Key result
Health coaching linked to ~4.6-fold higher blood pressure control rate versus standard care.
Why the study?
Studies on the effects of health coaching on primary care patients with uncontrolled hypertension in developing countries were limited.
Does health coaching combined with standard care improve blood pressure control and self-care activities in primary care patients with uncontrolled hypertension?
Does health coaching combined with standard care improve blood pressure control and self-care activities in primary care patients with uncontrolled hypertension?
A structured health coaching program using face-to-face sessions and phone calls significantly improved blood pressure control and self-care behaviors in primary care patients with uncontrolled hypertension.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
May support health coaching for uncontrolled hypertension in primary care; hypothesis-generating and requires randomized confirmation before practice change.
BACKGROUND: Health coaching effectively improves hypertension self-care activities and the control of blood pressure (BP) in hypertensive patients. Studies on the effects of health coaching on patients in primary care with uncontrolled hypertension in developing countries are limited. In this study, the effectiveness of health coaching on hypertension self-care and BP control was assessed in patients who have uncontrolled hypertension compared to standard care in Egypt. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Our quasi-experimental study included control and intervention groups. The intervention group included 70 participants who received health coaching sessions (face-to-face and by telephone) besides the standard care, whereas the control group included 71 participants who only received the standard care. The study was conducted between July 2020 and November 2021. The participants were recruited from three primary healthcare settings in the Port Said Governorate. Personal and medical history, BP measurements, and hypertension self-care activity level effects (H-SCALE) were obtained. Paired- t -test was used to assess the changes in BP measurement, and H-SCALE score before and after receiving the health coaching. McNemar’s test was used to assess changes in controlled BP and optimal hypertension self-care activities between control and health coached groups. Multiple logistic regression analysis assessed the predictors of better BP control. RESULTS: Health coaching resulted in more controlled BP (51.4%, P < 0.001) compared to the delivery of only usual care (11.3%, P = 0.008). The intervention showed a significant promotion in hypertension self-care activities, including medication usage ( P < 0.001), low-salt diet ( P < 0.001), and weight management ( P < 0.001). The H-SCALE score mean change was the only predictor for BP control (odds ratio 1.057, P = 0.048) in the intervention group after 6 months. CONCLUSION: Intervention including traditional health coaching and phone calls is a beneficial modality for the promotion of hypertension self-care and improvement of BP control in primary care patients with uncontrolled hypertension.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Abbas et al. (2024) studied Uncontrolled hypertension (n=141). Health coaching (face-to-face and telephone) vs. Standard care was evaluated on Controlled blood pressure at 6 months (RR 4.56, 95% CI 2.29-9.11, p=<0.001). A health coaching program of face-to-face sessions and phone calls significantly increased the rate of controlled blood pressure compared to standard care (51.4% vs 11.3%, RR 4.56) in primary care patients.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: