The potential link between proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and hypertension remains unclear. It is uncertain whether such an association exists, whether it represents a class-of-PPI effect and whether a dose–response relationship is involved. This study aimed to investigate the potential class-of-PPI effect associating PPIs with hypertension reporting and evaluate whether the association follows a dose-dependent pattern.

A disproportionality analysis was conducted within VigiBase to identify signals of hypertension reporting associated with individual PPIs by calculating adjusted reporting ORs (aRORs) within a multivariate case/non-case study design. Additionally, the presence of a dose–response relationship was explored.

Real-world data from VigiBase, the WHO pharmacovigilance database, was used.

All individual case safety reports with PPI use were included.

Incident hypertension cases were identified using the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities V.26.1 related to at least one PPI administration that were systematically collected until 28 October 2024. Pharmacovigilance signals between the use of PPIs and hypertension reported and dose dependence between PPI posology and onset or worsening hypertension were analysed.

The database contained 26 587 reports of PPI-associated hypertension (2.3%), predominantly among women (63.3%). Hypertension was most frequently reported in the group aged 45–64 years (41.4%). A significant reporting OR (ROR) was observed for almost all PPIs in both univariable (RORs, 1.32–1.97) and multivariate analyses (aRORs, 1.09–1.35) after adjustments for age group, sex, concurrent antihypertensive medication and drugs known to induce hypertension, with the exception of lansoprazole (aROR 0.99, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.03). A potential trend suggestive of a dose–response relationship was identified, with doses lower than the median associated with a lower aROR for hypertension than doses higher than the median for all PPIs. However, this trend was not statistically significant, potentially due to insufficient statistical power.

This investigation indicates a notable pharmacovigilance safety signal associating PPI usage with hypertension reporting. Although a potential dose–response trend was observed, it was not statistically significant, possibly due to limited statistical power. Further longitudinal studies are warranted.

Informal caregivers play a vital role in caring for individuals who choose to spend the end of their life at home. However, this caregiving role often imposes considerable physical, emotional, social and financial burdens that can negatively impact caregivers’ quality of life. A comprehensive understanding of the breadth of interventions designed to support caregivers of individuals receiving home-based palliative and end-of-life care is essential, along with insights into how these interventions are perceived by those who have received them. The objective of this review is to synthesise existing evidence on the effectiveness and appropriateness of interventions that support informal caregivers of patients receiving home-based palliative care in order to address the caregivers’ needs and improve their quality of life. Additionally, this review aims to explore the acceptability and perceived benefits of these interventions from the perspectives of informal caregivers who have received them.

A comprehensive search will be performed in the following databases: MEDLINE (PubMed), CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science, Scopus, Cairn.info, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL). This review will include studies that focus on adult informal caregivers of adult patients with serious life-threatening illnesses receiving home-based palliative care. Interventional studies that employed quantitative, qualitative and mixed-methods approaches will be considered. Quantitative studies will include randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and experimental and quasi-experimental designs. Qualitative studies will encompass research that explores informal caregivers’ experiences with the interventions, perceived benefits and barriers and enablers influencing intervention effectiveness. Mixed-methods studies using convergent, embedded or sequential designs will also be included.

The search will include studies published in English or French, with no restrictions on the publication period. Study selection, critical appraisal and data extraction will be conducted independently by two reviewers to ensure methodological rigour. This review will adhere to the Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines for mixed-methods systematic reviews, using a convergent segregated approach. Findings will be reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses guidelines.

Ethical review is not required for this study, as it is a literature review that does not involve the collection of primary data. The findings of this review will be disseminated to the scientific community through conference presentations and peer-reviewed publications. Additionally, lay summaries will be prepared and shared with the general public and relevant stakeholders.

PROSPERO, registration number CRD420251006612.