The Canadian Hypertension Education Program - a unique Canadian knowledge translation program

Ups and downs of hypertension control in Canada: critical factors and lessons learned

As the leading risk for death, population control of increased blood pressure represents a major challenge for all countries of the Americas. In the early 1990’s, Canada had a hypertension control rate of 13%. The control rate increased to 68% in 2010, accompanied by a sharp decline in cardiovascular disease. The unprecedented improvement in hypertension control started around the year 2000 when a comprehensive program to implement annually updated hypertension treatment recommendations started. The program included a comprehensive monitoring system for hypertension control. After 2011, there was a marked decrease in emphasis on implementation and evaluation and the hypertension control rate declined, driven by a reduction in control in women from 69% to 49%. A coalition of health and scientific organizations formed in 2011 with a priority to develop advocacy positions for dietary policies to prevent and control hypertension. By 2015, the positions were adopted by most federal political parties, but implementation has been slow.

This manuscript reviews key success factors and learnings. Some key success factors included having broad representation on the program steering committee, multidisciplinary engagement with substantive primary care involvement, unbiased up to date credible recommendations, development and active adaptation of education resources based on field experience, extensive implementation of primary care resources, annual review of the program and hypertension indicators and developing and emphasizing the few interventions important for hypertension control. Learnings included the need for having strong national and provincial government engagement and support, and retaining primary care organizations and clinicians in the implementation and evaluation.

Knowledge Translation for Cardiovascular Disease Research and Management in Japan

Knowledge translation is an essential and emerging arena in healthcare research. It is the process of aiding the application of research knowledge into clinical practice or policymaking. Individuals at all levels of the health care system, including patients, healthcare professionals, and policymakers, are affected by the gaps that exist between research evidence and practice; the process of knowledge translation plays a role in bridging these gaps and incorporating high-quality clinical research into decision-making. Cardiovascular disease (CVD) management is a crucial area of healthcare where information gaps are known to exist. Although Japan has one of the lowest risks and mortality rates from CVDs, an increasing trend of cardiovascular incidence and changes in the risk factor conditions have been observed in recent years. This article provides an overview of knowledge translation and its importance in the cardiovascular health of the Japanese population, and describes the key steps of a typical knowledge translation strategy.

A Framework for the Study of Complex mHealth Interventions in Diverse Cultural Settings

Background

To facilitate decision-making capacity between options of care under real-life service conditions, clinical trials must be pragmatic to evaluate mobile health (mHealth) interventions under the variable conditions of health care settings with a wide range of participants. The mHealth interventions require changes in the behavior of patients and providers, creating considerable complexity and ambiguity related to causal chains. Process evaluations of the implementation are necessary to shed light on the range of unanticipated effects an intervention may have, what the active ingredients in everyday practice are, how they exert their effect, and how these may vary among recipients or between sites.

Objective

Building on the CONSORT-EHEALTH (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials of Electronic and Mobile HEalth Applications and onLine TeleHealth) statement and participatory evaluation theory, we present a framework for the process evaluations for mHealth interventions in multiple cultural settings. We also describe the application of this evaluation framework to the implementation of DREAM-GLOBAL (Diagnosing hypertension—Engaging Action and Management in Getting Lower BP in Indigenous and LMIC [low- and middle-income countries]), a pragmatic randomized controlled trial (RCT), and mHealth intervention designed to improve hypertension management in low-resource environments. We describe the evaluation questions and the data collection processes developed by us.

Methods

Our literature review revealed that there is a significant knowledge gap related to the development of a process evaluation framework for mHealth interventions. We used community-based participatory research (CBPR) methods and formative research data to develop a process evaluation framework nested within a pragmatic RCT.

Results

Four human organizational levels of participants impacted by the mHealth intervention were identified that included patients, providers, community and organizations actors, and health systems and settings. These four levels represent evaluation domains and became the core focus of the evaluation. In addition, primary implementation themes to explore in each of the domains were identified as follows: (1) the major active components of the intervention, (2) technology of the intervention, (3) cultural congruence, (4) task shifting, and (5) unintended consequences. Using the four organizational domains and their interaction with primary implementation themes, we developed detailed evaluation research questions and identified the data or information sources to best answer our questions.

Conclusions

Using DREAM-GLOBAL to illustrate our approach, we succeeded in developing an uncomplicated process evaluation framework for mHealth interventions that provide key information to stakeholders, which can optimize implementation of a pragmatic trial as well as inform scale up. The human organizational level domains used to focus the primary implementation themes in the DREAM-GLOBAL process evaluation framework are sufficiently supported in our research, and the literature and can serve as a valuable tool for other mHealth process evaluations.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02111226; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02111226 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6oxfHXege)

I-RREACH: an engagement and assessment tool for improving implementation readiness of researchers, organizations and communities in complex interventions

BACKGROUND

Non-communicable chronic diseases are the leading causes of mortality globally, and nearly 80% of these deaths occur in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). In high-income countries (HICs), inequitable distribution of resources affects poorer and otherwise disadvantaged groups including Aboriginal peoples. Cardiovascular mortality in high-income countries has recently begun to fall; however, these improvements are not realized among citizens in LMICs or those subgroups in high-income countries who are disadvantaged in the social determinants of health including Aboriginal people. It is critical to develop multi-faceted, affordable and realistic health interventions in collaboration with groups who experience health inequalities. Based on community-based participatory research (CBPR), we aimed to develop implementation tools to guide complex interventions to ensure that health gains can be realized in low-resource environments.

METHODS

We developed the I-RREACH (Intervention and Research Readiness Engagement and Assessment of Community Health Care) tool to guide implementation of interventions in low-resource environments. We employed CBPR and a consensus methodology to (1) develop the theoretical basis of the tool and (2) to identify key implementation factor domains; then, we (3) collected participant evaluation data to validate the tool during implementation.

RESULTS

The I-RREACH tool was successfully developed using a community-based consensus method and is rooted in participatory principles, equalizing the importance of the knowledge and perspectives of researchers and community stakeholders while encouraging respectful dialogue. The I-RREACH tool consists of three phases: fact finding, stakeholder dialogue and community member/patient dialogue. The evaluation for our first implementation of I-RREACH by participants was overwhelmingly positive, with 95% or more of participants indicating comfort with and support for the process and the dialogue it creates.

CONCLUSIONS

The I-RREACH tool was designed to (1) pinpoint key domains required for dialogue between the community and the research team to facilitate implementation of complex health interventions and research projects and (2) to identify existing strengths and areas requiring further development for effective implementation. I-RREACH has been found to be easily adaptable to diverse geographical and cultural settings and can be further adapted to other complex interventions. Further research should include the potential use of the I-RREACH tool in the development of blue prints for scale-up of successful interventions, particularly in low-resource environments.

The impact of a change in hypertension management guidelines on diuretic use in Japan: trends in antihypertensive drug prescriptions from 2005 to 2011

The Japanese Society of Hypertension (JSH) updated its hypertension management guidelines in 2009. One of the most significant changes with respect to the 2004 version was the stance towards the use of diuretics: in 2004, their use was cautioned against, but in 2009, it was actively promoted. The purpose of this study was to measure the impact of this change in guidelines on prescription patterns for antihypertensive medications, and to investigate the overall trend in the use of antihypertensives. We used monthly claims data obtained from a database company. Data of patients who were 20 or more years old and prescribed antihypertensives were extracted and analyzed. There were 66 223 patients who were prescribed antihypertensives (mean age 53.6±11.0). Of these, 38 130 were men and 28 093 were women. The two most prescribed classes of antihypertensives were angiotensin receptor blockers, whose usage steadily increased over a 7-year period, and calcium channel blockers. Prescriptions for antihypertensives in these two classes were also more likely to be continued than those for other antihypertensive classes. The prescription rate for diuretics increased from December 2006 (P<0.0001), but the rate of increase was the same before and after 2009 (P=0.09). The clinical guidelines published in 2009 had no apparent impact on the trend of diuretic prescriptions, despite the radical change in stance concerning the use of antihypertensives. Further effort to disseminate the content of these guidelines, so that it is reflected in actual clinical practice, may be warranted.

Hypertension in people with type 2 diabetes: Update on pharmacologic management

OBJECTIVE

To summarize the evidence for the need to improve pharmacologic management of hypertension in people with type 2 diabetes and to provide expert advice on how blood pressure (BP) treatment can be improved in primary care.

SOURCES OF INFORMATION

Studies were obtained by performing a systematic review of the literature on hypertension and diabetes, from which management recommendations were developed, reviewed, and voted on by a group of experts selected by the Canadian Hypertension Education Program and the Canadian Diabetes Association; authors' expert opinions on optimal pharmacologic management were also considered during this process.

MAIN MESSAGE

The pathogenesis of hypertension in patients with diabetes is complex, involving a range of biological and environmental factors and genetic predisposition; as a result, hypertension in people with diabetes incurs higher associated risks and adverse events. Mortality and morbidity are heightened in diabetes patients who do not achieve BP control (ie, a target value of less than 130/80 mm Hg). Large randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials have shown that reducing BP pharmacologically is single-handedly the most effective way to reduce rates of death and disability in patients with diabetes, particularly associated cardiovascular risks. Often, combinations of 2 or more drugs (diuretics, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, β-blockers, angiotensin receptor blockers, calcium channel blockers, spironolactone, etc) are required for pharmacotherapy to be effective, particularly for patients in whom BP is difficult to control. However, the health care costs associated with extensively lowering BP are substantially less than the costs associated with treating the complications that can be prevented by lowering BP.

CONCLUSION

Detecting and managing hypertension in people with diabetes is one of the most effective measures to prevent adverse events, and pharmacotherapy is one of the most effective ways to maintain target BP levels in primary care.

An integrated approach to preventing cardiovascular disease: community-based approaches, health system initiatives, and public health policy

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is largely the product of interactions among modifiable risk factors that are common in developed nations and increasingly of concern in developing countries. Hypertension is an important precursor to the development of CVD, and although detection and treatment rates have improved in recent years in some jurisdictions, effective strategies and policies supporting a shift in distribution of risk factors at the population level remain paramount. Challenges in managing cardiovascular health more effectively include factors at the patient, provider, and system level. Strategies to reduce hypertension and CVD should be population based, incorporate multilevel, multicomponent, and socioenvironmental approaches, and integrate community resources with public health and clinical care. There is an urgent need to improve monitoring and management of risk factors through community-wide, primary care-linked initiatives, increase the evidence base for community-based prevention strategies, further develop and evaluate promising program components, and develop new approaches to support healthy lifestyle behaviors in diverse age, socioeconomic, and ethnocultural groups. Policy and system changes are critical to reduce risk in populations, including legislation and public education to reduce dietary sodium and trans-fatty acids, food pricing policies, and changes to health care delivery systems to explicitly support prevention and management of CVD.

Characteristics of hypertensive Canadians not receiving drug therapy

BACKGROUND

Many Canadians known to have hypertension remain untreated. To aid in the development of specific programs to improve hypertension management, the present report characterizes Canadians who indicated that they had hypertension but were not taking antihypertensive drug therapy.

METHODS

The 2005 Canadian Community Health Survey (cycle 3.1) was used to estimate the proportion of Canadians 20 years of age and older who reported having high blood pressure or ever being diagnosed with high blood pressure. Sociodemographic characteristics, reported health, lifestyle factors and health care resource use of those who reported taking or not taking high blood pressure medication in the previous month were described and compared.

RESULTS

Over one-half of hypertensive respondents 20 to 39 years of age reported no antihypertensive treatment compared with 17% and 5% among those 40 to 59 years and 60 years of age and older, respectively. In most age groups, several factors were associated with the absence of pharmacotherapy (eg, male sex, fewer health care professional consultations, perceived excellent health status and most markers of lower cardiovascular risk, with the exception of daily smoking). The proportion of young hypertensive Canadians not receiving pharmacotherapy remained consistent, regardless of the presence of cardiovascular risk factors.

CONCLUSIONS

Many hypertensive Canadians, particularly those who are younger than 60 years of age, are not taking antihypertensive drug therapy despite having one or more cardiovascular risks. The increased risk of no drug therapy among smokers warrants special attention.