged 40 to 59 years and those aged 60 years or older was
higher in non-Hispanic blacks than in non-Hispanic whites and Mexican Americans.
A multiple regression analysis was carried out to assess the independent
association of hypertension prevalence with demographics and BMI, considered
simultaneously (Table 4). In each
of the 3 surveys, hypertension was associated with increasing age (P<.001), non-Hispanic black race/ethnicity (P<.001), and higher BMI (P<.001). Hypertension
was not associated with sex (P = .37) in the regression
analysis. In all 3 surveys, demographic characteristics and BMI accounted
for 30% to 31% (age accounted for 26%, non-Hispanic black race/ethnicity for
0.4%, and BMI for 5%) of the hypertension prevalence.
To address the possibility that the increase in the age-adjusted hypertension
prevalence could be secondary to the increase in BMI from 1988-1991 to 1999-2000,
we calculated the contribution of this increase in BMI to the increase in
hypertension prevalence. Adjusting the 1988-1991 hypertension prevalence for
the differences between 1988-1991 and 1999-2000 covariates using analysis
of covariance, 2.0% of the 3.6% increase of hypertension prevalence was attributable
to an increase in BMI.
Because the recommended goal for hypertension control has been changed
to less than 130/85 mm Hg in those with diabetes,18 we
considered the possibility that the increase in prevalence in the 1999-2000
phase may be due to initiation of antihypertensive therapy at lower BP levels,
in accord with this new recommendation. A separate analysis of age-adjusted
prevalence excluding those with diabetes demonstrated an increase in hypertension
prevalence between 1988 and 2000, but this increase was no longer significant
(24.3 [SE, 2.0] in 1988-1991 vs 27.8 [SE, 1.9] in 1999-2000; P = .10).
In 1999-2000, 68.9% of all hypertensive participants were aware of their
hypertension, and 58.4% were receiving BP medication (Table 5). Hypertension was controlled in 53.1% of those taking medication,
and among all hypertensive participants, BP was controlled in only 31.0%.
Awareness remained unchanged from 1988 to 2000, although treatment and overall
control increased by 6.0% (P = .007) and 6.4% (P = .004), respectively. Among participants with diabetes,
control rates declined but not significantly, possibly because of the small
number of hypertensive individuals with diabetes. Based on the BP criterion
of less than 140/90 mm Hg, 46.9% of all patients with hypertension and diabetes
had their hypertension controlled in 1999-2000 compared with 53.1% in 1988-1991.
Control rates were lower for participants with diabetes, based on the BP criterion
of less than 130/85 mm Hg.
We then evaluated the separate effects of sex, race/ethnicity, and age
on hypertension awareness, treatment, and control (Table 6). Between 1988 and 2000, hypertension awareness rates remained
stable in both men and women. Hypertension treatment and control rates increased
in men (P<.001 for both) but did not change significantly
in women. In the 1999-2000 survey, hypertension awareness was similar between
men and women (P = .12), whereas treatment rates
were higher, although nonsignificantly (P = .03),
and control rates in those being treated were lower (P =
.006) in women than in men.
Hypertension awareness rates were unchanged and treatment rates improved
in all 3 racial/ethnic groups between 1988 and 2000, but the increase was
only significant in non-Hispanic whites (non-Hispanic whites, P = .009; non-Hispanic blacks, P = .02; and
Mexican Americans, P = .05). Hypertension control
rates improved in non-Hispanic whites (P = .01 for
treated hypertension and P = .002 for all hypertension);
non-Hispanic white men demonstrated the highest increase in control rates
(P<.001) (Table
6). Control rates did not change significantly for Mexican Americans
between 1988 and 2000. In the 1999-2000 survey, hypertension awareness (P = .005), treatment (P<.001),
and overall control rates (P<.001) were lower
in Mexican Americans than in non-Hispanic whites and non-Hispanic blacks.
Furthermore, rates of hypertension control among those being treated were
lower in non-Hispanic blacks than in non-Hispanic whites (P = .02) (Table 5).
Hypertension awareness did not change significantly from 1988 to 2000
in any age group (Table 7). Treatment
(P = .01) and control (P =
.006 for treated and P<.001 for all) improved
significantly in those aged 40 to 59 years between 1988 and 2000, whereas
only overall control rates improved in those aged 60 years or older (P = .02). Despite similar hypertension awareness and treatment
rates, control rates were lower during each of the 3 surveys in participants
aged 60 years or older than in those aged 40 to 59 years (P = .03 for 1988-1991 and P<.001 for 1999-2000)
(Table 7). Hypertension awareness,
treatment, and control rates tended to be lowest in participants aged 18 to
39 years in each of the 3 surveys. However, because of the low hypertension
prevalence and the high relative SE in this age group, these observations
must be interpreted cautiously.
Figure 2 depicts overall hypertension
control rates by age group (excluding those ≤39 years) and by race/ethnicity
for men and women in the 1999-2000 survey. For both sexes and both age groups,
Mexican Americans had the lowest rates of hypertension control. In those aged
40 to 59 years, non-Hispanic black men and women had lower rates of hypertension
control than non-Hispanic whites. However, in those aged 60 years or older,
hypertension control rates were similar in non-Hispanic white and non-Hispanic
black men, whereas the rate of hypertension control was lower in non-Hispanic
white than in non-Hispanic black women aged 60 years or older.
This analysis indicates that almost 29% of the adult US population,
an estimated 58.4 million individuals, had hypertension in 1999-2000. This
is an overall increase from 1988-1991 and demonstrates a reversal of the previously
reported trend of an overall decline in hypertension prevalence between 1960
and 1991 using the NHANES survey.4 It also
shows that women, non-Hispanic blacks, and the older population have the highest
rates of hypertension. In 1999-2000, almost 30% of all hypertensive individuals
were unaware of their illness, 42% were not being treated, and, at the time
that their BP was measured, 69% did not have their hypertension controlled.
Women, older participants, and Mexican Americans tended to have the lowest
rates of control. In addition, in 1999-2000, nearly 75% of all patients with
diabetes and hypertension did not have their hypertension controlled to the
BP target of less than 130/85 mm Hg recommended in 1997.18
The observed increase in hypertension prevalence during the last 10
years is in accordance with results from the BRFSS.6 However,
as expected, the prevalence based on NHANES data is higher because BP measurement
was not performed in the BRFSS survey. Our data suggest that the increased
prevalence is not explained by an increased awareness of hypertension. Potentially,
the increased prevalence may be related to an increase in BMI as well as the
aging of the US population. Based on an analysis of NHANES data, Flegal et
al26 recently reported an increase in prevalence
of obesity during this same period. Our analysis indicates that BMI was associated
with higher hypertension prevalence after adjusting for age, sex, and race/ethnicity
and contributed to 2%—more than half—of the 3.6% increase in hypertension
prevalence. Therefore, the increased prevalence of hypertension between 1988-1991
and 1999-2000 appears to be partially related to but not solely secondary
to the increase in BMI.
Although awareness rates remained unchanged, treatment and control rates
have each increased by approximately 6% between 1988 and 2000. In the latest
survey, treatment and control rates of 58% and 31% are comparable with rates
observed in the Framingham data between 1990 and 1995, in which 60.7% of hypertensive
patients were treated and 29% had their hypertension controlled.27 Furthermore,
our analysis shows that, compared with younger individuals with hypertension,
older individuals with hypertension have a lower rate of control despite being
equally likely to be treated. Although previous studies have also shown that
hypertension is less likely to be controlled in older patients,27-30 this
analysis demonstrates that since 1988 the control rate in the elderly population
has minimally increased and remains lower than in those aged 40 to 59 years.
We also observed that Mexican Americans had lower rates of awareness, treatment,
and control than non-Hispanic whites and non-Hispanic blacks. This pattern
persisted between 1988 and 2000.
Women had a greater increase in hypertension prevalence than men from
1988 to 2000, and in the 1999-2000 survey, hypertension prevalence was higher
in women aged 60 years or older than in any other age or sex group. Other
surveys have suggested higher prevalence of hypertension in elderly women.
For example, in the National Health Interview Survey, 38% of women 65 to 74
years old reported hypertension compared with 31% of men in the same age group.31 In the current analysis, despite the increase in
hypertension prevalence in women, awareness, treatment, and control rates
remained unchanged from 1988 to 2000.
Lowering BP in patients with diabetes and hypertension is associated
with decreases in cardiovascular events and renal failure.32,33 Our
analysis demonstrates that in 1999-2000, only one quarter of diabetic participants
receiving antihypertensive drugs had their hypertension controlled to the
recommended BP of less than 130/85 mm Hg. In addition, between 1988 and 2000,
the hypertension control rate tended to decline in diabetic participants based
on each of the 2 different BP target criteria, although these changes did
not reach statistical significance. With the increased prevalence rate of
diabetes mellitus observed in this analysis, uncontrolled hypertension with
diabetes is an important health problem in the United States.
The low control rates observed in this analysis can be explained in
part by lack of awareness or treatment. However, even in those who reported
that they were receiving hypertension medications, only 53% had hypertension
controlled to the recommended target. In addition, recent analysis of the
Framingham Heart Study demonstrated that control was only 33.7% at follow-up
in a cohort of participants with hypertension that was treated and uncontrolled
at baseline.34 Conceivably, different health
insurance coverage may affect different age-related rates of hypertension
awareness and control and the effect of age on race/ethnicity and sex differences.
However, despite universal health insurance (Medicare) for those aged 65 years
or older, hypertension control rates were lowest among individuals aged 60
years or older. Other reports have also noted low hypertension control rates
in the elderly,28 in patients treated at a
Veterans Administration hospital,35 and in
inner-city African Americans,36 despite availability
and access to medical care. These observations suggest that improving the
health care system to better manage hypertension may improve BP control in
the United States. In addition, improving hypertension awareness should result
in improved treatment and control rates.
Although measurements obtained at a single point in time may overestimate
the prevalence of hypertension, this potential problem was minimized by taking
the average of 3 separate measurements obtained under the same standardized
conditions in each of the surveys. Other potential sources of bias in the
reported estimates of hypertension prevalence include possible BP control
by nonpharmacological means (diet and exercise), failure to sample homeless
or other unnumerated persons, possible differential response rates, and lack
of estimates for smaller racial/ethnic groups. Also, this analysis depends
on a national survey that documents self-reported medical history. Although
this method has been shown to be accurate in estimating hypertension prevalence,37 limitations exist. Participants who report inaccurately
that they are not receiving antihypertensive medications or who cannot recall
if their physician has ever told them that they have hypertension are considered
nonhypertensive or unaware of their disease. Also, participants who have been
told that they have hypertension but are not receiving medications and have
BP below the 140/90 mm Hg cut points are not counted as hypertensive. In addition,
in this survey, medication use or type was not confirmed, which can lead to
misclassification. For example, participants may have been using medications
that lower BP for another indication.
Despite progress in treatment and control, hypertension remains an important
public health problem, and our analysis of the NHANES data has significant
public health implications. The increase in hypertension prevalence in women,
non-Hispanic blacks, and older individuals highlights the need for interventions
that would target prevention in these groups. Even greater strides will need
to be made, as the importance of reducing BP with healthy lifestyle interventions
in prehypertensive individuals in the general population (BP of 120-129/80-89
mm Hg) has recently been emphasized, and the target BP goal for antihypertensive
therapy in diabetic individuals has been lowered to less than 130/80 mm Hg.38 In addition, improving hypertension treatment and
control in women, the older population, Mexican Americans, and diabetic individuals
will have a significant impact on overall control rates, which would be translated
into improved cardiovascular outcomes. Although control rates have improved
since 1988, these rates remain unacceptably low. If the increase in hypertension
control rates remains at the current pace, the 50% target for hypertension
control by 2010 will not be met. Programs targeting hypertension prevention
to achieve the 16% target for hypertension prevalence by 2010 and improving
awareness and treatment are of utmost importance for the health of the US
population.
1.Kannel WB. Framingham study insights into hypertensive risk of cardiovascular
disease.
Hypertens Res.1995;18:181-196.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=7584927
Google Scholar 2.Himmelmann A, Hedner T, Hansson L.
et al. Isolated systolic hypertension: an important cardiovascular risk factor.
Blood Press.1998;7:197-207.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=9858111
Google Scholar 3.Kannel WB. Hypertension as a risk factor for cardiac events—epidemiologic
results of long-term studies.
J Cardiovasc Pharmacol.1993;21(suppl 2):S27-S37.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=7692148
Google Scholar 4.Burt VL, Cutler JA, Higgoins M.
et al. Trends in the prevalence, awareness, treatment, and control of hypertension
in the adult US population: data from the Health Examination Surveys, 1960-1991.
Hypertension.1995;26:60-69.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=7607734
Google Scholar 5.Goff DC, Howard G, Russell GB, Labarthe DR. Birth cohort evidence of population influences on blood pressure in
the United States, 1887-1994.
Ann Epidemiol.2001;11:271-9.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=11306346
Google Scholar 6.Ayla C, Greenlund KJ, Croft JB.
et al. State-specific trends in self-reported blood pressure screening and
high blood pressure—United States, 1991-1999.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep.2002;51:456-460.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=12054423
Google Scholar 7.Hansson L, Zanchetti A, Carruthers SG.
et al. Effects of intensive blood pressure lowering and low-dose aspirin in
patients with hypertension.
Lancet.1998;351:1755-1762.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=9635947
Google Scholar 8.SHEP Cooperative Research Group. Prevention of stroke by antihypertensive drug treatment in older persons
with isolated systolic hypertension.
JAMA.1991;265:3255-3264.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=2046107
Google Scholar 9.Neal B, MacMahon S, Chapman N.for the Blood Pressure Lowering Treatment Trialists' Collaboration. Effects of ACE inhibitors, calcium antagonists, and other blood-pressure-lowering
drugs.
Lancet.2000;356:1955-1964.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=11130523
Google Scholar 10.Burt VL, Whelton P, Roccella EJ.
et al. Prevalence of hypertension in the US adult population: results from
the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 1988-1991.
Hypertension.1995;25:305-313.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=7875754
Google Scholar 11. Healthy People 2000: Midcourse Review and 1995 Revisons. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office; 1995.
12.US Department of Health and Human Services. Healthy People 2010: Understanding and Improving
Health. 2nd ed. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office; November 2000.
13. Plan and operation of the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination
Survey 1988-94.
Vital Health Stat 1.July 1994:1-407.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=7975354
Google Scholar 18. Sixth report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Evaluation,
Detection, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure.
Arch Intern Med.1997;157:2413-2442.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=9385294
Google Scholar 19. Sample design: Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey.
Vital Health Stat 2.September 1992:1-35.Google Scholar 20. National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey III: Weighting and
Estimation Methodology. Rockville, Md: Westat Inc; 1996.
21.Rust KF, Rao JN. Variance estimation for complex survey data using replicate methods.
Stat Methods Med Res.1996;5:283-310.Google Scholar 22.Rust KF. Variance estimation for complex estimators in sample surveys.
J Off Stat.1985;1:381-397.Google Scholar 23.Berglund PA. Analysis of complex sample survey data using the SURVEYMEANS and SURVEYREG
procedures and macro coding. In: Proceedings of the Twenty-Seventh Annual SAS
Users Group International Conference. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc;
2002.
25.Klein RJ, Schoenborn CA. Age adjustment using the 2000 projected US population.
Healthy People 2010 Stat Notes.January 2001:1-10.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=11676466
Google Scholar 26.Flegal KM, Carroll MD, Ogden CL, Johnson CL. Prevalence and trends in obesity among US adults, 1999-2000.
JAMA.2002;288:1723-1727.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=12365955
Google Scholar 27.Lloyd DM, Evans JC, Larson MG.
et al. Differential control of systolic and diastolic blood pressure.
Hypertension.2000;36:594-599.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=11040241
Google Scholar 28.Hyman DJ, Pavlik VN. Characteristics of patients with uncontrolled hypertension in the United
States.
N Engl J Med.2001;345:479-486.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=11519501
Google Scholar 29.Barker WH, Mullooly JP, Linton KL. Trends in hypertension prevalence, treatment, and control in a well-defined
older population.
Hypertension.1998;31(1 pt 2):552-559.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=9453361
Google Scholar 30.Wassertheil-Smoller S, Anderson G, Psaty BM.
et al. Hypertension and its treatment in postmenopausal women: baseline data
from the Women's Health Initiative.
Hypertension.2000;36:780-789.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=11082143
Google Scholar 31. Hypertension: A Common Condition for Older Americans. Washington, DC: National Academy on an Aging Society; 2000.
32.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.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=9732337
Google Scholar 33. Effect of 3 years of antihypertensive therapy on renal structure in
type 1 diabetic patients with albuminuria: the European Study for the Prevention
of Renal Disease in Type 1 Diabetes (ESPRIT).
Diabetes.2001;50:843-850.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=11289051
Google Scholar 34.Lloyd-Jones DM, Evans JC, Larson MG, Levy D. Treatment and control of hypertension in the community.
Hypertension.2002;40:640-646.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=12411456
Google Scholar 35.Berlowitz DR, Ash AS, Hickey EC.
et al. Inadequate management of blood pressure in a hypertensive population.
N Engl J Med.1998;339:1957-1963.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=9869666
Google Scholar 36.Kotchen JM, Shakoor-Abdullah B, Walker WE, Chelius TH, Hoffmann RG, Kotchen TA. Hypertension control and access to medical care in the inner city.
Am J Public Health.1998;88:1696-1699.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=9807539
Google Scholar 37.Vargas CM, Burt VL, Gillum RF, Pamuk ER. Validity of self-reported hypertension in the National Health and Nutrition
Examination Survey III, 1988-1991.
Prev Med.1997;26(5 pt 1):678-685.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=9327477
Google Scholar 38.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 JNC7 report.
JAMA.2003;289:2560-2571.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/htbin-post/Entrez/query?db=m&form=6&Dopt=r&uid=12748199
Google Scholar