Measure accurately, Act rapidly, and Partner with patients: An intuitive and practical three-part framework to guide efforts to improve hypertension control

Hemp seed protein and its hydrolysate compared with casein protein consumption in adults with hypertension: a double-blind crossover study

BACKGROUND

The effects of consuming hemp seed protein (HSP) as well as its hydrolysate-derived bioactive peptide (HSP+) on blood pressure (BP) has not, to our knowledge, been investigated in humans.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to investigate how consumption of HSP and its hydrolysate modulates 24-h systolic (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP) and plasma biomarkers of BP compared with casein.

METHODS

In a double-blind, randomized, crossover design trial, 35 adults who had mild hypertension with SBP between 130 and 160 mmHg and DBP ≤110 mmHg were recruited. Participants were randomly assigned to varying sequences of 3 6-wk treatments, 50 g casein/d, 50 g HSP/d, or 45 g HSP plus 5 g HSP-derived bioactive peptides/d (HSP+), separated by a 2-wk washout period. Treatment effects were assessed with a linear mixed model with repeated measures.

RESULTS

Compared with casein, after HSP+ consumption, 24-h SBP and 24-h DBP decreased from 135.1 and 80.0 mmHg to 128.1 ± 1.6 (P < 0.0001) and 76.0 ± 1.4 mmHg (P < 0.0001), respectively, whereas these values were 133.5 ± 1.6 and 78.9 ± 1.4 mmHg after HSP consumption (P < 0.0001). There were no differences between the HSP and HSP+ consumption in plasma angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) activity, renin, or nitric oxide (NO) concentrations. However, these 2 treatments were able to lower both ACE and renin activities and raise NO concentration in plasma compared with casein.

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that hemp protein consumption, as well as in combination with bioactive peptides, may have a role in the dietary management of hypertension. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT03508895.

Using the Translating Research into Practice framework to develop a diabetes prevention intervention in primary care: a mixed-methods study

BACKGROUND

Pre-diabetes affects one-third of US adults and increases the risk of type 2 diabetes. Effective evidence-based interventions, such as the Diabetes Prevention Program, are available, but a gap remains in effectively translating and increasing uptake of these interventions into routine care.

METHODS

We applied the Translating Research into Practice (TRiP) framework to guide three phases of intervention design and development for diabetes prevention: (1) summarise the evidence, (2) identify local barriers to implementation and (3) measure performance. In phase 1, we conducted a retrospective cohort analysis of linked electronic health record claims data to evaluate current practices in the management of pre-diabetes. In phase 2, we conducted in-depth interviews of 16 primary care physicians, 7 payor leaders and 31 patients to elicit common barriers and facilitators for diabetes prevention. In phase 3, using findings from phases 1 and 2, we developed the core elements of the intervention and performance measures to evaluate intervention uptake.

RESULTS

In phase 1 (retrospective cohort analysis), we found few patients with pre-diabetes received diabetes prevention interventions. In phase 2 (stakeholder engagement), we identified common barriers to include a lack of knowledge about pre-diabetes among patients and about the Diabetes Prevention Program among clinicians. In phase 3 (intervention development), we developed the START Diabetes Prevention Clinical Pathway as a systematic change package to address barriers and facilitators identified in phases 1 and 2, performance measures and a toolkit of resources to support the intervention components.

CONCLUSIONS

The TRiP framework supported the identification of evidence-based care practices for pre-diabetes and the development of a well-fitted, actionable intervention and implementation plan designed to increase treatment uptake for pre-diabetes in primary care settings. Our change package can be adapted and used by other health systems or clinics to target prevention of diabetes or other related chronic conditions.

Age-Specific Association Between Visit-to-Visit Blood Pressure Variability and Hearing Loss: A Population-Based Cohort Study

Background and Objectives

Hearing loss is common and undertreated, and the impact of blood pressure variability (BPV) on the development of hearing loss remains unclear. We aimed to examine the age-specific association between visit-to-visit BPV and hearing loss.

Research Design and Methods

This nationally representative cohort study included 3,939 adults over 50 years from the Health and Retirement Study in the United States. Variabilities of systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) were assessed by standard deviation (SD), coefficient of variation, and variability independent of the mean (VIM), using SBP and DBP from 3 visits. Hearing loss was assessed by self-rated questions. Cox proportional risk models were used to evaluate age-specific associations (50-64, 65-79, and ≥80 years) between BPV and hearing loss. The generalized additive Cox models were further used to visualize the combined effect of age and BPV.

Results

During the follow-up up to 7.0 years, 700 participants developed hearing loss. Among people aged under 65 years, we observed a 36% increased risk of hearing loss with per-SD increment in VIM of SBP (hazard ratio [HR] per SD 1.36, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.13-1.63) and a slightly significant association between VIM of DBP (HR per SD 1.21, 95% CI 1.01-1.45) and hearing loss. We did not observe significant associations among groups aged over 65 years (p > .05). The generalized additive Cox models also showed younger participants had stronger associations between BPV and hearing loss.

Discussion and Implications

Higher visit-to-visit variabilities of SBP were associated with an increased risk of hearing loss in middle-aged adults (50-65 years). Intervention in early BPV may help decrease hearing loss in adults aged over 50 years.

Age and Comorbidities Are Associated With Therapeutic Inertia Among Older Adults With Uncontrolled Blood Pressure

BACKGROUND

Lack of initiation or escalation of blood pressure (BP) lowering medication when BP is uncontrolled, termed therapeutic inertia (TI), increases with age and may be influenced by comorbidities.

METHODS

We examined the association of age and comorbidities with TI in 22,665 visits with a systolic BP ≥140 mm Hg and/or diastolic BP ≥90 mm Hg among 7,415 adults age ≥65 years receiving care in clinics that implemented a hypertension quality improvement program. Generalized linear mixed models were used to determine the association of comorbidity number with TI by age group (65-74 and ≥75 years) after covariate adjustment.

RESULTS

Baseline mean age was 75.0 years (SD 7.8); 41.4% were male. TI occurred in 79.0% and 83.7% of clinic visits in age groups 65-74 and ≥75 years, respectively. In age group 65-74 years, prevalence ratio of TI with 2, 3-4, and ≥5 comorbidities compared with zero comorbidities was 1.07 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.04, 1.12), 1.08 (95% CI: 1.05, 1.12), and 1.15 (95% CI: 1.10, 1.20), respectively. The number of comorbidities was not associated with TI prevalence in age group ≥75 years. After implementation of the improvement program, TI declined from 80.3% to 77.2% in age group 65-74 years and from 85.0% to 82.0% in age group ≥75 years (P < 0.001 for both groups).

CONCLUSIONS

TI was common among older adults but not associated with comorbidities after age ≥75 years. A hypertension improvement program had limited impact on TI in older patients.

Age and sex disparities in blood pressure control and therapeutic inertia: Impact of a quality improvement program

Objective

Hypertension quality improvement programs reduce uncontrolled blood pressure (BP) but impact may differ by sex and age.

Methods

This study examined uncontrolled BP, defined as a BP ≥ 140/90 mmHg, and therapeutic inertia, defined as absence of medication initiation or escalation during visits with uncontrolled BP, by sex and by age group (19-40, 41-65, 66-75, and 76+ years) during a 12 month follow-up period among 21, 861 patients with hypertension and ≥ two visits in primary care clinics enrolled in the American Medical Association (AMA) Measure Accurately, Act Rapidly, and Partner with Patients (MAP) BP hypertension quality improvement program.

Results

The mean age was 64.8 years (standard deviation [SD 12.8]) and ranged from 19 to 87 years; 53.6% were female. In age groups 19-40, 41-65, 66-75, 76-87 years, uncontrolled BP at the first clinic visit was present in 51.5%, 42.5%, 37.5% and 36.6% of males, respectively, and in 40.0%, 38.0%, 36.0% and 39.6% of females, respectively. Based on vital signs at the first vs. last clinic visit, the proportion of patients with uncontrolled BP in age groups 19-40, 41-65, 66-75 years declined by 19.4%, 13.5%, 10.1% and 8.7% in males, respectively, and 14.4%, 12.5%, 9.3%, and 8.4%, among females, respectively. Therapeutic inertia ranged from 66.5% and 75.9% of clinic visits among males and females age 19-40 years, to 85.6% and 84.9% of clinic visits among males and females age 76-87 years, respectively. The proportion of clinic visits with therapeutic inertia was lower among males vs. females across all age groups until age 76-87 years.

Conclusion

A quality improvement program improves BP control but declines in uncontrolled BP are larger and therapeutic inertia is lower for younger vs. older age groups and for males vs. females. More interventions are needed to reduce sex and age disparities in hypertension management.

Target: BP™: A National Initiative to Improve Blood Pressure Control

TARGET

BP™ is a national initiative launched by the American Heart Association and the American Medical Association in 2017 in response to the high prevalence of uncontrolled blood pressure (BP) in the United States.

TARGET

BP™ provides support to health care organizations and health care teams, with no user fees, to improve the quality of care for adults with hypertension by providing education and resources and recognizing organizations committed to prioritizing and reporting their rate of BP control. Through Target: BP™, the American Heart Association and the American Medical Association also collaborate to align policy with evidence through federal, state, and institutional policy advocacy and raise public awareness through media campaigns. In 2022, Target: BP™ recognized 1309 health care organizations serving 8.4 million patients with hypertension for prioritizing BP control, 675 of which affirmed performance of evidence-based BP measurement activities and 551 of which reported BP control rates ≥70%. With the proportion of US adults with controlled BP falling to 48.2% from 2017 to 2020, Target: BP™ remains focused on regaining lost ground in national BP control rates by emphasizing accurate BP measurement, rapid treatment intensification, healthful lifestyle changes, and evidence-based use of self-measured BP monitoring.

TARGET

BP™ also emphasizes adoption of team-based care models and prioritizing equitable health outcomes. More than 1.37 million unique users have visited https://targetbp.org/ and downloaded 98 341 Target: BP™ resources from 2017 to 2022.

Implementation Strategies to Improve Blood Pressure Control in the United States: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association and American Medical Association

Hypertension is one of the most important risk factors that contribute to incident cardiovascular events. A multitude of US and international hypertension guidelines, scientific statements, and policy statements have recommended evidence-based approaches for hypertension management and improved blood pressure (BP) control. These recommendations are based largely on high-quality observational and randomized controlled trial data. However, recent published data demonstrate troubling temporal trends with declining BP control in the United States after decades of steady improvements. Therefore, there is a widening disconnect between what hypertension experts recommend and actual BP control in practice. This scientific statement provides information on the implementation strategies to optimize hypertension management and to improve BP control among adults in the United States. Key approaches include antiracism efforts, accurate BP measurement and increased use of self-measured BP monitoring, team-based care, implementation of policies and programs to facilitate lifestyle change, standardized treatment protocols using team-based care, improvement of medication acceptance and adherence, continuous quality improvement, financial strategies, and large-scale dissemination and implementation. Closing the gap between scientific evidence, expert recommendations, and achieving BP control, particularly among disproportionately affected populations, is urgently needed to improve cardiovascular health.

Improvement in Hypertension Control Among Adults Seen in Federally Qualified Health Center Clinics in the Stroke Belt: Implementing a Program with a Dashboard and Process Metrics

Objective

Attain 75% hypertension (HTN) control and improve racial equity in control with the American Medical Association Measure accurately, Act rapidly, Partner with patients blood pressure (AMA MAP BP™) quality improvement program, including a monthly dashboard and practice facilitation.

Methods

Eight federally qualified health center clinics from the HopeHealth network in South Carolina participated. Clinic staff received monthly practice facilitation guided by a dashboard with process metrics (measure [repeat BP when initial systolic ≥140 or diastolic ≥90 mmHg; Act [number antihypertensive medication classes prescribed at standard dose or greater to adults with uncontrolled BP]; Partner [follow-up within 30 days of uncontrolled BP; systolic BP fall after medication added]) and outcome metric (BP <140/<90). Electronic health record data were obtained on adults ≥18 years at baseline and monthly during MAP BP. Patients with diagnosed HTN, ≥1 encounter at baseline, and ≥2 encounters during 6 months of MAP BP were included in this evaluation.

Results

Among 45,498 adults with encounters during the 1-year baseline, 20,963 (46.1%) had diagnosed HTN; 12,370 (59%) met the inclusion criteria (67% black, 29% white; mean (standard deviation) age 59.5 (12.8) years; 16.3% uninsured. HTN control improved (63.6% vs. 75.1%, p<0.0001), reflecting positive changes in Measure, Act, and Partner metrics (all p<0.001), although control remained lower in non-Hispanic black than in non-Hispanic white adults (73.8% vs. 78.4%, p<0.001).

Conclusions

With MAP BP, the HTN control goal was attained among adults eligible for analysis. Ongoing efforts aim to improve program access and racial equity in control.

Protocol to improve hypertension management in a VA outpatient clinic

This 20-week quality improvement study describes implementation of a hypertension identification and management program with use of a standardized oscillometric blood pressure (BP) measurement protocol, provider education, and audit/feedback of hypertension control in a Veterans Affairs primary care clinic. A total of 692 male Veterans ages 18-85 years with treated hypertension and at least one clinic visit in the previous year were included for analysis. Mean age was 69.7 years (standard deviation 7.6) and race and ethnicity were 42.0% White, 29.1% Black and 3.0% Hispanic. Prior to program implementation, clinic BP was measured using the auscultatory method with a manual syphgmomanometer. Baseline BP measurements demonstrated bias as determined by terminal digit preference for digits 0 and 8 in 29.5% and 25.2% of systolic (SBP) and 31.6% and 21.8% of diastolic BP measurements, respectively (p < 0.001). Post-implementation of the standardized oscillometric BP measurement protocol, digit preference was eliminated. Protocol compliance was 89.1% at 5 weeks and 92.4% at 20 weeks. Overall average SBP was significantly higher in the post-implementation period compared to average SBP in the 12-month pre-implementation period (137.4 [Standard Deviation (SD) 17.4] vs. 126.3 [SD 15.3]; P < 0.001). Uncontrolled hypertension, (BP ≥ 140/90 mmHg), increased from 17.8% at baseline to 41.8% post-implementation while provider therapeutic inertia declined from 84.5% at baseline to 55.8% after 20 weeks. This study shows that terminal digit preference is reduced with implementation of standardized oscillatory BP measurement and a quality improvement program can reduce therapeutic inertia of hypertension treatment.

Analysis of Therapeutic Inertia and Race and Ethnicity in the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Therapeutic inertia may contribute to racial and ethnic differences in blood pressure (BP) control.

Objective

To determine the association between race and ethnicity and therapeutic inertia in the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT).

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cross-sectional study was a secondary analysis of data from SPRINT, a randomized clinical trial comparing intensive (<120 mm Hg) vs standard (<140 mm Hg) systolic BP treatment goals. Participants were enrolled between November 8, 2010, and March 15, 2013, with a median follow-up 3.26 years. Participants included adults aged 50 years or older at high risk for cardiovascular disease but without diabetes, previous stroke, or heart failure. The present analysis was restricted to participant visits with measured BP above the target goal. Analyses for the present study were performed in from October 2020 through March 2021.

Exposures

Self-reported race and ethnicity, mutually exclusively categorized into groups of Hispanic, non-Hispanic Black, or non-Hispanic White participants.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Therapeutic inertia, defined as no antihypertensive medication intensification at each study visit where the BP was above target goal. The association between self-reported race and ethnicity and therapeutic inertia was estimated using generalized estimating equations and stratified by treatment group. Antihypertensive medication use was assessed with pill bottle inventories at each visit. Blood pressure was measured using an automated device.

Results

A total of 8556 participants, including 4141 in the standard group (22 844 participant-visits; median age, 67.0 years [IQR, 61.0-76.0 years]; 1467 women [35.4%]) and 4415 in the intensive group (35 453 participant-visits; median age, 67.0 years [IQR, 61.0-76.0 years]; 1584 women [35.9%]) with at least 1 eligible study visit were included in the present analysis. Among non-Hispanic White, non-Hispanic Black, and Hispanic participants, the overall prevalence of therapeutic inertia in the standard vs intensive groups was 59.8% (95% CI, 58.9%-60.7%) vs 56.0% (95% CI, 55.2%-56.7%), 56.8% (95% CI, 54.4%-59.2%) vs 54.5% (95% CI, 52.4%-56.6%), and 59.7% (95% CI, 56.5%-63.0%) vs 51.0% (95% CI, 47.4%-54.5%), respectively. The adjusted odds ratios in the standard and intensive groups for therapeutic inertia associated with non-Hispanic Black vs non-Hispanic White participants were 0.85 (95% CI, 0.79-0.92) and 0.94 (95% CI, 0.88-1.01), respectively. The adjusted odds ratios for therapeutic inertia comparing Hispanic vs non-Hispanic White participants were 1.00 (95% CI, 0.90-1.13) and 0.89 (95% CI, 0.79-1.00) in the standard and intensive groups, respectively.

Conclusions and Relevance

Among SPRINT participants above BP target goal, this cross-sectional study found that therapeutic inertia prevalence was similar or lower for non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic participants compared with non-Hispanic White participants. These findings suggest that a standardized approach to BP management, as used in SPRINT, may help ensure equitable care and could reduce the contribution of therapeutic inertia to disparities in hypertension.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01206062.

Effect of the COVID-19 Pandemic and Other Predictors of True Therapeutic Inertia on Patients with Hypertension in a Primary Care Clinic in Thailand

Introduction

Hypertension (HT) has a significant impact on health care worldwide. Therapeutic inertia (TI) is defined as the failure to intensify therapy in the absence of an optimal goal and is widely used as a quality of care parameter. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has affected many health-care systems, including HT care. Therefore, the present study assessed the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on TI and its predictors in patients with HT.

Methods

The electronic medical records of patients with HT who attended a primary care clinic at a tertiary hospital during pre-COVID-19 (February 2019 to February 2020) and COVID-19 (March to August 2020) periods were reviewed.

Results

Our study included 6089 visits during the 12-month pre-COVID-19 period and 2852 visits during the 6-month COVID-19 period. Most of the baseline characteristics of the HT patients were not significantly different between the two time periods. During the COVID-19 period, the percentage of uncontrolled HT visits decreased from 43% to 31%. Similarly, the prevalence of TI decreased from 81% to 77%. False TI was predominantly due to physicians' concerns regarding the in-clinic blood pressure measurement being inaccurate during both the periods.

Conclusion

After readjustment for the physicians 'reasons, the true TI was 64% and 60% in the pre-COVID-19 and COVID-19 period. For adjusted physician and patient-related factors, multilevel modeling was used. Senior medical staff visits, elderly patients, prior diabetes mellitus diagnosis, patients who used more than one type of anti-HT medication, and patients with systolic blood pressure >150 mmHg were all predictors of TI. The COVID-19 period, on the other hand had no effect on TI with an adjusted odds ratio of 0.82 (95% confidence interval, 0.67-1.01).

Potential implications of the 2021 KDIGO blood pressure guideline for adults with chronic kidney disease in the United States

The 2021 Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Clinical Practice Guideline for the Management of Blood Pressure in Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD) recommends a target systolic blood pressure under 120 mmHg based on standardized office blood pressure measurement. Here, we examined the potential implications of this new guideline for blood pressure lowering with antihypertensive medication among adults in the United States with CKD compared to the 2012 KDIGO guideline (target blood pressure 130/80 mmHg or under with albuminuria or 140/90 mmHg or under without albuminuria) and the 2017 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (target blood pressure under 130/80 mmHg) guideline. Additionally, we determined implications of the 2021 KDIGO guideline for angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEi) or angiotensin II-receptor blocker (ARB) use for those with albuminuria (recommended at systolic blood pressure of 120 mmHg or over) compared to the 2012 KDIGO guideline (recommended at blood pressures over 130/80 mmHg). Data were analyzed from 1,699 adults with CKD (estimated glomerular filtration rate 15-59 ml/min/1.73m2 or a urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio of 30 mg/g or more) in the 2015-2018 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey and averaged up to three standardized blood pressure measurements. Among adults with CKD, 69.5% were eligible for blood pressure lowering according to the 2021 KDIGO guideline, compared with 49.8% as per 2012 KDIGO or 55.6% as per 2017 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines. Among those with albuminuria, 78.2% were eligible for ACEi/ARB use by the 2021 KDIGO guideline compared with 71.0% by the 2012 KDIGO guideline. However, only 39.1% were taking an ACEi/ARB. Thus, our findings highlight opportunities to improve blood pressure management and reduce cardiovascular risk among adults in the United States with CKD.

Meaningful Causal Decompositions in Health Equity Research: Definition, Identification, and Estimation Through a Weighting Framework

Causal decomposition analyses can help build the evidence base for interventions that address health disparities (inequities). They ask how disparities in outcomes may change under hypothetical intervention. Through study design and assumptions, they can rule out alternate explanations such as confounding, selection bias, and measurement error, thereby identifying potential targets for intervention. Unfortunately, the literature on causal decomposition analysis and related methods have largely ignored equity concerns that actual interventionists would respect, limiting their relevance and practical value. This article addresses these concerns by explicitly considering what covariates the outcome disparity and hypothetical intervention adjust for (so-called allowable covariates) and the equity value judgments these choices convey, drawing from the bioethics, biostatistics, epidemiology, and health services research literatures. From this discussion, we generalize decomposition estimands and formulae to incorporate allowable covariate sets (and thereby reflect equity choices) while still allowing for adjustment of non-allowable covariates needed to satisfy causal assumptions. For these general formulae, we provide weighting-based estimators based on adaptations of ratio-of-mediator-probability and inverse-odds-ratio weighting. We discuss when these estimators reduce to already used estimators under certain equity value judgments, and a novel adaptation under other judgments.

Achieving 70% Hypertension Control: How Hard Can It Be?

BACKGROUND

Although decades of research support hypertension treatment, studies guiding the successful implementation of programs to control blood pressure (BP) in real-world primary care settings are sparse.

METHODS

In this study a multicomponent intervention was implemented, with the following goals: (1) achieve 70% control of hypertension within 18 months, (2) use the RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance) framework to evaluate the implementation of the program, and (3) assess additional actions that could have been undertaken to achieve control among those who remained uncontrolled.

RESULTS

Of 786 patients, 597 achieved BP control (75.9%; improvement of 20.9 percentage points). For RE-AIM outcomes, (1) staff performed outreach for all uncontrolled patients, with 75.3% making follow-up appointments, and 61.3% attending at least one appointment; (2) the proportion of faculty with at least 70% control increased from 26.7% to 87.5%, indicating significant physician adoption; (3) implementation outcomes were mixed, with four of six medical assistant BP training sessions completed, outreach calls performed in 16 of 18 months, but only 24 patients referred to the patient counseling and medication management program. For maintenance, 70% control was maintained for a 7-month observation period. The research team determined that 16.8% of those uncontrolled could have had additional actions taken to achieve control.

CONCLUSION

The goal of 70% control was achieved, improving control by 20.9 percentage points over 18 months. The RE-AIM framework evaluation demonstrated successful implementation and likely contributed to achievement of the target. The chart review findings revealed that a minority of patients could have additional interventions provided by the primary care practice.

The PCORnet Blood Pressure Control Laboratory: A Platform for Surveillance and Efficient Trials

BACKGROUND

Uncontrolled blood pressure (BP) is a leading preventable cause of death that remains common in the US population despite the availability of effective medications. New technology and program innovation has high potential to improve BP but may be expensive and burdensome for patients, clinicians, health systems, and payers and may not produce desired results or reduce existing disparities in BP control.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The PCORnet Blood Pressure Control Laboratory is a platform designed to enable national surveillance and facilitate quality improvement and comparative effectiveness research. The platform uses PCORnet, the National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network, for engagement of health systems and collection of electronic health record data, and the Eureka Research Platform for eConsent and collection of patient-reported outcomes and mHealth data from wearable devices and smartphones. Three demonstration projects are underway: BP track will conduct national surveillance of BP control and related clinical processes by measuring theory-derived pragmatic BP control metrics using electronic health record data, with a focus on tracking disparities over time; BP MAP will conduct a cluster-randomized trial comparing effectiveness of 2 versions of a BP control quality improvement program; BP Home will conduct an individual patient-level randomized trial comparing effectiveness of smartphone-linked versus standard home BP monitoring. Thus far, BP Track has collected electronic health record data from over 826 000 eligible patients with hypertension who completed ≈3.1 million ambulatory visits. Preliminary results demonstrate substantial room for improvement in BP control (<140/90 mm Hg), which was 58% overall, and in the clinical processes relevant for BP control. For example, only 12% of patients with hypertension with a high BP measurement during an ambulatory visit received an order for a new antihypertensive medication.

CONCLUSIONS

The PCORnet Blood Pressure Control Laboratory is designed to be a reusable platform for efficient surveillance and comparative effectiveness research; results from demonstration projects are forthcoming.

Improving Hypertension Control in Primary Care With the Measure Accurately, Act Rapidly, and Partner With Patients Protocol

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

Better blood pressure (BP; mm Hg) control is a pivotal national strategy for preventing cardiovascular events. Measure accurately, Act rapidly, and Partner with patients (MAP) with practice facilitation improved BP control (<140/<90 mm Hg) from 61.2% to 89.8% during a 6-month pilot study in one primary care clinic. Current study objectives included evaluating the 6-month MAP framework in 16 Family Medicine Clinics and then withdrawing practice facilitation and determining whether better hypertension control persisted at 12 months since short-term improvements often decline by 1 year. Measure accurately included staff training in attended (intake) BP measurement and unattended automated office BP when intake BP was ≥140/≥90 mm Hg. Act rapidly (therapeutic inertia) included protocol-guided escalation of antihypertensive medications when office BP was ≥140/≥90 mm Hg. Partner with patients (systolic BP decline/therapeutic intensification) included shared decision making, BP self-monitoring, and affordable medications. Study data were obtained from electronic records. In 16 787 hypertensive adults (mean, 61.2 years; 54.1% women; 46.0% Medicare) with visits at baseline and first 6 months, BP control improved from 64.4% at baseline to 74.3% (P<0.001) at 6 and 73.6% (P<0.001) at 12 months. At the first MAP visit, among adults with uncontrolled baseline BP and no medication changes (n=3654), measure accurately resulted in 11.1/5.1 mm Hg lower BP. During the first 6 months of MAP, therapeutic inertia fell (52.0% versus 49.5%; P=0.01), and systolic BP decreased more per therapeutic intensification (−5.4 to −12.7; P<0.001). MAP supports a key national strategy for cardiovascular disease prevention through rapid and sustained improvement in hypertension control, largely reflecting measuring accurately and partnering with patients.

Automated Office-Based Blood Pressure Measurement: an Overview and Guidance for Implementation in Primary Care

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purposes of this study are to review evidence supporting the use of automated office blood pressure (AOBP) measurement and to provide practical guidance for implementing it in clinical settings.

RECENT FINDINGS

Mean AOBP readings correlate with awake ambulatory blood pressure monitor (ABPM) values and predict cardiovascular outcomes better than conventional techniques. However, heterogeneity among readings suggests that AOBP does not replace ABPM. Blood pressure (BP) measurement protocols differ among commonly described AOBP devices, but all produce valid BP estimates. Rest periods should not precede AOBP with BpTRU devices but should occur before use with Omron HEM-907 and Microlife WatchBP Office devices. Attended and unattended AOBP appear to produce similar results. This review also describes a framework to aid AOBP's implementation in clinical practice. Evidence supports AOBP as the preferred method for measuring BP in office settings, but this approach should be a complement to out-of-office measurements, such as self-measured BP monitoring or 24-h ABPM, not a substitute for it.