Search

Telemedicine-based medication management improves hypertension control, but has been evaluated primarily in patients with low antihypertensive drug counts. Its impact on patients taking three or more antihypertensive agents is not well-established. To address this evidence gap, the authors conducted an exploratory analysis of an 18-month, 591-patient trial of telemedicine-based hypertension medication management. Using general linear models, the effect of medication management on blood pressure for patients taking two or fewer antihypertensive agents at study baseline vs those taking three or more was compared. While patients taking two or fewer antihypertensive agents had a significant reduction in systolic blood pressure with medication management, those taking three or more had no such response. The between-subgroup effect difference was statistically significant at 6 months (-6.4 mm Hg [95% confidence interval, -12.2 to -0.6]) and near significant at 18 months (-6.0 mm Hg [95% confidence interval, -12.2 to 0.2]). These findings suggest that baseline antihypertensive drug count may impact how patients respond to hypertension medication management and emphasize the need to study management strategies specifically in patients taking three or more antihypertensive medications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The objective of the study was to identify potential explanatory factors for racial differences in blood pressure (BP) control.Design: The design of the study was a cross-sectional studyPatients/participants: The study included 608 patients with hypertension who were either African American (50%) or white (50%) and who received primary care in Durham, NC.Measurements and Main Results: Baseline data were obtained from the Take Control of Your Blood pressure study and included clinical, demographic, and psychosocial variables potentially related to clinic BP measures. African Americans were more likely than whites to have inadequate baseline clinic BP control as defined as greater than or equal to 140/90 mmHg (49% versus 34%; unadjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.8; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.3-2.5). Among factors that may explain this disparity, being older, reporting hypertension medication nonadherence, reporting a hypertension diagnosis for more than 5 years, reporting high levels of stress, being worried about hypertension, and reporting an increased number of medication side effects were related to inadequate BP control. In adjusted analyses, African Americans continue to have poor BP control relative to whites; the magnitude of the association was reduced (OR = 1.5; 95% CI 1.0-2.1). Medication nonadherence, worries about hypertension, and older age (>70) continued to be related to poor BP control.Conclusions: In this sample of hypertensive patients, there were a number of factors associated with poor BP control that partially explained the observed racial disparity in hypertension control including age, medication nonadherence, and worry about BP. Medication nonadherence is of particular interest because it is a potentially modifiable factor that might be used to reduce the racial disparity in BP control. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Obtaining accurate blood pressure (BP) readings is a challenge faced by health professionals. Clinical trials implement strict protocols, whereas clinical practices and studies that assess quality of care utilize a less rigorous protocol for BP measurement.Objective: To examine agreement between real-time clinic-based assessment of BP and the standard mercury assessment of BP.Design: Prospective reliability study.Patients: One hundred patients with an International Classification of Diseases-9th edition code for hypertension were enrolled.Measures: Two BP measurements were obtained with the Hawksley random-zero mercury sphygmomanometer and averaged. The clinic-based BP was extracted from the computerized medical records.Results: Agreement between the mercury and clinic-based systolic blood pressure (SBP) was good, intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC)=0.91 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.83 to 0.94); the agreement for the mercury and clinic-based diastolic blood pressure (DBP) was satisfactory, ICC=0.77 (95% CI: 0.62 to 0.86). Overall, clinic-based readings overestimated the mercury readings, with a mean overestimation of 8.3 mmHg for SBP and 7.1 mmHg for DBP. Based on the clinic-based measure, 21% of patients were misdiagnosed with uncontrolled hypertension.Conclusions: Health professionals should be aware of this potential difference when utilizing clinic-based BP values for making treatment decisions and/or assessing quality of care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Obesity treatment is less successful for socioeconomically disadvantaged populations, particularly when delivered in primary care. Digital health strategies can extend the reach of clinical obesity treatments to care settings serving patients at highest risk.Methods: Track was an effectiveness RCT of a 12-month digital weight-loss intervention, embedded within a community health center system. Participants were 351 adult patients (aged 21-65 years) with obesity and hypertension, diabetes, and hyperlipidemia. Patients were randomized to usual care (n=175) or an intervention (n=176) comprising app-based self-monitoring of behavior change goals with tailored feedback, a smart scale, dietitian-delivered counseling calls, and clinician counseling informed by app-generated recommendations, delivered via electronic health record. The primary outcome was 12-month weight change. Randomization began on June 18, 2013, final assessments were completed on September 10, 2015. Data analysis was conducted in 2016 and 2017. The trial retained 92% of usual care and 96% of intervention participants at 12 months.Results: The Track intervention produced larger weight losses relative to usual care at 6 months (net effect: -4.4 kg, 95% CI= -5.5, -3.3, p<0.001) and 12 months (net effect: -3.8 kg, 95% CI= -5.0, -2.5, p<0.001). Intervention participants were more likely to lose ≥5% of their baseline weight at 6 months (43% vs 6%, p<0.001) and 12 months (40% vs 17%, p<0.001). Intervention participants completing ≥80% of expected self-monitoring episodes (-3.5 kg); counseling calls (-3.0 kg); or self-weighing days (-4.4 kg) lost significantly more weight than less engaged intervention participants (all p<0.01).Conclusions: A digital obesity treatment, integrated with health system resources, can produce clinically meaningful weight-loss outcomes among socioeconomically disadvantaged primary care patients with elevated cardiovascular disease risk.Trial Registration: This study is registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov NCT01827800. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Because hyperlipidemia is asymptomatic, many veterans affairs (VA) patients may not perceive it seriously. We assessed key Health Belief model concepts to describe patients' cholesterol-related health beliefs and examine associations between patient-level factors and desire to improve cholesterol control.Methods: We used baseline data from an ongoing randomized clinical trial. Eligible patients were receiving care at the Durham VA and had CVD risk-total cholesterol levels >130 mg/dL and/or <80% medication adherence in the previous 12 months. A survey assessed patients' health beliefs about high cholesterol and self-reported medication adherence. Multivariable logistic regression examined whether there was an association between desire to control cholesterol and cholesterol status.Results: Approximately 64% (n=155) of patients perceived high cholesterol as 'very serious'. In multivariable logistic regression analysis, patients who perceived high cholesterol as 'very serious' (OR 2. 26, p=0.032) and/or with high self-efficacy (OR 4.70, p<0.001) had increased odds of desiring cholesterol control.Conclusion: The factors most significantly associated with desire to improve cholesterol control were perceiving hyperlipidemia as 'very serious and self-efficacy for cholesterol control.Practice Implication: Educating patients, with the goal of appropriately increasing their perceived risk of disease, is likely necessary to impact cholesterol control. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]