Let's Not SPRINT to Judgment About New Blood Pressure Goals
Authors: Cora E. Lewis, Karen C. Johnson, Mahboob Rahman, Kaycee M. Sink, Walter T. Ambrosius
Journal: Annals of Internal Medicine (2016)

Letters20 December 2016Let's Not SPRINT to Judgment About New Blood Pressure GoalsCora E. Lewis, MD, MSPH, Karen C. Johnson, MD, MPH, Mahboob Rahman, MD, Kaycee M. Sink, MD, MAS, and Walter T. Ambrosius, PhDCora E. Lewis, MD, MSPHFrom University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama; University of Tennessee Health Sciences Center, Memphis, Tennessee; Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio; Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina.Search for more papers by this author, Karen C. Johnson, MD, MPHFrom University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama; University of Tennessee Health Sciences Center, Memphis, Tennessee; Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio; Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina.Search for more papers by this author, Mahboob Rahman, MDFrom University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama; University of Tennessee Health Sciences Center, Memphis, Tennessee; Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio; Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina.Search for more papers by this author, Kaycee M. Sink, MD, MASFrom University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama; University of Tennessee Health Sciences Center, Memphis, Tennessee; Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio; Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina.Search for more papers by this author, and Walter T. Ambrosius, PhDFrom University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama; University of Tennessee Health Sciences Center, Memphis, Tennessee; Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio; Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina.Search for more papers by this authorAuthor, Article, and Disclosure Informationhttps://doi.org/10.7326/L16-0441 SectionsAboutFull TextPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail TO THE EDITOR:Ortiz and James (1) state that the absolute risk reduction for the primary outcome of SPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial) with an intensive compared with a standard systolic blood pressure treatment goal (16 events per 1000 persons treated) was outweighed by the absolute risk for harm (22 events per 1000 persons) over 3.2 years. More accurately, the absolute risk reduction (benefit) with intensive treatment was 18 events per 1000 persons and the absolute risk for harm was 23 events per 1000 persons over a median follow-up of 3.26 years.Their comparison overemphasizes harms by focusing on ...References1. Ortiz E, James PA. Let's not SPRINT to judgment about new blood pressure goals. Ann Intern Med. 2016;164:692-3. [PMID: 26902415]. doi:10.7326/M15-3123 LinkGoogle Scholar2. Wright JT, Williamson JD, Whelton PK, Snyder JK, Sink KM, Rocco MV, et al; SPRINT Research Group. A randomized trial of intensive versus standard blood-pressure control. N Engl J Med. 2015;373:2103-16. [PMID: 26551272] doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1511939 CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar3. Chobanian AV, Bakris GL, Black HR, Cushman WC, Green LA, Izzo JL Jr, et al; Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Seventh report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure. Hypertension. 2003;42:1206-52. [PMID: 14656957] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar4. James PA, Oparil S, Carter BL, Cushman WC, Dennison-Himmelfarb C, Handler J, et al. 2014 evidence-based guideline for the management of high blood pressure in adults: report from the panel members appointed to the Eighth Joint National Committee (JNC 8). JAMA. 2014;311:507-20. [PMID: 24352797] doi:10.1001/jama.2013.284427 CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar5. Chazal RA, Creager MA. New quality measure core sets provide continuity for measuring quality improvement: concerns raised about conflicting blood pressure measures [Editorial]. Hypertension. 2016;67:1053-4. [PMID: 26883270] doi:10.1161/HYP.0000000000000043 CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar Author, Article, and Disclosure InformationAffiliations: From University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama; University of Tennessee Health Sciences Center, Memphis, Tennessee; Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio; Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina.Disclaimer: All authors are investigators and receive support from the National Institutes of Health for SPRINT.Disclosures: Disclosures can be viewed at www.acponline.org/authors/icmje/ConflictOfInterestForms.do?msNum=L16-0441. PreviousarticleNextarticle Advertisement FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsSee AlsoLet's Not SPRINT to Judgment About New Blood Pressure Goals Eduardo Ortiz and Paul A. James Let's Not SPRINT to Judgment About New Blood Pressure Goals Eduardo Ortiz and Paul A. James Metrics Cited bySleep, insomnia, and depression 20 December 2016Volume 165, Issue 12Page: 889KeywordsAbsolute risk reductionAdverse eventsBlood pressureDisclosureKneesMortalityPrevention, policy, and public healthSerious adverse eventsSyncopeSystolic pressure ePublished: 20 December 2016 Issue Published: 20 December 2016 Copyright & PermissionsCopyright © 2016 by American College of Physicians. All Rights Reserved.PDF downloadLoading ...