Skip to main page content
Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2014 Dec;64(6):1198-204.
doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.114.03799. Epub 2014 Sep 8.

Blood Pressure Differences Associated With Optimal Macronutrient Intake Trial for Heart Health (OMNIHEART)-like Diet Compared With a Typical American Diet

Affiliations
Free PMC article
Randomized Controlled Trial

Blood Pressure Differences Associated With Optimal Macronutrient Intake Trial for Heart Health (OMNIHEART)-like Diet Compared With a Typical American Diet

John Molitor et al. Hypertension. .
Free PMC article

Abstract

The Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension-Sodium (DASH-Sodium) trial demonstrated beneficial effects on blood pressure (BP) of the DASH diet with lower sodium intake when compared with typical American diet. The subsequent Optimal Macronutrient Intake Trial for Heart Health (OMNIHEART) trial reported additional BP benefits from replacing carbohydrate in the DASH diet with either protein or monounsaturated fats. The primary aim of this study is to assess possible BP benefits of an OMNIHEART-like diet in free-living Americans using cross-sectional US population data of the International Study of Macronutrients, Micronutrients and Blood Pressure (INTERMAP) study. The INTERMAP data include four 24-hour dietary recalls, 2 timed 24-hour urine collections, 8 BP readings for 2195 individuals aged 40 to 59 years from 8 US INTERMAP population samples. Analyses are conducted using 2 approaches: (1) regression of BP on a linear OMNIHEART nutrient score calculated for each individual and (2) a Bayesian approach comparing estimated BP levels of an OMNIHEART-like nutrient profile with a typical American nutrient profile. After adjustment for potential confounders, an OMNIHEART score higher by 1 point was associated with systolic/diastolic BP differences of -1.0/-0.5 mm Hg (both P<0.001). Mean systolic/diastolic BPs were 111.3/68.4 and 115.2/70.6 mm Hg for Bayesian OMNIHEART and Control profiles, respectively, after controlling for possible confounders, with BP differences of -3.9/-2.2 mm Hg, P(difference≤0)=0.98/0.96. Findings were comparable for men and women, for nonhypertensive participants, and with adjustment for antihypertensive treatment. Our findings from data on US population samples indicate broad generalizability of OMNIHEART results beyond the trial setting and support recommendations for an OMNIHEART-style diet for prevention/control of population-wide adverse BP levels.

Keywords: blood pressure; hypertension; nutrients; statistics.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Unadjusted posterior systolic blood pressure distribution obtained from Bayesian profile regression for Control nutrient profiles (A), OMNIHEART-P (protein arm) (B), and from OMNIHEARTP minus Control (C), US INTERMAP participants. Vertical lines represent (from left to right) lower bound of the 95% credible interval, mean, and upper bound of the 95% credible interval. The distribution from the Control nutrient profile (A) had a median of 119.2 (116.4, 121.8). The distribution from the OMNIHEART-P profile (B) had a median of 114.1 (111.3, 116.6). The distribution of the difference between the two profiles (C) had a median of −5.0 (−8.7, −1.5) and the probability that the difference was less than or equal to zero was approximately 1.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Unadjusted posterior diastolic blood pressure distribution obtained from Bayesian profile regression for Control nutrient profiles (A), OMNIHEART (protein arm) (B), and from OMNIHEART (protein arm) minus Control (C), US INTERMAP participants. Vertical lines represent (from left to right) lower bound of the 95% credible interval, mean, and upper bound of the 95% credible interval. The distribution from the Control nutrient profile (A) had a median of 74.0 (72.1, 75.8). The distribution from the OMNIHEART-P profile (B) had a median of 70.9 (68.8, 72.8). The distribution of the difference between the two profiles (C) had a median of −3.1 (--5.7, −0.5) and the probability that the difference was less than or equal to zero was approximately 1.

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by 8 articles

See all "Cited by" articles

Publication types

Feedback