Search

This article describes the October 2020 proceedings of the Million Hearts Cardiac Rehabilitation Think Tank: Accelerating New Care Models, convened with representatives from professional organizations, cardiac rehabilitation (CR) programs, academic institutions, federal agencies, payers, and patient representative groups. As CR delivery evolves, terminology is evolving to reflect not where activities occur (eg, center, home) but how CR is delivered: in-person synchronous, synchronous with real-time audiovisual communication (virtual), or asynchronous (remote). Patients and CR staff may interact through ≥1 delivery modes. Though new models may change how CR is delivered and who can access CR, new models should not change what is delivered-a multidisciplinary program addressing CR core components. During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) public health emergency, Medicare issued waivers to allow virtual CR; it is unclear whether these waivers will become permanent policy post-public health emergency. Given CR underuse and disparities in delivery, new models must equitably address patient and health system contributors to disparities. Strategies for implementing new CR care models address safety, exercise prescription, monitoring, and education. The available evidence supports the efficacy and safety of new CR care models. Still, additional research should study diverse populations, impact on patient-centered outcomes, effect on long-term outcomes and health care utilization, and implementation in diverse settings. CR is evolving to include in-person synchronous, virtual, and remote modes of delivery; there is significant enthusiasm for implementing new care models and learning how new care models can broaden access to CR, improve patient outcomes, and address health inequities.

BACKGROUND The use of correctly sized blood pressure (BP) cuffs is important to ensure accurate measurement and effective management of hypertension. The goals of this study were to determine the proportions of pregnant women that would require small, adult, large, and extra-large (XL) cuff sizes, and to examine the demographic characteristics associated with need for a large or XL cuff. METHODS This cross-sectional study analyzed 1,176 pregnant women (≥18 years) included in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 1999–2006 cycles. Recommended BP cuff sizes, based on American Heart Association recommendations, were categorized by mid-arm circumference: small adult (≤26 cm), adult (>26 to ≤34 cm), large (>34 to ≤44 cm), and extra-large (XL) (>44 cm). RESULTS Among US pregnant women, recommended cuff sizes were: 17.9% small adult, 57.0% adult, and 25.1% for large or XL. About 38.5% of non-Hispanic Black, 21.6% of Mexican American and 21.0% of non-Hispanic White pregnant women required a large or XL cuff. About 81.8% of women in the highest quartile for BMI required large or XL cuffs, which was significantly higher than women in other quartiles. CONCLUSION Roughly one out of every four pregnant women required large or XL BP cuffs. The requirement for large or XL cuffs was highest among non-Hispanic Black women and women with the highest BMI. For pregnant women, measuring the arm circumference and selecting an appropriately sized cuff is important to facilitate accurate blood pressure monitoring and hypertension management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Hypertension is highly prevalent in the United States, and many persons with hypertension do not have controlled blood pressure. Self-measured blood pressure monitoring (SMBP), when combined with clinical support, is an evidence-based strategy for lowering blood pressure and improving control in persons with hypertension. For years, there has been support for widespread implementation of SMBP by national organizations and the federal government, and SMBP was highlighted as a primary intervention in the 2020 Surgeon General's Call to Action to Control Hypertension , yet optimal SMBP use remains low. There are well-known patient and clinician barriers to optimal SMBP documented in the literature. We explore additional high-level barriers that have been encountered, as broad policy and systems-level changes have been attempted, and offer potential solutions. Collective efforts could modernize data transfer and processing, improve broadband access, expand device coverage and increase affordability, integrate SMBP into routine care and reimbursement practices, and strengthen patient engagement, trust, and access. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Cruise travel contributed to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission when there were relatively few cases in the United States. By 14 March 2020, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) issued a No Sail Order suspending US cruise operations; the last US passenger ship docked on 16 April. Methods We analyzed SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks on cruises in US waters or carrying US citizens and used regression models to compare voyage characteristics. We used compartmental models to simulate the potential impact of 4 interventions (screening for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) symptoms; viral testing on 2 days and isolation of positive persons; reduction of passengers by 40%, crew by 20%, and reducing port visits to 1) for 7-day and 14-day voyages. Results During 19 January to 16 April 2020, 89 voyages on 70 ships had known SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks; 16 ships had recurrent outbreaks. There were 1669 reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR)-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infections and 29 confirmed deaths. Longer voyages were associated with more cases (adjusted incidence rate ratio, 1.10, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.03–1.17, P  < .003). Mathematical models showed that 7-day voyages had about 70% fewer cases than 14-day voyages. On 7-day voyages, the most effective interventions were reducing the number of individuals onboard (43.3% reduction in total infections) and testing passengers and crew (42% reduction in total infections). All four interventions reduced transmission by 80.1%, but no single intervention or combination eliminated transmission. Results were similar for 14-day voyages. Conclusions SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks on cruises were common during January–April 2020. Despite all interventions modeled, cruise travel still poses a significant SARS-CoV-2 transmission risk. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]