SPRINT Trial Results

SPRINT Trial Results: Latest News in Hypertension Management.

Rxfiles Trial Summary Sprint

 A lower BP target of <120mmHg versus a standard target of <140mmHg in those at high CV risk, but without diabetes or stroke, resulted in a trade‐off between benefit & harm. {Mean automated BP achieved at 1 yr: 121/69 vs 136/76.}  Benefits: The intensive group experienced lower rates of fatal and non‐fatal CV events (i.e., 1° outcome = MI, other ACS, stroke, HF, or death from CV causes): 5.2%...

The effect of 8 weeks Repeated Sprint Training on buffering system and the results of three different types of recovery

Back ground and aim: Today, Repeated high intensity endurance training is an integral part of the preparation of most team and individual sports, which, if not accompanied by proper recovery during or after physical activity, does not create the necessary adaptations and may Is to harm the athlete's performance under the conditions of competition or training (1, 2). Due to intense repetitive tr...

Systolic Blood Pressure Response in SPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial) and ACCORD (Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes): A Possible Explanation for Discordant Trial Results

BACKGROUND SPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial) and the ACCORD (Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes) blood pressure trial used similar interventions but produced discordant results. We investigated whether differences in systolic blood pressure (SBP) response contributed to the discordant trial results. METHODS AND RESULTS We evaluated the distributions of SBP res...

Interpretation of clinical trial results

Evidence from clinical trials is fundamental to ethical medical practice. Along with patient preferences, circumstances, and clinical experience, it is central to effective clinical decision-making. Applying evidence to clinical questions requires filtering in the form of three questions: first, do the trial results reflect true effects of intervention, rather than artifactual ones (validity)? ...