A multifaceted, team-based strategy significantly reduced systolic blood pressure more than enhanced usual care among low-income patients with hypertension.
Does a multifaceted, team-based implementation strategy reduce systolic blood pressure in low-income patients with hypertension?
A multifaceted, team-based implementation strategy is effective at reducing systolic blood pressure in low-income patients with hypertension.
Tasa de eventos absoluta: 0% vs 0%
BACKGROUND: Uncontrolled hypertension disproportionately affects populations that have substantial health disparities. Data regarding the effectiveness and implementation of multifaceted, team-based strategies for hypertension control among low-income patients are lacking. METHODS: We randomly assigned federally qualified health center clinics in Louisiana and Mississippi to use either a multifaceted implementation strategy (intervention group) or enhanced usual care (control group) for hypertension control. The intervention included team-based care, protocol-based intensive blood-pressure management, blood-pressure audit and feedback, health coaching on lifestyle changes and medication adherence, and home blood-pressure monitoring. Enhanced usual care involved educating physicians about clinical guidelines for hypertension. The primary effectiveness outcome was the mean change in systolic blood pressure from baseline to 18 months. The primary implementation outcome was the adherence summary score (on a scale of 0 to 4, with higher scores indicating better adherence to blood-pressure management). RESULTS: A total of 36 clinics underwent randomization. Among these clinics, we enrolled 1272 patients with uncontrolled hypertension who were 40 years of age or older; 642 were in the intervention group and 630 were in the control group. The mean age of the patients was 58. 8 years, 56. 7% were women, 63. 4% were Black, 75. 9% were unemployed, and 73. 4% had a family income of less than 25, 000 per year. At 18 months, the mean change from baseline in the systolic blood pressure was -15. 5 mm Hg (95% confidence interval CI, -17. 4 to -13. 6) in the intervention group and -9. 1 mm Hg (95% CI, -11. 0 to -7. 2) in the control group (between-group difference, -6. 4 mm Hg; 95% CI, -9. 0 to -3. 8; P<0. 001). The mean adherence summary score over the 18-month follow-up period was 2. 8 (95% CI, 2. 7 to 2. 9) in the intervention group and 2. 1 (95% CI, 2. 0 to 2. 2) in the control group (between-group difference, 0. 7 points; 95% CI, 0. 6 to 0. 8; P<0. 001). Serious adverse events occurred in 20. 9% of the patients in the intervention group and in 21. 7% of those in the control group. CONCLUSIONS: Among low-income patients with hypertension, a multifaceted, team-based implementation strategy resulted in a significantly greater reduction in systolic blood pressure than enhanced usual care. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and others; IMPACTS-BP ClinicalTrials. gov number, NCT03483662. ).
“Hypertension is a major public health priority due to its high prevalence and associated morbidity and mortality. Low-income populations experience higher prevalence and lower control rates, which [contribute] to health disparities.”
Mills et al. (Wed,) reported a other. A multifaceted, team-based strategy significantly reduced systolic blood pressure more than enhanced usual care among low-income patients with hypertension.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: