Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2024 Apr 9.
Published in final edited form as: Hypertension. 2017 May 8;70(1):50–58. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.117.09188

Table 2.

Treatment and Control Rates of Conventional and Ambulatory Hypertension by Cohort

Conventional Hypertension Ambulatory Hypertension
Cohort All HT Treated and Controlled Treated and Not Controlled Not Treated All HT Treated and Controlled Treated and Not Controlled Not Treated
Copenhagen 952 105 (11.0) 214 (22.5) 633 (66.5) 1045 108 (10.3) 211 (20.2) 726 (69.5)
Ohasama 591 242 (40.9) 196 (33.2) 153 (25.9) 609 261 (42.8) 177 (29.1) 171 (28.1)
Noorderkempen 377 98 (26.0) 95 (25.2) 184 (48.8) 332 124 (37.4) 69 (20.8) 139 (41.9)
Montevideo 488 66 (13.5) 162 (33.2) 260 (53.3) 471 73 (15.5) 155 (32.9) 243 (51.6)
JingNing 94 9 (9.6) 34 (36.2) 51 (54.3) 111 8 (7.2) 35 (31.5) 68 (61.3)
EPOGH 252 61 (24.2) 99 (39.3) 92 (36.5) 259 63 (24.3) 97 (37.5) 99 (38.2)
Maracaibo 472 17 (3.6) 151 (32.0) 304 (64.4) 362 69 (19.1) 99 (27.3) 194 (53.6)
All 3226 598 (18.5) 951 (29.5) 1677 (52.0) 3189 706 (22.1) 843 (26.5) 1640 (51.4)

Values are n (percentage). Treatment and control rates were assessed among those with hypertension. Conventional hypertension was a conventional blood pressure ≥140 mm Hg systolic or ≥90 mm Hg diastolic or use of antihypertensive drugs. Ambulatory hypertension was a 24-hour systolic blood pressure ≥130 mm Hg systolic or ≥80 mm Hg diastolic or use of antihypertensive drugs. EPOGH indicates European Project on Genes in Hypertension; and HT, hypertension.