Cited by 192Pharmaceutical Practices and Patient OutcomesBlood Pressure and Hypertension StudiesCardiovascular Health and Disease Prevention

Effect of Antihypertensive Medication Reduction vs Usual Care on Short-term Blood Pressure Control in Patients With Hypertension Aged 80 Years and Older: The OPTIMISE Randomized Clinical Trial

Open access
Sheppard, James P., Burt, Jenni, Lown, Mark, Temple, Eleanor, Lowe, Rebecca, Fraser, Rosalyn, Allen, Julie, Ford, Gary A +12 more·2020·JAMA

Abstract

Importance: Deprescribing of antihypertensive medications is recommended for some older patients with polypharmacy and multimorbidity when the benefits of continued treatment may not outweigh the harms. Objective: This study aimed to establish whether antihypertensive medication reduction is possible without significant changes in systolic blood pressure control or adverse events during 12-week follow-up. Design, Setting, and Participants: The Optimising Treatment for Mild Systolic Hypertension in the Elderly (OPTIMISE) study was a randomized, unblinded, noninferiority trial conducted in 69 primary care sites in England. Participants, whose primary care physician considered them appropriate for medication reduction, were aged 80 years and older, had systolic blood pressure lower than 150 mm Hg, and were receiving at least 2 antihypertensive medications were included. Participants enrolled between April 2017 and September 2018 and underwent follow-up until January 2019. Interventions: Participants were randomized (1:1 ratio) to a strategy of antihypertensive medication reduction (removal of 1 drug [intervention], n = 282) or usual care (control, n = 287), in which no medication changes were mandated. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was systolic blood pressure lower than 150 mm Hg at 12-week follow-up. The prespecified noninferiority margin was a relative risk (RR) of 0.90. Secondary outcomes included the proportion of participants maintaining medication reduction and differences in blood pressure, frailty, quality of life, adverse effects, and serious adverse events. Results: Among 569 patients randomized (mean age, 84.8 years; 276 [48.5%] women; median of 2 antihypertensive medications prescribed at baseline), 534 (93.8%) completed the trial. Overall, 229 (86.4%) patients in the intervention group and 236 (87.7%) patients in the control group had a systolic blood pressure lower than 150 mm Hg at 12 weeks (adjusted RR, 0.98 [97.5% 1-sided CI, 0.92 to ∞]). Of 7 prespecified secondary end points, 5 showed no significant difference. Medication reduction was sustained in 187 (66.3%) participants at 12 weeks. Mean change in systolic blood pressure was 3.4 mm Hg (95% CI, 1.1 to 5.8 mm Hg) higher in the intervention group compared with the control group. Twelve (4.3%) participants in the intervention group and 7 (2.4%) in the control group reported at least 1 serious adverse event (adjusted RR, 1.72 [95% CI, 0.7 to 4.3]). Conclusions and Relevance: Among older patients treated with multiple antihypertensive medications, a strategy of medication reduction, compared with usual care, was noninferior with regard to systolic blood pressure control at 12 weeks. The findings suggest antihypertensive medication reduction in some older patients with hypertension is not associated with substantial change in blood pressure control, although further research is needed to understand long-term clinical outcomes. Trial Registration: EudraCT Identifier: 2016-004236-38; ISRCTN identifier: 97503221.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.2020.4871

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The evidence for the safety and efficacy of deintensification protocols in older adults is growing for both glucose and blood pressure management and is clearly relevant for palliative care.

    “The evidence for the safety and efficacy of deintensification protocols in older adults is growing for both glucose and blood pressure management (97,134) and is clearly relevant for palliative care.”

    From 13. Older Adults: <i>Standards of Care in Diabetes—2024</i> (2024) · cites this paper as [134]

    The Primary Outcome section reports that antihypertensive medication reduction was noninferior to usual care for blood-pressure control at 12 weeks, supporting the blood-pressure part of the claim. The Discussion says the trial was not powered to detect differences in adverse effects, and the Subgroup Analyses report more adverse events in the reduction group; this paper therefore does not establish safety. The separate glucose-management citation and the citing authors’ palliative-care framing are not assessed here. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The evidence for the safety and efficacy of deintensification protocols in older adults is growing for both glucose and blood pressure management and is clearly relevant for palliative care.

    “The evidence for the safety and efficacy of deintensification protocols in older adults is growing for both glucose and blood pressure management (104,153) and is clearly relevant for palliative care.”

    From 13. Older Adults: Standards of Care in Diabetes—2025 (2025) · cites this paper as [153]

    The Primary Outcome section reports that antihypertensive medication reduction was noninferior to usual care for blood-pressure control at 12 weeks in patients aged 80 or older. The Discussion says the trial was not powered to detect differences in adverse effects, and the Subgroup Analyses report more adverse events in the reduction group, so it does not establish safety. Glucose management is covered by the sentence’s other citation; relevance to palliative care is the citing authors’ framing. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The evidence for the safety and efficacy of deintensification protocols in older adults is growing for both glucose and blood pressure management and is clearly relevant for palliative care.

    “The evidence for the safety and efficacy of deintensification protocols in older adults is growing for both glucose and blood pressure management (113,174) and is clearly relevant for palliative care.”

    From 13. Older Adults: Standards of Care in Diabetes—2026 (2026) · cites this paper as [174]

    The Primary Outcome section reports that antihypertensive medication reduction was noninferior to usual care for blood-pressure control at 12 weeks in patients aged 80 or older, supporting the blood-pressure portion of the claim. The Subgroup Analyses report significantly more adverse events after reduction, and the Discussion says the trial could not establish longer-term benefits or harms. This paper therefore contributes short-term efficacy evidence, but does not establish the safety of deintensification protocols more broadly. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 32

  1. Violán C, Foguet-Boreu Q, Roso-Llorach A, et al. Burden of multimorbidity, socioeconomic status and use of health services across stages of life in urban areas: a cross-sectional study. BMC Public Health. 2014;14:530. doi:10.1186/1471-2458-14-530 · DOI
  2. Beckett NS, Peters R, Fletcher AE, et al; HYVET Study Group. Treatment of hypertension in patients 80 years of age or older. N Engl J Med. 2008;358 (18):1887-1898. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa0801369 · DOI · Paper page
  3. Wright JT Jr, Williamson JD, Whelton PK, et al; SPRINT Research Group. A randomized trial of intensive versus standard blood-pressure control. N Engl J Med. 2015;373(22):2103-2116. doi:10.1056/ NEJMoa1511939 · DOI · Paper page
  4. Sheppard JP, Singh S, Fletcher K, McManus RJ, Mant J. Impact of age and sex on primary preventive treatment for cardiovascular disease in the West Midlands, UK: cross sectional study. BMJ. 2012;345:e4535. doi:10.1136/bmj.e4535 · DOI
  5. Bress AP, Tanner RM, Hess R, Colantonio LD, Shimbo D, Muntner P. Generalizability of SPRINT results to the US adult population. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016;67(5):463-472. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2015.10.037 · DOI
  6. van Deudekom FJ, Postmus I, van der Ham DJ, et al. External validity of randomized controlled trials in older adults, a systematic review. PLoS One. 2017;12(3):e0174053. doi:10.1371/journal.pone. 0174053 · DOI
  7. Benetos A, Labat C, Rossignol P, et al. Treatment With multiple blood pressure medications, achieved blood pressure, and mortality in older nursing home residents: the PARTAGE study. JAMA Intern Med. 2015;175(6):989-995. doi:10.1001/ jamainternmed.2014.8012 · DOI
  8. Tinetti ME, Han L, Lee DS, et al. Antihypertensive medications and serious fall injuries in a nationally representative sample of older adults. JAMA Intern Med. 2014;174(4):588-595. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2013.14764 · DOI
  9. Mansfield KE, Nitsch D, Smeeth L, Bhaskaran K, Tomlinson LA. Prescription of renin-angiotensin system blockers and risk of acute kidney injury: a population-based cohort study. BMJ Open. 2016; 6(12):e012690. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012690 · DOI
  10. Benetos A, Bulpitt CJ, Petrovic M, et al. An expert opinion from the European Society of Hypertension-European Union Geriatric Medicine Society Working Group on the management of hypertension in very old, frail subjects. Hypertension. 2016;67(5):820-825. doi:10.1161/ HYPERTENSIONAHA.115.07020 · DOI
  11. Krishnaswami A, Steinman MA, Goyal P, et al; Geriatric Cardiology Section Leadership Council, American College of Cardiology. Deprescribing in older adults with cardiovascular disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019;73(20):2584-2595. doi:10.1016/j.jacc. 2019.03.467 · DOI
  12. Sheppard JP, Burt J, Lown M, et al. Optimising Treatment for Mild Systolic Hypertension in the Elderly (OPTiMISE): protocol for a randomised controlled non-inferiority trial. BMJ Open. 2018;8 (9):e022930. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2018-022930 · DOI
  13. Dennis M, Mead G, Doubal F, Graham C. Determining the modified Rankin score after stroke by postal and telephone questionnaires. Stroke. 2012;43(3):851-853. doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.111. 639708 · DOI
  14. Mattu GS, Heran BS, Wright JM. Overall accuracy of the BpTRU-an automated electronic blood pressure device. Blood Press Monit. 2004;9(1):47-52. doi:10.1097/00126097- 200402000-00009 · DOI
  15. Searle SD, Mitnitski A, Gahbauer EA, Gill TM, Rockwood K. A standard procedure for creating a frailty index. BMC Geriatr. 2008;8:24. doi:10.1186/ 1471-2318-8-24 · DOI · Paper page
  16. Clegg A, Bates C, Young J, et al. Development and validation of an electronic frailty index using routine primary care electronic health record data. Age Ageing. 2016;45(3):353-360. doi:10.1093/ ageing/afw039 · DOI
  17. Morley JE, Malmstrom TK, Miller DK. A simple frailty questionnaire (FRAIL) predicts outcomes in middle aged African Americans. J Nutr Health Aging. 2012;16(7):601-608. doi:10.1007/ s12603-012-0084-2 · DOI
  18. Moss-Morris R, Weinman J, Petrie K, et al. The Revised Illness Perception Questionnaire (IPQ-R). Psychol Health. 2002;17(1):1-16. doi:10.1080/ 08870440290001494 · DOI · Paper page
  19. van Hout B, Janssen MF, Feng YS, et al. Interim scoring for the EQ-5D-5L: mapping the EQ-5D-5L to EQ-5D-3L value sets. Value Health. 2012;15(5):708- 715. doi:10.1016/j.jval.2012.02.008 · DOI · Paper page
  20. Gulla C, Flo E, Kjome RL, Husebo BS. Deprescribing antihypertensive treatment in nursing home patients and the effect on blood pressure. J Geriatr Cardiol. 2018;15(4):275-283.
  21. Moonen JE, Foster-Dingley JC, de Ruijter W, et al. Effect of discontinuation of antihypertensive treatment in elderly people on cognitive functioning-the DANTE Study Leiden: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Intern Med. 2015; 175(10):1622-1630. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2015. 4103 · DOI
  22. Luymes CH, Poortvliet RKE, van Geloven N, et al. Deprescribing preventive cardiovascular medication in patients with predicted low cardiovascular disease risk in general practice-the ECSTATIC study: a cluster randomised non-inferiority trial. BMC Med. 2018;16(1):5. doi:10. 1186/s12916-017-0988-0 · DOI
  23. van der Wardt V, Harrison JK, Welsh T, Conroy S, Gladman J. Withdrawal of antihypertensive medication: a systematic review. J Hypertens. 2017; 35(9):1742-1749. doi:10.1097/HJH. 0000000000001405 · DOI
  24. Medical Research Council Working Party on Mild Hypertension. Course of blood pressure in mild hypertensives after withdrawal of long term antihypertensive treatment. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed). 1986;293(6553):988-992. doi:10.1136/bmj.293.6553. 988 · DOI
  25. Freis ED, Thomas JR, Fisher SG, et al. Effects of reduction in drugs or dosage after long-term control of systemic hypertension. Am J Cardiol. 1989;63(11):702-708. doi:10.1016/0002-9149(89) 90255-5 · DOI
  26. Sieg-Dobrescu D, Burnier M, Hayoz D, Brunner HR, Waeber B. The return of increased blood pressure after discontinuation of antihypertensive treatment is associated with an impaired post-ischemic skin blood flow response. J Hypertens. 2001;19(8):1387-1392. doi:10.1097/00004872- 200108000-00006 · DOI
  27. Schuling J, Gebben H, Veehof LJ, Haaijer-Ruskamp FM. Deprescribing medication in very elderly patients with multimorbidity: the view of Dutch GPs: a qualitative study. BMC Fam Pract. 2012;13:56. doi:10.1186/1471-2296-13-56 · DOI
  28. Palagyi A, Keay L, Harper J, Potter J, Lindley RI. Barricades and brickwalls-a qualitative study exploring perceptions of medication use and deprescribing in long-term care. BMC Geriatr. 2016; 16:15. doi:10.1186/s12877-016-0181-x · DOI
  29. Williamson JD, Supiano MA, Applegate WB, et al; SPRINT Research Group. Intensive vs standard blood pressure control and cardiovascular disease outcomes in adults aged Ն75 years: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2016;315(24):2673-2682. doi: 10.1001/jama.2016.7050 · DOI · Paper page
  30. Qaseem A, Wilt TJ, Rich R, Humphrey LL, Frost J, Forciea MA; Clinical Guidelines Committee of the American College of Physicians and the Commission on Health of the Public and Science of the American Academy of Family Physicians. Pharmacologic treatment of hypertension in adults aged 60 years or older to higher versus lower blood pressure targets: a clinical practice guideline from the American College of Physicians and the American Academy of Family Physicians. Ann Intern Med. 2017;166(6):430-437. doi:10.7326/M16-1785 · DOI
  31. Whelton PK, Carey RM, Aronow WS, et al. 2017 ACC/AHA/AAPA/ABC/ACPM/AGS/APhA/ASH/ASPC/ NMA/PCNA guideline for the prevention, detection, evaluation, and management of high blood pressure in adults: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018;71(19):2199-2269. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2017.11.006 · DOI · Paper page
  32. Kostis JB, Espeland MA, Appel L, Johnson KC, Pierce J, Wofford JL. Does withdrawal of antihypertensive medication increase the risk of cardiovascular events? Trial of Nonpharmacologic Interventions in the Elderly (TONE) Cooperative Research Group. Am J Cardiol. 1998;82(12):1501-1508. doi:10.1016/S0002-9149(98)00694-8 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sheppard, J. P., Burt, J., Lown, M., Temple, E., Lowe, R., Fraser, R., Allen, J., Ford, G. A., Heneghan, C., Hobbs, F. D. R., Jowett, S., Kodabuckus, S., Little, P., Mant, J., Mollison, J., Payne, R. A., Williams, M., Yu, L.-M., McManus, R. J., & for the OPTIMISE Investigators
Affiliations
  • University of Oxford (GB)
  • University of Cambridge (GB)
  • University of Southampton (GB)
  • Oxford University Hospitals NHS Trust (GB)
  • Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
  • University of Birmingham (GB)
  • University of Bristol (GB)
  • Patient and public involvement representative, London, United Kingdom
Corresponding author
Sheppard, James P.
Venue
JAMA
Published
2020-05-26
Volume
323
Issue
20
Pages
2039
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
OpenAlex
W3030513959
Cited by
192
References
5
Citations by year
2026: 32 · 2025: 26 · 2024: 35 · 2023: 31 · 2022: 26 · 2021: 32 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 1
FWCI
12.85
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • JAMA (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ePrints Soton (University of Southampton) (acceptedVersion)
  • Bristol Research (University of Bristol) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • University of Birmingham Research Portal (University of Birmingham) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • Wellcome Trust (211182/Z/18/Z)
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR‐RP‐R2‐12‐015, NIHR200201, NIHR-RP-02-12-015)
  • Department of Health and Social Care
  • University of Southampton
  • University of Oxford
  • Curtin University of Technology
  • Oxford Health NHS Foundation Trust
  • NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre
  • NIHR School for Primary Care Research
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Geriatrics and Gerontology › Pharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Blood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiovascular Health and Disease Prevention
Keywords
antihypertensive medication reduction, deprescribing, hypertension, older adults, systolic blood pressure control, polypharmacy, multimorbidity, primary care, non-inferiority, adverse events, frailty, quality of life, antihypertensive drugs, usual care comparison
MeSH terms
Deprescriptions, Aged, 80 and over, Antihypertensive Agents, Blood Pressure, Female, Humans, Hypertension, Male, Polypharmacy

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review