Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 17, 2025

Improved Home Blood Pressure Control by CT-guided Ozone-mediated Renal Denervation for Patients with Resistant Hypertension
Published on: June 6, 2025
STEPWISE management of clinically apparent resistant hypertension in primary care: a cluster randomised controlled
Birsen Kiliç1, Marion C J Biermans2, Michiel L Bots3
1Department of General Practice & Nursing Science, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Insights
A structured approach to managing resistant hypertension in primary care did not significantly lower blood pressure compared to usual care. This study found no significant differences in 24-hour or office systolic blood pressure between the groups.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Primary Care Medicine
- Clinical Trials
Background:
- Clinically apparent resistant hypertension (CARH) is a prevalent condition associated with increased cardiovascular event risk.
- Effective management strategies for CARH in primary care are crucial for patient outcomes.
- This study addresses the need for evidence-based approaches to control difficult-to-manage hypertension.
Purpose of the Study:
- To evaluate the effectiveness of a stepwise management strategy for CARH in primary care.
- To compare blood pressure control in patients receiving a structured intervention versus usual care.
- To determine if a pragmatic, stepwise approach improves outcomes for resistant hypertension patients.
Main Methods:
- A pragmatic, cluster-randomised controlled trial (cRCT) involving 106 patients across 22 general practitioner practices.
- Patients had office blood pressure >140/90 mmHg despite three or more antihypertensive medications.
- The intervention included 24-hour BP monitoring, assessment of BP-raising compounds, lifestyle, compliance, medication optimization, and specialist referral when needed.
Main Results:
- No significant difference in 24-hour systolic blood pressure (136.9 mmHg vs. 132.6 mmHg, p=0.15) or office systolic blood pressure (146.1 mmHg vs. 147.6 mmHg, p=0.51) at 8 months.
- Similar rates of controlled hypertension (22% vs. 28%) and number of prescribed BP-lowering medications (2.98 vs. 3.11) between the intervention and usual care groups.
- The stepwise approach did not yield statistically significant improvements in blood pressure control.
Conclusions:
- A pragmatic, structured stepwise approach for managing CARH in primary care does not appear to be more effective than usual care.
- Further research may be needed to identify optimal strategies for resistant hypertension management in primary care settings.
- The findings suggest that current usual care may be as effective as the tested stepwise intervention for this patient group.
Background:
Clinically apparent resistant hypertension (CARH) is common and a major health problem because it increases the risk of cardiovascular events. We aim to assess whether a stepwise work-up management strategy for patients with CARH in primary care would result in better blood pressure control compared to usual care.
Methods:
A pragmatic, cluster-randomised controlled trial (cRCT). General practitioners (GPs) from 22 practices (10 intervention arm; 12 usual care) recruited 106 patients aged 18-80 years who had an office blood pressure (BP) > 140/90 mmHg and were prescribed three or more antihypertensive drugs from different therapeutic classes for three or more months in an adequate dose. This study was conducted between October 2018 and June 2021. The intervention was a stepwise approach comprising of (i) 24-hour blood pressure measurements, (ii) dedicated attention on intake of blood pressure raising compounds, (iii) on lifestyle and on compliance to and (iv) optimalisation of medication, and (v) referral to specialist care, when appropriate. The control group received usual care. Primary outcome was the difference in 24-hours systolic BP between intervention and usual care measured at 8 months after baseline.
Results:
Neither 24-hour nor office systolic BP 8 months after baseline significantly differed between intervention and usual care arm: 136.9 mmHg versus 132.6 mmHg (p = 0.15) and 146.1 mmHg versus 147.6 mmHg (p = 0.51), respectively. No significant differences across groups were seen in number of prescribed BP lowering medication: 2.98 versus 3.11, or controlled hypertension after 8 months: 22% versus 28%.
Conclusions:
Our results suggest that a pragmatic, structured stepwise approach of CARH does not result in lower 24 h or office BP values compared to usual primary care.
Trial Registration:
NTR7304 (www.trialregister.nl/trial/7099), May 4th, 2018.
Related Concept Videos
Hypertension V: Nursing Management
Hypertension IV: Drug Therapy and Lifestyle Modifications
Hypertension I: Introduction
Hypertension III: Clinical Manifestations and Diagnostic Studies
Heart Failure V: Medical Management
Hypertension and Regulation of Blood Pressure

