Why the study?
Information on long-term outcomes of hypertensive populations prospectively followed in their life and care settings is rare, especially in low-income countries.
Does a community health promoter-based hypertension control program improve cardiovascular risk levels in a rural, low-income population?
Cohort (n=1,733)
Does a community health promoter-based hypertension control program improve cardiovascular risk levels in a rural, low-income population?
Absolute Event Rate: 17.5% vs 26.6%
p-value: p=<0.01
A community health promoter-based hypertension control program in a rural, low-income setting is feasible and significantly reduces the proportion of patients at high cardiovascular risk over time.
Supports community promoter-based hypertension programs in rural low-income settings; hypothesis-generating and should not yet change practice without randomized trials.
BACKGROUND: In contrast with the abundance of global epidemiological descriptive data on cardiovascular diseases and their risk factors, information on the outcomes of real populations prospectively followed up in their life and care settings is much rarer, especially in low-income countries. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to evaluate the feasibility and the overall results of a hypertension control program, based mainly on a network of community nonprofessional health promoters, in the poor rural region of Borbon (Ecuador). METHODS: This is a prospective cohort study describing the results of a program of hypertension diagnosis, treatment and follow-up from 2004 to 2015 in the area, carried out mainly by the health promoters. RESULTS: The number of hypertensive patients identified and followed over the years increased from 1,024 in 2004 to 1,733 in 2015. The percentage of patients with no visits during a year was reduced to <10%, whereas the proportion of hypertensive subjects attending all 4 scheduled annual checks approached and, in some years, exceeded 50%. From 2004 to 2015, the proportion of patients at high or very high cardiovascular risk progressively decreased from 26.6% in 2004 to 17.5% in 2015 (p for trend <0.01), whereas the proportion of hypertensive patients at low or very low risk increased from 30.4% in 2004 to 45.0% in 2015 (p for trend <0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In a poor, disadvantaged area, a strategy of control mainly based on the involvement and responsibility of community health promoters (with health professionals as supporters more than direct actors) can achieve adequate follow-up of the population of hypertensive patients and improve their global cardiovascular risk level.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Moreira et al. (2019) conducted a cohort in Hypertension (n=1,733). Community health promoter-based hypertension control program vs. Baseline (2004) was evaluated on Proportion of patients at high or very high cardiovascular risk (p=<0.01).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: