Effectiveness of patient education and psychosocial counseling in promoting compliance and control among hypertensive patients. Improving blood pressure control in diabetes: limitations of a clinical reminder in influencing physician behavior. A randomized trial of special packaging of antihypertensive medications. Improving blood pressure control through provider education, provider alerts, and patient education: a cluster randomized trial. Pharmacist involvement in primary care improves hypertensive patient clinical outcomes. Randomised clinical trial of strategies for improving medication compliance in primary hypertension. Increasing compliance. Patient-operated hypertension groups. Electronic monitoring of adherence as a tool to improve blood pressure control. A randomized controlled trial. A controlled trial of health education in the physician's office. Evaluation of family health education to build social support for long-term control of high blood pressure. Improving compliance with therapeutic regimens in hypertensive patients in a community health center. Antihypertensive drug treatment: a comparison of usual care with self blood pressure measurement. A randomized trial to improve follow-up care in severe uncontrolled hypertensives at an inner-city walk-in clinic. Work-site treatment of hypertension by specially trained nurses. A controlled trial. An appointment reminder system's effect on reducing the number of hypertension patients who drop out from care. Patterns of compliance with once versus twice daily antihypertensive drug therapy in primary care: a randomized clinical trial using electronic monitoring. Trial of Nonpharmacologic Intervention in the Elderly (TONE). Design and rationale of a blood pressure control trial. Comprehensive pharmaceutical care in the chain setting. Screening, treatment and adherence to treatment for hypertension. A telecommunications system for monitoring and counseling patients with hypertension. Impact on medication adherence and blood pressure control. Management of hypertension. Effect of improving patient compliance for follow-up care. Improving hypertension control in a private medical practice. A randomized study comparing a patient-directed hypertension management strategy with usual office-based care. Comparing standard care with a physician and pharmacist team approach for uncontrolled hypertension. Self-recording of blood pressure in the management of hypertension. Non-pharmacological treatment of hypertension in primary health care: a 2-year open randomized controlled trial of lifestyle intervention against hypertension in eastern Finland. Rational prescribing in primary care (RaPP): a cluster randomized trial of a tailored intervention. Effect of value-added utilities on prescription refill compliance and health care expenditures for hypertension. Influencing adherence among hypertensives. Improving hypertension control: impact of computer feedback and physician education. The effects of family involvement and practitioner home visits on the control of hypertension. Educational outreach in diabetes to encourage practice nurses to use primary care hypertension and hyperlipidaemia guidelines (EDEN): a randomized controlled trial. Weight reduction in obese hypertensive patients. Coordinating and standardizing long-term care: evaluation of the west of Scotland shared-care scheme for hypertension. The effect of treatment on mortality in "mild" hypertension: results of the hypertension detection and follow-up program. Self-monitoring of blood pressure promotes achievement of blood pressure target in primary health care. Targets and self monitoring in hypertension: randomised controlled trial and cost effectiveness analysis. Evaluation of a structured treatment and teaching programme on hypertension in general practice. A computer-based monitoring system for follow-up of elevated blood pressure. Feedback on prescribing rate combined with problem-oriented pharmacotherapy education as a model to improve prescribing behaviour among general practitioners. Pharmaceutical care program for patients with uncontrolled hypertension. Report of a double-blind clinical trial with ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. Appropriate Blood Pressure Control in NIDDM (ABCD) Trial. Effect of pharmacist intervention and initiation of home blood pressure monitoring in patients with uncontrolled hypertension. Hypertension improvement project: randomized trial of quality improvement for physicians and lifestyle modification for patients. Integration of depression and hypertension treatment: a pilot, randomized controlled trial. Effects of 8 weeks sustained follow-up after a nurse consultation on hypertension: a randomised trial. Linking community-based blood pressure measurement to clinical care: a randomized controlled trial of outreach and tracking by community health workers. Effect of nurse-directed hypertension treatment among First Nations people with existing hypertension and diabetes mellitus: the Diabetes Risk Evaluation and Microalbuminuria (DREAM 3) randomized controlled trial. Randomised controlled trial of computer assisted management of hypertension in primary care. Improvement of medication compliance in uncontrolled hypertension. Use of a standardized personal medical record by patients with hypertension: a randomized controlled prospective trial. Health education for hypertensive patients. Compliance to treatment for hypertension in elderly patients: the SHEP pilot study. Systolic Hypertension in the Elderly Program. A randomized controlled trial of an information booklet for hypertensive patients in general practice. Can general practitioners use training in relaxation and management of stress to reduce mild hypertension? Five-year blood pressure control and mortality following health education for hypertensive patients. Nurse management for hypertension. A systems approach. Randomized controlled trial on lifestyle modification in hypertensive patients. Efficacy of a home blood pressure monitoring programme on therapeutic compliance in hypertension: the EAPACUM-HTA study. Group versus individual academic detailing to improve the use of antihypertensive medications in primary care: a cluster-randomized controlled trial. Evaluation of two educative models in a primary care hypertension programme. Implementing clinical guidelines in the treatment of hypertension in general practice. Evaluation of patient outcome related to implementation of a computer-based clinical decision support system. Home blood pressure monitoring for mild hypertensives. Effects of a lifestyle programme on ambulatory blood pressure and drug dosage in treated hypertensive patients: a randomized controlled trial. Treatment of hypertension with biofeedback and relaxation techniques. Pharmacoeconomic evaluation of a pharmacist-managed hypertension clinic. Evaluation of computer based clinical decision support system and risk chart for management of hypertension in primary care: randomised controlled trial. Nonpharmacologic intervention to reduce blood pressure in older patients with mild hypertension. Effectiveness of multidisciplinary lifestyle intervention for hypertension: a randomised controlled trial.
Compliance with physician recommendations among long-term hypertensive patients can be a chronic and difficult treatment problem. This study evaluated the relative effectiveness of additional patient education and psychosocial counseling in improving patient compliance. At a family practice clinic, 123 low income, rural, black hypertensive patients were pretested on several psychological characteristics and randomly assigned to one of three groups: vigorous, group patient education and family physician appointments; supportive, individualized psychosocial counseling and family physician appointments; or family physician appointments only, which was the baseline medical care. Intervention and follow-up each lasted three months, and the intervention was in addition to the patients' baseline medical care. Compliance was measured by: keeping follow-up appointments; bringing antihypertension medications to each appointment; consuming these medications; and diastolic blood pressure. Analysis of variance of group mean and change scores, t tests, and chisquare analysis indicated that neither additional patient education nor additional psychosocial counseling improved compliance or blood pressure control significantly better than regular family physician visits alone. Hypertension should be aggressively treated, especially in diabetic patients. But studies of physician prescribing habits reveal that physicians often delay making medication changes or initiating antihypertensive therapy. A chart-based reminder was designed to improve physician medication prescribing in this clinical situation.
                A randomized controlled trial was conducted at the Veterans Affairs Medical Center in Richmond, Virginia. Patients with diabetes and hypertension were selected. A highly visible chart reminder was applied to the front of outpatient charts in the intervention group practice. A chart review was conducted to assess physician-directed medication changes. A successful outcome was defined as any antihypertensive medication increase or addition at that same visit.
                Physicians were more likely to intensify antihypertensive medication as the blood pressure increased regardless of the reminder. Overall, only 33% of visits resulted in a medication change, even though 93% of patients had elevations over target blood pressure at the follow-up visit. Physicians in the intervention and control groups made changes to medication at similar rates (chi 2 = 0.621, p = .511).
                In this study, a chart reminder failed to improve physician compliance with the clinical guideline for hypertension management in diabetics, Sixth Report of the Joint National Committee on the Detection, Evaluation, Prevention and Treatment of High Blood Pressure. To inform the design of effective intervention strategies, further research should explore specific barriers to guideline adherence in this clinical situation. This article reports a randomized controlled trial designed to test the effects of special packaging of antihypertensive medication on compliance and blood pressure control. One hundred eighty subjects who had exhibited elevated blood pressure greater than 90 mmHg in the two years prior to the study were recruited from patients receiving care at a community hospital-based family medicine practice. After completing preenrollment interviews and blood pressure measurements, subjects were randomly assigned to receive their antihypertensive medications either in the usual vials or in special unit dose-reminder packaging. Follow-up interviews, pill counts, and blood pressure measurements were performed at three-month intervals. There were no statistically significant differences between the control and experimental groups with regard to age, sex, race, employment, education, marital status, insurance coverage, or blood pressure regimens. Prior to the intervention, the experimental group had slightly lower diastolic blood pressure and reported better compliance than the control group. Analyses performed on 165 subjects completing the first follow-up visit revealed no significant improvements in blood pressure control or compliance for patients receiving special medication packaging. While some patients found it easy to remember to take pills packaged using this format, they also found the packages somewhat more difficult and inconvenient to use. In contrast to previously reported work, this study did not demonstrate any significant improvement in compliance with special packaging of antihypertensive medications. Inadequate blood pressure control is a persistent gap in quality care.
                To evaluate provider and patient interventions to improve blood pressure control.
                Cluster randomized, controlled trial.
                2 hospital-based and 8 community-based clinics in the Veterans Affairs Tennessee Valley Healthcare System.
                1341 veterans with essential hypertension cared for by 182 providers. Eligible patients had 2 or more blood pressure measurements greater than 140/90 mm Hg in a 6-month period and were taking a single antihypertensive agent.
                Providers who cared for eligible patients were randomly assigned to receive an e-mail with a Web-based link to the Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on the Prevention, Detection, Evaluation and Treatment of High Blood Pressure (JNC 7) guidelines (provider education); provider education and a patient-specific hypertension computerized alert (provider education and alert); or provider education, hypertension alert, and patient education, in which patients were sent a letter advocating drug adherence, lifestyle modification, and conversations with providers (patient education).
                Proportion of patients with a systolic blood pressure less than 140 mm Hg at 6 months; intensification of antihypertensive medication.
                Mean baseline blood pressure was 157/83 mm Hg with no differences between groups (P = 0.105). Six-month follow-up data were available for 975 patients (73%). Patients of providers who were randomly assigned to the patient education group had better blood pressure control (138/75 mm Hg) than those in the provider education and alert or provider education alone groups (146/76 mm Hg and 145/78 mm Hg, respectively). More patients in the patient education group had a systolic blood pressure of 140 mm Hg or less compared with those in the provider education or provider education and alert groups (adjusted relative risk for the patient education group compared with the provider education alone group, 1.31 [95% CI, 1.06 to 1.62]; P = 0.012).
                Follow-up blood pressure measurements were missing for 27% of study patients. The study could not detect a mechanism by which patient education improved blood pressure control.
                A multifactorial intervention including patient education improved blood pressure control compared with provider education alone. The practice of pharmaceutical care in primary care settings in Thailand is currently not generally accepted.
                To evaluate the effect of pharmacist involvement in treatment with hypertensive patients in primary care settings.
                The treatment objective was to stabilize the blood pressure (BP) of hypertensive patients in accordance with the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation and Treatment of High Blood Pressure guidelines. Patients were randomly assigned to a pharmacist-involved group (treatment) or a group with no pharmacist involvement (control). Pre- and post-test BPs, tablet counts, lifestyle modifications, and pharmacists' recommendations were recorded. The 6-month study was carried out in Mahasarakham University pharmacy and 2 primary care units. Patients were monitored monthly by reviewing their medications and supported by providing pharmaceutical care and counseling.
                From a total of 235 patients, the treatment group (n = 118) had a significant reduction in both systolic (S) and diastolic (D) BP compared with the 117 patients of the control group (p = 0.037, 0.027, respectively). The 158 patients (76 treatment, 82 control) with BPs >or=140/90 mm Hg at the beginning of the study showed significant BP reductions (p = 0.002 SBP, 0.008 DBP). The proportion of 158 patients whose BP became stabilized was higher in the treatment group (p = 0.017). The treatment group showed significantly better adherence (p = 0.014) and exercise control (p = 0.012) at the end of the study. Physicians accepted 42.72% of medication modifications and 5.34% of the suggestions for additional investigations.
                Hypertensive patients who received pharmacist input achieved a significantly greater benefit in BP reduction, BP control, and improvement in adherence rate and lifestyle modification. 230 Canadian steelworkers with hypertension took part in a randomised trial to see if compliance with antihypertensive drug regimens could be improved. For care and follow-up these men were randomly allocated to see either their own family doctors outside working-hours or industrial physicians during work shifts; the same men were randomly allocated to receive or not receive an educational programme aimed at instructing them about hypertension and its treatment. Surprisingly, the convenience of follow-up at work had no effect upon these men's compliance with antihypertensive drug regimens. Similarly, although men receiving health education learned a lot about hypertension, they were not more likely to take their medicine. Compliance was compared in 52 previously noncompliant hypertensive patients randomly assigned for eight weeks to either a nurse-operated hypertension clinic (control) or a patient-operated hypertension group] (experimental). Control patients listened to audiotapes on hypertension and its management and met individually with a nurse who adjusted their drug regimens. Experimental patients were trained to take their own blood pressure (BP) and select their own drugs in a group program emphasizing informed self-help. After the eight-week training period and at two- and six-month follow-up visits, both groups had significantly lower BPs. Compared with control patients, experimental patients had lower diastolic BPs, better pill counts, and better attendance (all P < .05). This study suggests that training noncompliant patients in groups to manage their own hypertension may achieve better results than traditional management programs. Poor adherence to antihypertensive drug regimens is believed to be a major contributor to treatment failure. Electronic monitoring of adherence may improve adherence and allow differentiation between those who are nonadherent and those who are pharmacologically nonresponsive. This study was designed to evaluate the effectiveness of electronic monitoring of adherence in lowering blood pressure (BP) in comparison with usual care.
                A total of 258 patients with high BP despite use of antihypertensive medication were randomly assigned to either continuation of usual care (with adjustment in antihypertensive medication if necessary) or to the introduction of electronic monitoring. Adherence to antihypertensive medication was monitored for 2 months without medication changes. The primary outcome measure was the proportion of patients who reached target BP levels after a 5-month follow-up period.
                At 5 months, 50.6% of the patients in the usual care group reached adequate BP, v 53.7% in the electronic monitoring group (P = .73). The percentages of patients with drug additions or increases in dosage were higher in the usual care group compared with those in whom adherence was monitored (P < .01).
                These data show that electronic monitoring in comparison to usual care results in similar BP control but leads to fewer drug changes and less drug use. This result is likely to be achieved by improving adherence. Hence a strategy that includes electronic monitoring has the potential to prevent unnecessary treatment escalation in patients with poor adherence. Screening of 6,144 patients in a general practice clinic to assist physician case-finding uncovered 983 (16%) who were uncontrolled hypertensives. Following physician recommendation, 115 patients volunteered for a controlled trial to test the effectiveness of supplementary strategies to the pharmaceutical management of high blood pressure. A study of nonparticipants indicated that about 7% of the practice population was eligible for cardiovascular health education. One group received a health education program, a second was allocated to self-monitor their blood pressure for 6 months, a third group was allocated to both strategies, and the final group, acting as a control, continued to receive their usual care. Physician monitoring of patients continued for the duration of the study and blood pressures decreased in all patients. The study's most important outcome was the joint reduction of blood pressure and medication strength. These were assessed by a "blind" clinician before and after the interventions according to criteria set out in the "stepped-care" approach to management of high blood pressure. People allocated to a health education program conducted in the doctor's common room did twice as well on this measure as those who were not so educated. Daily self-monitoring of blood pressure for 6 months proved to be too much for the majority of those so instructed. It is concluded that the general practice setting remains an important place for health education to prevent cardiac disease and suggestions are made for incorporating this into everyday practice. Sustaining patient motivation for long-term adherence to drug therapies remains a substantial problem for physicians, other health care providers, the patients themselves, and their families. Other therapeutic requests such as dietary changes and weight control may be even more difficult to maintain than taking pills. As part of a controlled experimental design implemented in an outpatient teaching hospital, an educational program was implemented to improve family member support for medical compliance among hypertensive patients. Family members were interviewed, counseled, and provided with a booklet for the purpose of educating and involving them in the home management of high blood pressure. The booklet identified ways the family member could assist the patient with medication compliance, appointment keeping, as well as diet and weight control. These items were identified and recorded as behavioral objectives in the booklet. Patients were followed for three years to assess long-term outcomes. Results showed a strong statistically significant difference between the experimental and control groups, with the experimental group demonstrating higher levels of appointment-keeping behavior, weight control, and BP under control (all p values less than .001). Analysis of the main effects of the educational program demonstrated that the family member support intervention accounted for the greatest decrease in diastolic blood pressure variability, R2 = .20, p less than .001. A 1-year, randomized study was conducted to test the possibility of improving compliance with therapeutic regimens in hypertensives by means of certain simple arrangements. Patients were given written treatment instructions concerning hypertension, a personal blood-pressure follow-up card, and, for those who failed to attend their blood-pressure check-up, an invitation for a new check-up. Using matched pairs, 202 Finnish hypertensives were randomly allocated either to an ordinary or a reorganized treatment group. By means of the latter system, patient compliance could be significantly (p less than 0.01) improved: Only 4% of the patients in this group dropped out of treatment, compared with 19% in the ordinary treatment group. By the end of the year, blood pressure had been lowered by at least 10% in 95% of the patients in the reorganized group and in 78% of those in the ordinary group (p less than 0.01). This was achieved in approximately 60% of cases using chlorthalidone alone. Blood pressure self-measurement is increasing in most communities and yet its role in the management of hypertension is poorly understood. This study was devised to evaluate the behaviour of doctors in general practice when treating patients with poorly controlled essential hypertension who use self-measurement. Patients, most of whom were already taking antihypertensive medications were commenced on perindopril or indapamide at their doctor's discretion and were randomly allocated to self-measurement (SM) using an OMRON HEM706 oscillometric device or a continuation of their usual care (UC) over an 8-week period. This was an observational study without any specific or set treatment goals for the doctor to follow. Sixty of 62 subjects completed the study and the two groups were equally matched for age, body mass index, gender, and blood pressure (BP). While additional perindopril or indapamide produced a significant fall in BP in both groups over the study period, the systolic pressure remained significantly higher in the SM group (sitting 148 +/- 3 compared with 142 +/- 3; 145 +/- 3 compared with 138 +/- 3 mm Hg respectively; P < 0.05). Twenty-four hour and daytime ambulatory monitor systolic pressures were also significantly higher in the SM group. Differences in diastolic BP were not statistically significant. Furthermore, SM patients were less likely to have their medications increased and more likely to have them reduced or ceased. Doctors and patients found self-measurement convenient and useful. This study suggests that doctors prescribing decisions are influenced by evidence from self-measurement of BP with consequential increases in office BP related to reduced drug use. While self-BP measurement can offer reassurance about adequacy of control when away from a physicians office, our best evidence of understanding target blood pressures comes from large randomised studies using office blood pressures as an end-point. There is an urgent need for further study to provide arbitration between self-measurement and office blood pressures although each measurement must contribute to the management of hypertension. A single-blinded, randomized trial was conducted to determine whether a mailed postcard improved follow-up in uncontrolled hypertensives. One hundred and seven patients with a systolic blood pressure (BP) of 180 or more or a diastolic blood pressure of 110 or more at an inner-city, hospital-based walk-in clinic were enrolled; mean age was 56 years, 95 percent were African American, 73 percent were female, and mean BP was 193/106. Patients were required to be aware of their diagnosis and to have been informed of their need for medication at least a month before the trial. Of those who received postcard reminders, 45 percent followed up within 10 days, compared with 47 percent of controls (p = 0.93). At 30 days, 64 percent of the intervention group followed up, compared with 55 percent of controls (p = 0.36). In an adjusted logistic regression model, there was no difference in follow-up. Correlates of appointment noncompliance at one month included alcoholism and lack of insurance in an adjusted logistic regression model. Follow-up in severe hypertensives was poor, and a mailed postcard reminder had no effect in a walk-in setting. The clinical efficacy of using specially trained nurses to treat hypertension at the patient's place of work was compared in a controlled trial with management by the patient's family doctor. The 457 study participants were selected from 21 906 volunteers in industry and government whose blood-pressure was screened. The nurses were allowed to prescribe and change drug therapy at the work site without prior physician approval. Patients randomly allocated to receive care at work were significantly more likely to be put on antihypertensive medications (94.7% vs 62.7%, to reach goal blood-pressure in the first six months (48.5% vs 27.5%), and to take the drugs prescribed (67.6% vs 49.1%). Only 6% of patients were dissatisfied with the care provided by the nurses. Thus provision of care at work by specially tranined nurses was well accepted and resulted in significantly improved blood-pressure control and medication compliance among employees with asymptomatic and uncomplicated hypertension. We evaluated the effects of an appointment reminder system on the appointment-keeping behavior and blood pressure control status of hypertensive patients receiving care in an urban medical clinic. The study population consisted of 973 adult hypertensive patients receiving medical care at a family practice clinic affiliated with the Wayne State University School of Medicine, Detroit, Michigan. Of the 973 patients enrolled in the study, 486 were randomly assigned to a group that received appointment reminder cards and telephone calls to reschedule missed appointments, and 487 were assigned to a nonintervention control group. Patients were followed-up with regard to their appointment-keeping behavior and blood pressure control status, five to eight months after being entered in the study. The study results indicate that patients in the appointment reminder group kept significantly more appointments and were less likely to drop out of treatment than patients in the control group. The dropout rate was 46 percent lower among patients in the appointment reminder group than in the control group. Patients in the appointment reminder group also demonstrated slightly better blood pressure control at the end of the study compared with patients in the control group, although none of the differences in blood pressure levels between groups were statistically significant at the 5 percent level. To evaluate patterns of compliance with once versus twice daily administration of antihypertensive therapy (primary-outcome measure) and relevance of partial compliance for blood pressure control (secondary outcome measure).
                Multicentre, nonblinded, parallel group randomized design.
                Nonacademic primary care practices across Canada.
                Patients with mild essential hypertension (diastolic blood pressure 95 to 110 mmHg) of either sex (40% women), age 18 to 80 years (average 55 years). One hundred and ninety-eight patients were randomized to active treatment; 14 patients discontinued the study because of side effects.
                After a four-week placebo run-in period, patients were randomized to amlodipine 5 mg once-a-day or diltiazem slow release formulation (SR) 90 mg twice daily. Doses were increased to 10 mg and 180 mg to achieve sitting diastolic blood pressure of 90 mmHg or less.
                During 20 weeks on active treatment, compliance was assessed by pill counts and medication event monitoring system (MEMS), assessing percentage of prescribed doses taken, percentage days correct doses taken, percentage prescribed doses taken on time and blood pressure control as determined by office blood pressure measurement.
                The percentage prescribed doses taken (by either pill count of MEMS) showed a high degree of compliance, similar for the two treatments. However, other parameters of compliance were significantly better with once versus twice daily therapy. Partial compliance (less than 80% by pill count) led to less blood pressure control with the short acting diltiazem, but did not affect blood pressure control for the long acting amlodipine. Side effects profiles did not differ between the two treatments.
                Within the constraints of a clinical trial, hypertensive patients in primary care show a high degree of overall compliance with once or twice daily pill-taking, but patterns of pill-taking are more erratic with twice versus once daily medication, particularly in men. The results suggest that the negative consequences of partial compliance for blood pressure control can be offset by choosing agents with a duration of action well beyond the dosing interval. National and international policy-making organizations advocate nonpharmacologic therapies to reduce blood pressure (BP). However, data to support such recommendations in older persons are virtually nonexistent. The Trials of Nonpharmacologic Intervention in the Elderly (TONE) is a randomized, controlled trial that will test whether weight loss or a reduced sodium (Na) intake or both can maintain satisfactory BP control, without unacceptable side effects, after withdrawal of antihypertensive drug therapy. Medication-treated hypertensives (aged 60 to 80 years) with a systolic BP less than 145 mm Hg and a diastolic BP less than 85 mm Hg who are taking one antihypertensive medication are randomly assigned to one of four groups: (1) weight loss alone, (2) reduced Na intake alone, (3) combined weight loss and reduced Na intake, or (4) usual life-style (control group). Overweight participants are randomized to one of these four groups, while nonoverweight individuals are assigned to either the reduced Na intake or the usual life-style group. The interventions, tailored to the needs of older persons, use behavioral approaches to accomplish intervention-specific goals (weight loss > or = 10 lb, daily Na intake < or = 80 mEqa). Three months after the start of intervention, antihypertensive drug therapy is withdrawn. The primary trial end point is a BP of 150/90 mm Hg or higher, resumption of antihypertensive drug therapy, or the occurrence of a BP-related clinical complication during 2 to 3 years of follow-up. It is anticipated that TONE findings may identify an effective and acceptable nonpharmacologic approach to control hypertension in the increasingly large number of older persons treated with antihypertensive drug therapy. A controlled, randomized study was conducted in two chain pharmacies to determine the clinical value of comprehensive pharmacy services for hypertensive patients in a chain pharmacy setting. Twenty-seven patients were enrolled as intervention participants with 26 control subjects. Monthly services for the intervention group included blood pressure and heart rate assessments and counseling on lifestyle modifications and drug therapy. Control patients received initial and final blood pressure measurements and minimal counseling. Both study and control groups completed quality-of-life questionnaires upon entering and completing the study. Results showed that blood pressure control was significantly improved in the study group. Compliance rates as well as energy/fatigue scores (a quality-of-life scale) improved in the study group compared with the control population. Community pharmacists in chain stores could have a beneficial effect on the health care of large numbers of patients if pharmaceutical care programs were developed. The population aged 40 to 64 years of the municipality of Köyliö, situated in southwestern Finland, was screened for hypertension in 1973-74; a total of 1018 persons (92%) participated in the program. On the basis of two separate blood pressure measurements a total of 147 hypertensive individuals who were not under treatment were identified. These individuals were divided into two groups by randomization of matched pairs. One group (the control group) was merely advised by letter to see a physician for raised blood pressure, while the other group (the experimental group), in addition to being so notified, received written information explaining the nature of hypertension and the importance of its treatment. After two years, the individuals in both groups were invited for a follow-up blood-pressure measurement, with the object of investigating the number of individuals who had sought treatment and who had continued it, and the differences between the groups in treatment seeking and adherence. A total of 79% of those who were notified to seek medical care had done so. Antihypertensive drug therapy had been begun for 85% of these. After two years, 56% of those who had been found initially to be hypertensive and who were seen in the follow-up were still under treatment. In 43% of these the blood pressure was at the target level. No statistically significant differences in treatment seeking and adherence to it were found between the experimental and control groups, nor were differences found in the decline in the blood pressure or its target levels. Comparing with other studies shows, that results can be better if the health care system that carries out the screening procedure for hypertension also take active steps to bring the patient under treatment and keep him on the regimen. This study was conducted to evaluate the effect of automated telephone patient monitoring and counseling on patient adherence to antihypertensive medications and on blood pressure control. A randomized controlled trial was conducted in 29 greater Boston communities. The study subjects were 267 patients recruited from community sites who were >or= 60 years of age, on antihypertensive medication, with a systolic blood pressure (SBP) of >or= 160 mm Hg and/or a diastolic blood pressure (DBP) of >or= 90 mm Hg. The study compared subjects who received usual medical care with those who used a computer-controlled telephone system in addition to their usual medical care during a period of 6 months. Weekly, subjects in the telephone group reported self-measured blood pressures, knowledge and adherence to antihypertensive medication regimens, and medication side-effects. This information was sent to their physicians regularly. The main study outcome measures were change in antihypertensive medication adherence, SBP and DBP during 6 months, satisfaction of patient users, perceived utility for physicians, and cost-effectiveness. The mean age of the study population was 76.0 years; 77% were women; 11% were black. Mean antihypertensive medication adherence improved 17.7% for telephone system users and 11.7% for controls (P = .03). Mean DBP decreased 5.2 mm Hg in users compared to 0.8 mm Hg in controls (P = .02). Among nonadherent subjects, mean DBP decreased 6.0 mm Hg for telephone users, but increased 2.8 mm Hg for controls (P = .01). For telephone system users, mean DBP decreased more if their medication adherence improved (P = .03). The majority of telephone system users were satisfied with the system. Most physicians integrated it into their practices. The system was cost-effective, especially for nonadherent patient users. Therefore, weekly use of an automated telephone system improved medication adherence and blood pressure control in hypertension patients. This system can be used to monitor patients with hypertension or with other chronic diseases, and is likely to improve health outcomes and reduce health services utilization and costs. A radomized controlled trial was conducted in a metropolitan teaching hospital to determine whether improving follow-up of emergency room patients who had hypertension led to improvements in their medical care and blood pressure control. One hundred fourty four patients were randomly assigned into an intervention group and a control group. In the former, a follow-up clerk assigned patients in returning for follow-up care. Eighty-four percent of patients in this group and 63% of control patients returned to the clinic (P less than 0.1). However, five months after the patients' emergency room visits, 51% of patients in the intervention group and 53% of control patients were normotensive. There were more diagnostic and therapeutic measures in the intervention group, but long-term management was similar in both groups. Improvement in follow-up may not be by itself lead to blood pressure control among hypertensive patients. Hypertension is one of the most common diseases seen by the practicing physician. Yet, because of noncompliance, conditions of many hypertensive patients are not effectively controlled by treatment. The purpose of this study was to test the efficacy of a patient education program in reducing the blood pressure (BP) of hypertensive patients in a private, solo medical practice. The intervention program focused on three behavioral objectives-pill taking, appointment keeping, and dietary sodium reduction while stressing the need for taking responsibility for one's own care. It was hypothesized that patients receiving an educational intervention stressing self-care would benefit more than those receiving the usual medical care. A substantial reduction in BP was considered to be the measure of successful treatment. Thirty-nine hypertensive patients receiving drug therapy from a private, solo medical practice were randomized into either a treatment group or a control group. A comparison of means disclosed no pretreatment differences between the groups' average BPs. After following up both groups for six months, mean changes in BP were compared for both treatment and control patients using a two-sample t test for independent samples. The BP fell in the treatment group (-13 mm Hg, systolic; -8 mm Hg, diastolic) but rose slightly in the control group (3 mm Hg, systolic 0.5 mm Hg, diastolic). The difference in changes was significant for both the systolic and diastolic BP. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of a patient-directed management strategy with office-based management in maintaining blood pressure control in patients with chronic stable hypertension using a randomized trial of two months duration. The subjects had chronic stable essential hypertension without secondary causes or unstable cardiovascular disease and were selected through the offices of 11 family physicians and a tertiary care hypertension research unit. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1 ratio) to either a patient-directed management strategy using home blood pressure monitoring to adjust drug therapy if readings consistently exceeded defined limits, or office-based management through physician visits. The primary endpoint was the change from baseline in mean arterial pressure as determined by automatic ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. Secondary endpoints were changes in compliance, quality of life, and health care resource use. Ninety-one potential subjects were screened and 31 were randomized. Subjects in the patient-directed management group employed the drug adjustment protocols appropriately without complications. A significant difference in change in mean blood pressure was observed, favoring the patient-directed management (-0.95 mm Hg and +1.90 mm Hg, respectively, for patient-directed management and office-based management, P = .039). Compliance rates and quality of life scores were not significantly different between groups. Physician visits were more frequent in the patient-directed management group (1.05 v 0.20 visits/8 weeks, respectively, for patient-directed management and office-based management groups, P = .045). A patient-directed hypertensive management strategy may be feasible for patients with chronic stable hypertension. Such a strategy may improve blood pressure control compared with usual office-based care. However, physician visits may be increased using this strategy, at least in the short term. To assess the effect of a physician and pharmacist teamwork approach to uncontrolled hypertension in a medical resident teaching clinic, for patients who failed to meet the recommended goals of the fifth Joint National Commission on Detection, Evaluation and Treatment of High Blood Pressure.
                Physician and pharmacist teamwork can improve the rate of meeting national blood pressure goals in patients with previously uncontrolled hypertension.
                A single-blinded randomized controlled trial lasting 6 months.
                A primary care outpatient teaching clinic.
                A sample of 95 adult hypertensive patients who failed to meet national blood pressure goals based on three consecutive visits over a 6-month period.
                Patients were randomly assigned to a control arm of standard medical care or to an intervention arm in which a physician and pharmacist worked together as a team.
                At study completion, the percentage of patients achieving national goals due to intervention was more than double the percentage in the control arm (55% vs 20%, p < .001). Systolic blood pressure declined 23 mm Hg in the intervention arm versus 11 mm Hg in the control arm (p < .01). Diastolic blood pressure declined 14 and 3 mm Hg in the intervention and control arms, respectively (p < .001). The intervention worked equally as well in men and women and demonstrated noticeable promise in a minority of mixed-ancestry Hawaiians in whom hypertension is of special concern.
                Patients who fail to achieve national blood pressure goals under standard outpatient medical care may benefit from a program that includes a physician and pharmacist teamwork approach. The efficacy of self-recording of blood pressure in the management of hypertension was assessed in a randomized clinical trial involving 140 persons who had been receiving antihypertensive therapy for a year or more, but whose diastolic blood pressure had remained at 95 mm Hg or higher. To control for the increased attention implicit in self-recording, which might affect blood pressure, the patients were assigned at random to one of the four groups: self-recording and monthly home visits, self-recording only, monthly home visits only, and neither self-recording nor monthly home visits. This design also permitted assessment of the effect of home visits. During the 6-month experiment no significant differences were apparent between the groups in either compliance or diastolic blood pressure. However, both self-recording and monthly home visits produced a reduction in blood pressure among patients who admitted to difficulty remembering to take their pills; a reduction was not seen among patients who said they had no such difficulty. This confirmed an earlier observation suggesting that this easily identified group of patients may be the most responsive to intervention programs. To assess whether lifestyle counselling is effective in non-pharmacological treatment of hypertension in primary health care.
                Open randomized controlled trial.
                Ten municipal primary health care centres in eastern Finland.
                Seven hundred and fifteen subjects aged 25-74 years with systolic blood pressure 140-179 mmHg and/or diastolic blood pressure 90-109 mmHg or antihypertensive drug treatment.
                Systematic health counselling given by local public health nurses for 2 years.
                Blood pressure, lipids and lifestyle data were collected annually.
                Among participants with no antihypertensive drug treatment, the net reductions after 1 year both in systolic blood pressure [-2.6 mmHg; 95% confidence interval (CI), -4.7 to -0.5 mmHg] and in diastolic blood pressure (-2.7 mmHg; 95% CI, -4.0 to -1.4 mmHg) were significant in favour of the intervention group. This difference in blood pressure change was maintained during the second year. In participants with antihypertensive drug treatment, no significant difference in blood pressure reduction was seen between the groups during the study.
                A relatively modest, but systematic counselling in primary health care can, at least among untreated hypertensive subjects, produce reductions in blood pressure levels that are modest for the individual, but very important from the public health point of view. A gap exists between evidence and practice regarding the management of cardiovascular risk factors. This gap could be narrowed if systematically developed clinical practice guidelines were effectively implemented in clinical practice. We evaluated the effects of a tailored intervention to support the implementation of systematically developed guidelines for the use of antihypertensive and cholesterol-lowering drugs for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease.
                We conducted a cluster-randomized trial comparing a tailored intervention to passive dissemination of guidelines in 146 general practices in two geographical areas in Norway. Each practice was randomized to either the tailored intervention (70 practices; 257 physicians) or control group (69 practices; 244 physicians). Patients started on medication for hypertension or hypercholesterolemia during the study period and all patients already on treatment that consulted their physician during the trial were included. A multifaceted intervention was tailored to address identified barriers to change. Key components were an educational outreach visit with audit and feedback, and computerized reminders linked to the medical record system. Pharmacists conducted the visits. Outcomes were measured for all eligible patients seen in the participating practices during 1 y before and after the intervention. The main outcomes were the proportions of (1) first-time prescriptions for hypertension where thiazides were prescribed, (2) patients assessed for cardiovascular risk before prescribing antihypertensive or cholesterol-lowering drugs, and (3) patients treated for hypertension or hypercholesterolemia for 3 mo or more who had achieved recommended treatment goals. The intervention led to an increase in adherence to guideline recommendations on choice of antihypertensive drug. Thiazides were prescribed to 17% of patients in the intervention group versus 11% in the control group (relative risk 1.94; 95% confidence interval 1.49-2.49, adjusted for baseline differences and clustering effect). Little or no differences were found for risk assessment prior to prescribing and for achievement of treatment goals.
                Our tailored intervention had a significant impact on prescribing of antihypertensive drugs, but was ineffective in improving the quality of other aspects of managing hypertension and hypercholesterolemia in primary care. A randomised trial was undertaken to discern the effect of pharmacy-based value-added utilities on prescription refill compliance with antihypertensive therapy and subsequent health care expenditures. The subjects were 304 Medicaid beneficiaries from the state of Florida, previously untreated for mild to moderate hypertension, prescribed 240 mg of calcium channel antagonist verapamil once daily and monitored regarding prescription refill compliance and health service utilisation for one year. Subjects provided informed consent and were randomly assigned to one of four experimental groups: (1) the control cohort received standard pharmaceutical care with each dispensing of antihypertensive therapy, (2) the second cohort received standard pharmaceutical care and was mailed a medication-refill reminder ten days prior to each sequential refill date, (3) the third cohort received standard pharmaceutical care and was provided unit-of-use packaging with each prescription-refill request and (4) the fourth cohort received standard pharmaceutical care, mailed medication-refill reminders and unit-of-use packaging. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) procedures revealed that patients receiving mailed prescription-refill reminders, unit-of-use packaging or a combination of both interventions achieved a significant (P < or = 0.05) increase in the Medication Possession Ratio (MPR) for antihypertensive therapy relative to controls. Receipt of both interventions resulted in a significant (P < or = 0.05) improvement in the MPR for antihypertensive therapy relative to all other groups no significant difference was discerned between groups receiving either mailed prescription-refill reminders or unit-of-use packaging.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS) In the treatment of hypertension, problems of nonadherence and consequent poor blood pressure control are particularly severe. Alternative intervention strategies were compared to explore means of improving adherence and lowering blood pressures. In a 3 x 4 repeated measures analysis of variance design, 115 patients were randomly selected and randomly assigned to one of three treatment modalities (routine clinic care, patient education, and contingency contracting) and were followed over four clinic visits. Subjects' knowledge about hypertension and its management, adherence to requests for regular medical follow-up, and blood pressure levels were measured. Patient education was not effective in lowering blood pressures; it produced an untoward outcome, a dropout rate higher than that for patients receiving only routine clinic care. However, contingency contracting was an effective intervention strategy for improving patient knowledge, F (1,59) = 51.32, p less than .0001; adherence to requests for regular medical care, Max L (2) = 25.9, p less than .0001; and decreasing diastolic blood pressures, F (2,49) = 3.39, p less than .05. Two interventions designed to help physicians manage hypertensive patients were evaluated in a controlled trial: 1) computer-generated feedback to facilitate identification of poorly controlled patients; and 2) a physician education program on clinical management strategies, emphasizing patient compliance. Four physician practice teams received either computer feedback, the education program, both, or neither. Feedback team physicians received seven monthly listings of the latest visits and blood pressures of their hypertensive patients. The self-administered learning program included written clinical stimulations and associated didactic material. Experimental and control physicians were similar in baseline knowledge, patient mix and level of training. All feedback team physicians requested appointments for listed patients, and their patients made twice as many visits as control patients during the intervention period (p less than 0.05). Education team physicians showed significant gains on a content-specific post-intervention test: mean score 84 per cent compared with 74 per cent for the control group (p less than 0.005). All patient groups showed improvement in blood pressure over the study period. However, no differences between intervention teams could be detected (p greater than 0.20). The probability of missing a 10 mm interteam difference in outcome diastolic pressure was 1 per cent (power of 0.99). Strategies for further improvement in outpatient hypertension management may need to come from outside the traditional medical model. The effectiveness of two social support strategies designed to lower hypertensive patients' blood pressure were compared to each other and to a control group (N = 63) receiving routine care in a randomized clinical trial extending over a period of two years. Group 1 (N = 99) received visits and had family members actively participate in their care through home blood pressure monitoring; Group 2 (N = 56) received home visits from nurses and pharmacists. All groups were predominantly Black. After the first year of the trial, the proportion of patients with uncontrolled diastolic blood pressure (greater than or equal to 95mm Hg) had declined significantly for all three groups; no group showed a statistically significant advantage. However, during the last six months of the second year (after visiting had ended), both Groups 1 and 2 demonstrated clear superiority in DBP control over Group 3, achieving borderline statistical significance (p = .07) when multivariable analysis was performed to control for potential confounders. Supplementing routine care with periodic home visits produced an additional 21 per cent of patients with well-controlled DBP, while involving family members plus visits produced a 17 per cent improvement in the percentage of patients with DBP less than 95mm Hg. However, neither support strategy was clearly more effective than the other over time. The efficacy of the interventions is discussed with respect to cost and feasibility of implementation. To determine the effectiveness of specialist nurse delivered education in primary care to improve control of hypertension and hyperlipidaemia in patients with diabetes.
                Practice-level randomized controlled trial, Salford, England.
                From 44 practices, 10 303 subjects presenting in general practice with raised blood pressure (= 140/80 mmHg), raised total cholesterol (= 5.0 mmol/l) or both.
                Practices were randomized to receive either the intervention for hyperlipidaemia or for hypertension; practices acted as control for the intervention not received. Specialist nurses arranged a schedule of visits with general practitioners and general practice nurses, reminding them of diabetes protocols and clinical targets. They provided educational materials and protocols used in secondary care for nurse and doctor interventions including stepping up pharmacotherapy when necessary. Practices received a list of patients in their practice who were poorly controlled at their last annual review; new and recalled patients were targeted.
                At subsequent annual review, blood pressure and total cholesterol values were obtained from the Salford electronic diabetes register for patients from participating practices.
                Overall, specialist nurse-led educational outreach to primary care was associated with no improvement in patients achieving target after 1 year-odds ratio (OR): 1.03 (95% CI 0.95-1.11; P = 0.52). Similar results were achieved with hyperlipidaemia OR: 1.04 (95% CI 0.88-1.23; P = 0.62) and hypertension OR: 1.01 (95% CI 0.80-1.27; P = 0.93).
                This study provides evidence that the use of specialist nurses to perform educational outreach to improve target adherence to patients with diabetes in primary care is not effective. This study tested the feasibility of a low-technology office-based approach to weight reduction in obese hypertensive patients. Family practice residents were randomly assigned to either an experimental or a control group. Physicians in the experimental group were instructed in methods of weight reduction, which they then passed on to their patients. Patients of experimental physicians were seen monthly, their diets were discussed, and improvements were suggested. The control group patients received their usual care. After six months the experimental patients had lost significantly more weight than the controls and had significantly reduced the number of antihypertensive drugs while maintaining blood pressure control. After 12 months there was no significant difference between the two groups with respect to weight loss, blood pressure, or number of antihypertensive drugs. Experimental and control patients who lost weight had visited their physicians more frequently than those who did not and had reduced the number of antihypertensive medications they were taking. This educationally oriented intervention trial is an example of the type of research that is practical to perform in a family practice center and is applicable in family physicians' offices. The long-term management of patients with chronic conditions such as hypertension presents problems for the health services. Shared care addresses these by coordinating care and defining responsibilities.
                This study set out to investigate the feasibility, acceptability and cost effectiveness of shared general practitioner-hospital care for well-controlled hypertensive patients in an urban area by comparing three matched groups of patients.
                A total of 554 outpatient clinic attenders, considered suitable for shared care by their consultant, were randomly allocated to shared care or follow up in the outpatient clinic; a third group of 277 patients was selected from a nurse practitioner clinic. Main outcome measures were the proportion of patients in the second year of follow up who had undergone a complete review (blood pressure measurement, serum creatinine level result and electrocardiograph report), acceptability to patients and general practitioners as assessed by questionnaire, and cost per complete review in year two (National Health Service and patient costs).
                After two years 220 (82%) shared care patients had had a complete review compared with 146 (54%) outpatient clinic attenders and 202 (75%) nurse practitioner clinic attenders. Blood pressure control was similar in each group. Of 297 general practitioners invited, 85% wished to participate in the study; 61% of questionnaire respondents subsequently wanted shared care to continue while 25% were unsure. Half of the patients receiving shared care preferred this method of follow up. The rank order of cost-effectiveness ratios was shared care, nurse practitioner care and conventional outpatient care, relative differences being most marked when only patient costs were considered.
                Shared care for hypertension is feasible in an urban setting, acceptable to the majority of participants and is a cost-effective method of long-term follow up. In the Hypertension Detection and Follow-up Program, 7825 (71.5 per cent) of the 10,940 participants had diastolic blood pressures averaging between 90 and 104 mm Hg on entry into the study and were designated Stratum 1. Half were referred to their usual source of care in the community (the referred-care group), and half were treated intensively in special clinics (the stepped-care group). Five-year mortality in the Stratum 1 patients given stepped care was 20.3 per cent lower than in those given referred care (P less than 0.01). Particularly noteworthy was the beneficial effect of stepped-care treatment on persons with diastolic pressures of 90 to 104 mm Hg who had no evidence of end-organ damage and were not receiving antihypertensive medication when they entered the study. This subgroup had 28.6 per cent fewer deaths at five years among those treated with stepped care than among those treated with referred care (P less than 0.01). These findings support a recommendation that in patients with mild hypertension, treatment should be considered early, before damage to end organs occurs. The majority of hypertensive patients do not reach the target blood pressure (BP). We sought to clarify whether intermittent self-monitoring of BP leads to better BP control compared to ordinary treatment in general practice.
                Two hundred sixty-nine hypertensive patients participated in this multicenter, randomized, parallel-group study in primary health care. Home BP was measured in the self-monitoring (SM) group at 0, 2, 4, and 6 months, and in the control (C) group at 0 and 6 months. The participating physicians were instructed to intensify the antihypertensive therapy when needed.
                At the beginning, both groups had similar home BP levels (SM 143.1 +/- 17.4/85.3 +/- 7.4 mm Hg v C 143.9 +/- 18.3/85.4 +/- 7.5 mm Hg). After 6 months, there were significant decreases in systolic (P <or= .0001), diastolic (P <or= .0029), and pulse pressures (P <or= .021) in both groups. Systolic (-7.8 +/- 13.1 mm Hg v -4.5 +/- 12.2 mm Hg, P = .047) and pulse pressure (-4.7 +/- 9.0 mm Hg v -2.2 +/- 10.0 mm Hg, P = .042) decreased significantly more than in the self-monitoring group. The decrease in diastolic pressure was similar in both groups (SM -3.1 +/- 6.2 mm Hg v C -2.3 +/- 8.3 mm Hg, P = not significant). The patients in the SM group reached home BP target more often than those in the C group (29% v 16%, P = .016). There was a nonsignificant trend toward lower office BP values in the SM group.
                Self-monitoring decreased systolic and pulse pressure significantly more than ordinary treatment and promoted achievement of target BP. This was most likely due to improved patient compliance and more active treatment by the physicians. Our results suggest that home measurement is useful in the control of hypertension. To assess whether blood pressure control in primary care could be improved with the use of patient held targets and self monitoring in a practice setting, and to assess the impact of these on health behaviours, anxiety, prescribed antihypertensive drugs, patients' preferences, and costs.
                Randomised controlled trial.
                Eight general practices in south Birmingham.
                441 people receiving treatment in primary care for hypertension but not controlled below the target of < 140/85 mm Hg.
                Patients in the intervention group received treatment targets along with facilities to measure their own blood pressure at their general practice; they were also asked to visit their general practitioner or practice nurse if their blood pressure was repeatedly above the target level. Patients in the control group received usual care (blood pressure monitoring by their practice).
                Primary outcome: change in systolic blood pressure at six months and one year in both intervention and control groups. Secondary outcomes: change in health behaviours, anxiety, prescribed antihypertensive drugs, patients' preferences of method of blood pressure monitoring, and costs.
                400 (91%) patients attended follow up at one year. Systolic blood pressure in the intervention group had significantly reduced after six months (mean difference 4.3 mm Hg (95% confidence interval 0.8 mm Hg to 7.9 mm Hg)) but not after one year (mean difference 2.7 mm Hg (- 1.2 mm Hg to 6.6 mm Hg)). No overall difference was found in diastolic blood pressure, anxiety, health behaviours, or number of prescribed drugs. Patients who self monitored lost more weight than controls (as evidenced by a drop in body mass index), rated self monitoring above monitoring by a doctor or nurse, and consulted less often. Overall, self monitoring did not cost significantly more than usual care (251 pounds sterling (437 dollars; 364 euros) (95% confidence interval 233 pounds sterling to 275 pounds sterling) versus 240 pounds sterling (217 pounds sterling to 263 pounds sterling).
                Practice based self monitoring resulted in small but significant improvements of blood pressure at six months, which were not sustained after a year. Self monitoring was well received by patients, anxiety did not increase, and there was no appreciable additional cost. Practice based self monitoring is feasible and results in blood pressure control that is similar to that in usual care. Evaluation of a structured hypertension treatment and teaching programme in general practice.
                Prospective controlled trial; follow-up period 18 months.
                10 primary health care practices. PRACTICES AND PATIENTS: From each practice 20 patients (30 to 60 years old, mean of the last two blood pressure measurements at or above 160 and/or 95 mmHg) were randomly selected; in 5 practices these patients were to participate in the treatment and teaching programme; in the remaining 5 practices hypertension care was continued without the availability of such a programme (controls).
                Structured treatment and teaching programme based upon four group sessions for patients mainly conducted by paramedical personnel.
                Blood pressure, body weight, prescription of antihypertensive drugs - as documented in the patient's records.
                Of the 100 control patients 26 and of the 100 intervention patients 14 were lost to observation; 46 patients had agreed to participate in the programme. The mean number of prescribed antihypertensive agents per patient decreased in the intervention group (1.8 +/- 1.3 at baseline, vs 1.2 +/- 1.2 at follow-up) compared to the control group (1.6 +/- 1.3 vs 1.8 +/- 1.6); difference 0.8 (95% CI 0.4 to 1.1), p < 0.0001. In the control group 9% and in the intervention group 33% of patients had documented reductions of body weight (p < 0.0001). Blood pressure decreased in the intervention group (162 +/- 14/100 +/- 7 mmHg at baseline, vs 154 +/- 16/95 +/- 9 mmHg at follow-up) compared to the control group (161 +/- 13/98 +/- 7 mmHg vs 158 +/- 18/96 +/- 11 mmHg); differences for systolic blood pressure 5 (95% CI 0 to 10) mmHg, p = 0.071; for diastolic blood pressure 4 (1 to 7) mmHg, p = 0.018.
                The introduction of a structured hypertension treatment and teaching programme in general practice may lead to significant improvements of hypertension care. An automated surveillance system utilizing a computer-based medical record system (COSTAR) was designed to improve the follow-up of patients with newly identified elevated diastolic blood pressure. A population of patients was selected where, in the 6-month period following the initial measurement of an elevated diastolic blood pressure, there were fewer than two visits during which blood pressure was recorded. In a randomized controlled clinical trial, this poor follow-up population was divided into two groups, with computer-generated reminders being automatically generated for only patients in the experimental group. Follow-up was significantly improved in the group receiving the reminders, both in terms of rate of follow-up attempted or achieved by the responsible physician and in the repeated recording of blood pressure. We conclude that a computer-based reminder system improves follow-up of newly discovered elevation in diastolic blood pressure. To develop a working model with which prescribing behaviour among general practitioners might be influenced.
                Intervention based on feedback on prescribing rates and problem-oriented educational outreach visits, using educational material and local opinion leaders. Randomised study with three parallel intervention groups of general practitioners, which also served as controls for each other. The pharmacotherapeutic fields chosen were hypertension, peptic ulcer/dyspepsia and depression. Prescription data were retrieved from the electronic patient records for periods of 1 year before and after the intervention.
                Six health care centres and three continuing medical education groups in Stockholm.
                Forty general practitioners.
                Drug prescribing rates and patterns before and after the intervention.
                In the hypertension field, desired trends in fractional prescribing (favouring diuretics and beta blocking agents) were recorded, with a significant (P < 0.05) effect on prescriptions for agents acting on the renin-angiotensin system, despite a pre-existing prescribing behaviour already much in line with the goals. In the peptic ulcer/dyspepsia field, desired trends were recorded for both types of therapies addressed. The fractional prescribing rates for proton-pump inhibitors decreased from 61.0% to 52.6% in the intervention arm and increased from 68.1% to 76.0% in the control arm (not significant due to low power). The depression group focused on better general attention to the disease and only minor changes were registered.
                Feedback of individual prescribing rates, combined with problem-oriented educational outreach visits, is a promising model for the improvement of prescribing behaviour. Data from the electronic patient record were feasible for feedback on prescribing rates. Pharmaceutical care programs may be an option to improve blood pressure (BP) control in patients with uncontrolled hypertension. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of pharmaceutical care programs in treating patients with resistant hypertension.
                In a double-blind randomized clinical trial, 71 patients with uncontrolled BP were enrolled in a pharmaceutical care program or in a control group and underwent a series of cognitive tests. The primary outcome was change in ambulatory BP (ABP) between the baseline evaluation and the final visit 6 months later. The secondary outcomes were the frequency of drug-related problems and adherence as determined by plasma levels of hydrochlorothiazide.
                The delta-values between the intervention and control groups for ABP in the different daily periods, with the corresponding 95% confidence limits, adjusted for age and baseline BP were: 3 (-1 to 5), 2 (-2 to 4), and 5 (-1 to 6) mm Hg for 24 h, daily and nightly systolic BP, respectively. The corresponding values for diastolic BP were 1 (-1 to 3), 0 (-2 to 2), and 3 (-1 to 4) mm Hg, respectively. Hydrochlorothiazide was detected in the plasma in 21 of 27 patients in the intervention group that attended to all appointments and 24 of 30 patients in the control group (P = .904).
                The pharmaceutical care program tested in this trial was feasible and showed a trend for better BP control in patients with uncontrolled hypertension. The ABCD (Appropriate Blood Pressure Control in Diabetes) Trial is a large, prospective, randomized clinical trial of 950 patients with non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (NIDDM) designed to compare the effects of intensive blood pressure control with moderate control on the prevention and progression of diabetic nephropathy, retinopathy, cardiovascular disease, and neuropathy in NIDDM. The secondary objective is to determine equivalency of the effects of a calcium channel blocker (nisoldipine) and an angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitor (enalapril) as a first-line antihypertensive agent in the prevention and/or progression of these diabetic vascular complications. The study consists of two study populations aged 40-74 years, 470 hypertensive patients (diastolic blood pressure of > or = 90.0 mmHg at time of randomization) and 480 normotensive patients (diastolic blood pressure of 80.0 mmHg at time of randomization). The study duration is 5 years and is scheduled to end in May of 1998. Patients are randomized to receive either intensive antihypertensive drug therapy or moderate antihypertensive drug therapy. Patients are also randomized to nisoldipine or enalapril, with open-label medications added if further blood pressure control is necessary. The primary outcome measure is glomerular filtration rate as assessed by 24-h creatinine clearance. Secondary outcome measures are urinary albumin excretion, left ventricular hypertrophy, retinopathy, and neuropathy. Cardiovascular morbidity and mortality will also be evaluated. Given the data showing the impact of hypertension on complications in NIDDM, the ABCD Trial is designed to determine if intensive antihypertensive therapy will be more efficacious than moderate antihypertensive therapy on the outcome of diabetic complications in NIDDM. This prospective, randomized, controlled study evaluated the impact of pharmacist-initiated home blood pressure monitoring and intervention on blood pressure control, therapy compliance, and quality of life (QOL). Subjects were 36 patients with uncontrolled stage 1 or 2 hypertension. Eighteen subjects received home blood pressure monitors, a diary, and instructions to measure blood pressure twice every morning. Home measurements were evaluated by a clinical pharmacist by telephone, and the patient's family physician was contacted with recommendations if mean monthly values were 140/90 mm Hg or higher. Eighteen control patients did not receive home monitors or pharmacist intervention. Office blood pressure measurements and QOL surveys (SF-36) were obtained at baseline and after 6 months. Mean absolute reductions in systolic and diastolic pressures were significantly reduced from baseline in intervention subjects (17.0 and 10.5 mm Hg, both p < 0.0001) but not in controls (7.0 and 3.8 mm Hg, p = 0.12 and p = 0.09). More intervention subjects (8) had blood pressure values below 140/90 at 6 months compared with controls (4). During the study 83.3% (15) of intervention subjects had drug therapy changes versus 33% (6) of controls (p < 0.01). Compliance and QOL were not significantly affected. Our data suggest that the combination of pharmacist intervention with home monitoring can improve blood pressure control in patients with uncontrolled hypertension. This may be related to increased modifications of drug regimens. Despite widely publicized hypertension treatment guidelines for physicians and lifestyle recommendations for patients, blood pressure control rates remain low. In community-based primary care clinics, we performed a nested, 2 x 2 randomized, controlled trial of physician intervention versus control and/or patient intervention versus control. Physician intervention included internet-based training, self-monitoring, and quarterly feedback reports. Patient intervention included 20 weekly group sessions followed by 12 monthly telephone counseling contacts and focused on weight loss, Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension dietary pattern, exercise, and reduced sodium intake. The primary outcome was change in systolic blood pressure at 6 months. Eight primary care practices (32 physicians) were randomized to physician intervention or control groups. Within those practices, 574 patients were randomized to patient intervention or control groups. Patient mean age was 60 years, 61% were women, and 37% were black. Blood pressure data were available for 91% of patients at 6 months. The main effect of physician intervention on systolic blood pressure at 6 months, adjusted for baseline pressure, was 0.3 mm Hg (95% CI: 1.5 to 2.2; P=0.72). The main effect of the patient intervention was 2.6 mm Hg (95% CI: 4.4 to 0.7; P=0.01). The interaction of the 2 interventions was significant (P=0.03); the largest impact was observed with the combination of physician and patient intervention (9.7 +/- 12.7 mm Hg). Differences between treatment groups did not persist at 18 months. Combined physician and patient interventions lowers blood pressure; future research should focus on enhancing effectiveness and sustainability of these interventions. We wanted to examine whether integrating depression treatment into care for hypertension improved adherence to antidepressant and antihypertensive medications, depression outcomes, and blood pressure control among older primary care patients.
                Older adults prescribed pharmacotherapy for depression and hypertension from physicians at a large primary care practice in West Philadelphia were randomly assigned to an integrated care intervention or usual care. Outcomes were assessed at baseline, 2, 4, and 6 weeks using the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D) to assess depression, an electronic monitor to measure blood pressure, and the Medication Event Monitoring System to assess adherence.
                In all, 64 participants aged 50 to 80 years participated. Participants in the integrated care intervention had fewer depressive symptoms (CES-D mean scores, intervention 9.9 vs usual care 19.3; P <.01), lower systolic blood pressure (intervention 127.3 mm Hg vs usual care 141.3 mm Hg; P <.01), and lower diastolic blood pressure (intervention 75.8 mm Hg vs usual care 85.0 mm Hg; P <.01) compared with participants in the usual care group at 6 weeks. Compared with the usual care group, the proportion of participants in the intervention group who had 80% or greater adherence to an antidepressant medication (intervention 71.9% vs usual care 31.3%; P <.01) and to an antihypertensive medication (intervention 78.1% vs usual care 31.3%; P <.001) was greater at 6 weeks.
                A pilot, randomized controlled trial integrating depression and hypertension treatment was successful in improving patient outcomes. Integrated interventions may be more feasible and effective in real-world practices, where there are competing demands for limited resources. The prevalence of hypertension is high, but the overall control rate is low. Poor control of, hypertension is associated with a number of diseases, such as stroke, heart and renal failure, and high, mortality rates. Studies have shown the separate effects of nurse clinics and telephone follow-up on, blood pressure control, but the incremental effect of combining the two interventions is unknown.
                This study examines whether there is an incremental effect on blood pressure control when using a nurse clinic combined with telephone follow-up.
                This was a randomised controlled trial. The primary outcome measure was blood pressure reading. The secondary outcome measures included adherence to home blood pressure monitoring, exercise, diet, medication, and satisfaction with care.
                There were no significant differences in the baseline measures between the control and study groups. Significant differences were found at 8 weeks after intervention was initiated between groups in, systolic blood pressure (control -7.97 vs study -19.03, t=2.35, p=0.022, CI 1.66-20.47) and diastolic, blood pressure (control -3.72 vs study -11.68, t=3.02, p=0.004, CI 2.68-13.24). Other variables with a significant between-group differences (p<0.05) were blood pressure control rate, adherence, to home blood pressure monitoring, exercise and satisfaction with care. Further analysis using, regression showed that home blood pressure monitoring is the most significant predictor for improved, systolic blood pressure.
                This study showed that nurse clinics have positive effects on blood pressure control and adherence to healthy lifestyle, but telephone follow-up after such clinics augments the effects of the clinic consultation. This combined mode of services is worth considering for other chronic disease, management programmes.
                Copyright 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. This study assessed the effectiveness of enhanced tracking and follow-up services provided by community health workers in promoting medical follow-up of persons whose elevated blood pressures were detected during blood pressure measurement at urban community sites.
                In a randomized controlled trial, 421 participants received either enhanced or usual referrals to care. Participants were 18 years or older, were either Black or White, and had blood pressure greater than or equal to 140/90 mm Hg and income equal to or less than 200% of poverty. The primary outcome measure was completion of a medical follow-up visit within 90 days of referral.
                The enhanced intervention increased follow-up by 39.4% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 14%, 71%; P = .001) relative to usual care. Follow-up visits were completed by 65.1% of participants in the intervention group, compared with 46.7% of those in the usual-care group. The number needed to treat was 5 clients (95% CI = 3, 13) per additional follow-up visit realized.
                Enhanced tracking and outreach increased the proportion of persons with elevated blood pressure detected during community measurement who followed up with medical care. First Nations people with diabetes mellitus and hypertension are at greater risk of renal and cardiovascular complications than are non-native patients because of barriers to health care services. We conducted this randomized controlled trial to assess whether a community-based treatment strategy implemented by home care nurses would be effective in controlling hypertension in First Nations people with existing hypertension and type 2 diabetes.
                We compared 2 community-based strategies for controlling hypertension in First Nations people with existing hypertension and diabetes. In the intervention group, a home care nurse followed a predefined treatment algorithm of pharmacologic antihypertensive therapy. In the control group, treatment decisions were made by each subject's primary care physician. The primary outcome measure was the difference between the 2 groups in the change in systolic blood pressure after 12 months. Secondary outcome measures were the change in diastolic blood pressure over time, the change in urine albumin status and the incidence of adverse events.
                Both groups experienced a significant reduction in systolic blood pressure by the final visit (by 24.0 [standard deviation (SD) 13.5] mm Hg in the intervention group and by 17.0 [SD 18.6] mm Hg in the control group); p < 0.001 in each case). However, the difference between the 2 groups in this change was not significant. Patients in the intervention group had a larger decrease in diastolic blood pressure over time than did those in the control group (by 11.6 [SD 10.6] mm Hg v. 6.8 [SD 11.1] mm Hg respectively; p = 0.05). The groups did not differ significantly in terms of changes in urine albumin excretion or incidence of adverse events.
                High rates of blood pressure control in the community were achieved in both groups in the DREAM 3 study. The addition of a home care nurse to implement a treatment strategy for blood pressure control was more effective in lowering diastolic than systolic blood pressure compared with home care visits for blood pressure monitoring alone and follow-up treatment by a family physician. The hypothesis that general practitioners would obtain better outcomes for patients with hypertension using a computer than doctors not using a computer was tested. Sixty family physicians were randomised to two treatment strategies. "Test" physicians completed a data collection form after each visit from a patient with hypertension and mailed the forms to the test centre for processing. Computer feedback on management was mailed to the doctors. This encouraged doctors to apply the "stepped care" protocol, supplied charts of diastolic blood pressure v time, and ranked patients' diastolic blood pressures by percentile. Letters were mailed to patients to remind them of appointments. "Control" doctors filled out the same data collection forms as test physicians, but neither doctors nor patients received computer feedback. Physicians who used the computer saw more patients per practice than control doctors (test 50 patients, control 40). For all patients the length of follow up was significantly longer in test practices (test 199 days, control 167), and a smaller percentage dropped out of active treatment in test practices (test 37.5%, control 42.1%). For patients with "moderate" hypertension of a baseline diastolic pressure of greater than 104 mm Hg the mean score of the last recorded pressure was below the goal of 90 mm Hg in test practices (88.5 mm Hg), but it failed to reach this goal in control practices (93.3 mm Hg). A greater average reduction of diastolic pressure was achieved in test practices (test 21.7 mm Hg, control 16.7 mm Hg). Though patients with "moderate" hypertension were better controlled in test practices than in control practices, the patients in test practices visited their doctors less often (test 13.3 visits per patient-year, control 17.4 visits). Among patients with newly detected hypertension test practices achieved a greater reduction in diastolic pressure than control practices (test 15.1 mm Hg v control 11.3 mm Hg) and more sustained control of hypertension (test 323 days per patient-year with a diastolic pressure of 90 mm Hg or less v control 259 days). 38 hypertensive Canadian steelworkers who were neither compliant with medications nor at goal diastolic blood-pressure six months after starting treatment were allocated either to a control group or to an experimental group who were taught how to measure their own blood-pressures, asked to chart their home blood-pressures and pill taking, and taught how to tailor pill taking to their daily habits and rituals; these men were also seen fortnightly by a highschool graduate with no formal health professional training who reinforced the experimental manoeuvres and rewarded improvements in compliance and blood-pressure. Six months later, average compliance had fallen by 1.5% in the control group but rose 21.3% in the experimental group. Blood-pressures fell in 17 of 20 experimental patients (to goal in 6) and in 10 of 18 control patients (to goal in 2). It is widely believed that patients' compliance can be increased by persuading them to participate in their own care. We tested whether patients with hypertension could manage their own clinical records and whether their doing so would affect the quality of their care. Two hundred patients were randomly assigned to an intervention or a control group. Those in the intervention group were asked to complete a 10-page booklet containing a personal standardized medical record. All patients were scheduled for a follow-up appointment at the end of one year and were referred to their general practitioners for interim care. At the end of the follow-up period, the proportion of patients seen was comparable in the two groups. More of the patients in the intervention group than in the control group filled out a questionnaire as requested, and more added comments. Within the intervention group, the proportion of patients seen and the fall in systolic blood pressure were significantly higher among the 44 patients who had completed the personal record as requested than among the 57 who had not. Patients who completed the personal record also had fewer compliance problems. Three educational interventions for the control of essential hypertension in ambulatory patients were based on analyses of the educational needs of patients and providers. The educational program increased reported compliance with medication, improved the proportion of patients losing weight, and improved appointment keeping. Most important, there was a favorable effect on blood pressure (BP) control. The proportion of patients with BP under control in the group assigned to all three interventions increased by 28% (from 38% to 66%), while the proportion in the control group receiving standard medical therapy with no educational interventions remained unchanged at 42%. Assessing the compliance of people over 60 years of age and older with an antihypertensive treatment regimen was a major objective of the Systolic Hypertension in the Elderly Program (SHEP) pilot study. The study randomized 551 men and women over the age of 60 (mean age = 72 years) to a stepped care treatment that included chlorthalidone or placebo in a double-blind trial. Three measures of compliance to treatment protocol--pill count, self-report, and a urine chlorthalidone assay--all indicated high levels of compliance in 80 to 90% of participants at 3 months and 1 year after randomization. Pill-taking compliance was similar in the active and placebo groups, although the rate of discontinuance from study medications at 1 year was higher in the placebo than in the active group. Compliance was high in all age categories, including those over age 80. These data suggest that elderly patients can achieve high levels of compliance with antihypertensive medications. A randomized controlled trial of an information and medical record booklet designed to improve patient understanding and participation in the management of hypertension was conducted in six inner London general practices. After one year there were no significant differences between the group who had received the booklets and the control group in mean systolic or diastolic blood pressure, but the study group scored significantly higher on knowledge about hypertension and its management. However, the difference between the two groups was small, possibly because both groups started with a high level of understanding about hypertension and its management. In addition, the mean diastolic blood pressure in the control group showed that the treatment provided was already satisfactory, and that there was little need for improvement. Nevertheless, the information booklet evaluated in this study provides health professionals with a highly acceptable method of informing the patient about hypertension and its management and could be used both in hospital and general practice. To see whether general practitioners could effectively carry out training in relaxation and management of stress to reduce mild hypertension a study was carried out with a subsample of phase 2 of the Medical Research Council's treatment of mild hypertension trial. In the main mild hypertension trial patients had been receiving either an active drug or placebo for six years. In phase 2 a subsample of these patients were randomly allocated either to continue or to stop receiving the active drug or placebo. In a further subsample patients were again randomised to receive or not to receive relaxation therapy. This factorial design presented an additional opportunity to assess whether patients controlled with active drugs might have their blood pressure maintained by this behavioural therapy once drug treatment was stopped and to assess whether blood pressure might be further reduced by this therapy in patients who had been under regular medical supervision for as long as six years and who had already received non-pharmacological advice. The therapy was conducted by general practitioners in group sessions once a week for eight weeks. The training in relaxation was accompanied by galvanic skin resistance biofeedback. At one year follow up blood pressure in the relaxation subgroups was either maintained (in the group who had stopped receiving drugs) or reduced further (in the group who had continued receiving drugs and in both placebo groups), while in the control group it had increased in all the subgroups, but particularly in those who had stopped receiving drugs. Differences in changes in blood pressure between the relaxation and control groups were significant. There were five new cardiovascular events, including evidence of myocardial ischaemia in blindly coded electrocardiograms in the control group, compared with one in the treatment group. General practitioners, if motivated, can successfully apply this technique of training those with mild hypertension in relaxation and management of stress. Three health education interventions for urban poor hypertensive patients were introduced sequentially in a randomized factorial design: 1) an exit interview to increase understanding of and compliance with the prescribed regimen; 2) a home visit to encourage a family member to provide support for the patient's regimen; and 3) invitations to small group sessions to increase the patient's confidence and ability to manage his/her problem. Previous evaluation of the initial two-year experience demonstrated a positive effect of the educational program on compliance with the medical treatment and blood pressure control. Data accumulated over an additional three years, including mortality analysis, are now presented. The study group consisted of the same cohort of 400 ambulatory hypertensive outpatients in the eight experimental and control groups. The five-year analysis shows a continuing positive effect on appointment keeping, weight control, and blood pressure control. All-cause life table mortality rate was 57.3 per cent less for the experimental group compared to the control group (12.9/100 vs 30.2/100, p less than .05), while the hypertension-related mortality rate was 53.2 per cent less (8.9/100 vs 19.0/100, p less than .01). The results from this longitudinal study provide evidence to encourage health practitioners to utilize such educational programs in the long-term management and control of high blood pressure. Standard office-based approaches to controlling hypertension show limited success. Such suboptimal hypertension control reflects in part the absence of both an infrastructure for patient education and frequent, regular blood pressure (BP) monitoring. We tested the efficacy of a physician-directed, nurse-managed, home-based system for hypertension management with standardized algorithms to modulate drug therapy, based on patients' reports of home BP.
                We randomized outpatients requiring drug therapy for hypertension according to the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure (JNC VI) criteria to receive usual medical care only (UC, n = 76) or usual care plus nurse care management intervention (INT, n = 74) over a 6-month period.
                Patients receiving INT achieved greater reductions in office BP values at 6 months than those receiving UC: 14.2 +/- 18.1 versus 5.7 +/- 18.7 mm Hg systolic (P < .01) and 6.5 +/- 10.0 versus 3.4 +/- 7.9 mm Hg diastolic, respectively (P < .05). At 6 months, we observed one or more changes in drug therapy in 97% of INT patients versus 43% of UC patients, and 70% of INT patients received two or more drugs versus 46% of UC. Average daily adherence to medication, measured by electronic drug event monitors, was superior among INT subjects (mean +/- SD, 80.5% +/- 23.0%) than among UC subjects (69.2 +/- 31.1%; t(113) = 2.199, P = .03). There were no significant adverse drug reactions in either group.
                Telephone-mediated nurse management can successfully address many of the systems-related and patient-related issues that limit pharmacotherapeutic effectiveness for hypertension. The authors examined the effects of a comprehensive lifestyle modification intervention on blood pressure (BP) and other cardiovascular risk factors in hypertensive patients. A total of 70 participants were randomly placed into either a lifestyle intervention or a control group. Four education classes and individual counseling sessions were held for the intervention group. Participants in the control group were provided with routine outpatient services and were asked to maintain their usual lifestyle. Data were gathered at baseline and at the end of 6 months. At the end of 6 months, BP, body weight, body mass index, waist circumference, and fasting lipids, apart from high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, significantly declined in the intervention group. Healthpromoting lifestyle scores of the intervention group had increased significantly compared to those of the control group. In conclusion, the results demonstrate the feasibility of comprehensive lifestyle modification and show its beneficial effects. To evaluate the efficacy of a programme of home blood pressure measurement (HBPM) on therapeutic compliance in mild-to-moderate hypertension.
                A prospective controlled multicentre clinical trial.
                Forty primary care centres in Spain, with a duration of 6 months.
                A total of 250 patients with newly diagnosed or uncontrolled hypertension were included.
                The patients were randomly selected and distributed in two groups: (1) the control group (CG) who received standard health intervention; (2) the intervention group (IG): the patients in this group received an OMRON in their homes for a programme of HBPM.
                Four visits were scheduled, for the measurement of blood pressure (BP). They were provided with an electronic monitor for measuring compliance (monitoring events medication system; MEMS). Therapeutic compliance was defined as a drug consumption of 80-110%. A number of variables were calculated using the MEMS. The mean BP were calculated and the percentage of controlled patients.
                A total of 200 patients completed the study (100 in each group). Compliance was observed in 74 and 92%, respectively, in the CG and IG [95% confidence interval (CI) 63.9-84.1 and 86.7-97.3; P = 0.0001], the mean percentage compliances were 87.6 and 93.5% (95% CI 81.2-94 and 80.7-98.3; P = 0.0001), the percentages of correct days were 83.6 and 89.4%, the percentages of subjects who took the medication at the prescribed time were 79.89 and 88.06%, and the levels of therapeutic cover were 86.7 and 93.1%. The number needed to treat to avoid one case of non-compliance was 5.6 patients. The differences in the mean decreases in BP were significant for diastolic BP, with a greater decrease observed in the IG.
                An HBPM programme using electronic monitors is effective in improving compliance in arterial hypertension, measured using the MEMS. To compare group versus individual academic detailing to increase diuretic or beta-blocker use in hypertension.
                We conducted a cluster-randomized controlled trial in a large health maintenance organization. Subjects (N=9820) were patients with newly treated hypertension in the year preceding the intervention (N=3692), the 9 months following the intervention (N=3556), and the second year following intervention (N=2572). We randomly allocated 3 practice sites to group detailing (N=227 prescribers), 3 to individual detailing (N=235 prescribers), and 3 to usual care (N=319 prescribers). Individual detailing entailed a physician-educator meeting individually with clinicians to address barriers to prescribing guideline-recommended medications. The group detailing intervention incorporated the same social marketing principles in small groups of clinicians.
                In the first year following the intervention, the rates of diuretic or beta-blocker use increased by 13.2% in the group detailing practices, 12.5% in the individual detailing practices, and 6.2% in the usual care practices. As compared with usual care practices, diuretic or beta-blocker use was more likely in group detailing practices (adjusted odds ratio (OR), 1.40; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.11 - 1.76) and individual detailing practices (adjusted OR, 1.30; 95% CI, 0.95 - 1.79). Neither intervention affected blood pressure control. Two years following this single-visit intervention, there was still a trend suggesting a persistent effect of individual (OR, 1.22; 95% CI, 0.92 - 1.62), but not group, detailing (OR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.80 - 1.39), as compared with usual care.
                Both group and individual academic detailing improved antihypertensive prescribing over and above usual care but may require reinforcement to sustain improvements. This study was planned in the context of a regional high blood pressure programme, to compare the efficacy of two educative methods. The group of 722 hypertensive patients (58.8% women), mean age 61 years, was randomly selected from 19 primary care centres. Initial assessment was based on a patient interview including 22 questions on high blood pressure, its consequences and treatment. Patients agreeing to participate in an active education team programme were distributed into three groups: individual education, team education and a control group. Those who declined to participate formed two groups: individual education and controls. Team education consisted of two audiovisual sessions attended by groups of 8-12 patients and conducted by treating physicians and nurses. Individual education included comments related to the 22 questions. Follow-up assessment was made after two months. An increase in the level of hypertension control was observed only in the accepting group, in which educative action was followed by increased knowledge. Results were similarly favourable for both the individual and team education groups and suggested the need to consider educational factors together with those influencing patient attitude towards an active educational programme. To evaluate the implementation of clinical guidelines for hypertension in general practice by use of a computer-based clinical decision support system (CDSS) and a specific implementation strategy. Evaluation of patient outcome.
                Randomised study with health centres as units. The intervention group had the CDSS installed and made ready for use, doctors and assistants were trained and received a user-manual, the doctors were offered telephone repetitions, a seminar in risk intervention and, at the same seminar, further demonstration of the CDSS. The doctors received baseline registrations with information of how they treated their own hypertensive patients, and use of the CDSS was checked repeatedly.
                General practice in Sør- and Nord-Trøndelag counties in Norway, 380,000 inhabitants.
                Seventeen health centres with 24 doctors and 984 patients in the intervention group. Data from 879 patients used in the final analyses. Twelve health centres with 29 doctors and 1255 patients in the control group. Data from 1119 patients used in the final analyses.
                After an intervention period of 18 months, group differences in level of systolic and diastolic blood pressure, serum cholesterol, body mass index, and risk score for myocardial infarction were calculated, as well as group differences in fractions of smokers.
                Significant group difference in favour of intervention group: diastolic blood pressure 1 mmHg (95% CI -1.89, -0.17). However, a significant baseline difference in systolic blood pressure in favour of control group of 2.7 mmHg (95% CI 1.0, 4.5) had been reduced to 1.2 mmHg (95% CI -0.6, 3.0) after intervention.
                Implementation of clinical guidelines in the treatment of hypertensive patients in general practice by means of a CDSS and several other procedures for implementation did not affect patient outcome in any clinically significant way. A clinical trial of 204 untreated patients with mild hypertension was conducted to assess the effect of home blood pressure monitoring on blood pressure level, pharmacologic treatment, reduction of risk factors, and use of health services. After 1 year, no statistically significant differences were found between the treatment and control groups. The findings indicate that, while home blood pressure monitoring may be useful, it has no measurable short-term impact on these aspects of blood pressure management for patients with mild hypertension. To assess effects of multifactorial lifestyle modification on antihypertensive drug needs in treated hypertensive individuals.
                Randomized controlled trial.
                Research studies unit.
                Overweight hypertensive patients, receiving one or two antihypertensive drugs, were recruited by advertising, and allocated randomly to a usual care group (controls; n = 118) or a lifestyle modification group (programme group; n = 123).
                A 4-month programme of weight loss, a low-sodium 'Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension'-type diet with added fish, physical activity and moderation of alcohol intake. After 4 months, if mean 24-h ambulatory blood pressure (ABP) was less than 135/85 mmHg, antihypertensive drugs were withdrawn over 4 weeks and long-term home blood pressure monitoring was begun.
                Antihypertensive drug requirements, ABP, weight, waist girth at 4 months and 1-year follow-up.
                Ninety control group and 102 programme group participants completed the study. Mean 24-h ABP changed after 4 months by -1.0/-0.3 +/- 0.5/0.4 mmHg in controls and -4.1/-2.1 +/- 0.7/0.5 mmHg with the lifestyle programme (P < 0.01). At follow-up, changes in the two groups were not significantly different (4.1/1.3 +/- 1.1/1.0 mmHg in controls; 2.5/-0.1 +/- 1.1/0.8 mmHg in the programme group; P = 0.73). At 4 months, drug withdrawal differed significantly between the groups (P = 0.038) in men (control 44%; programme 66%) but not in women (65 and 64%, respectively; P = 0.964). At follow-up, sex-related differences were not significant, and 41% in the control group and 43% in the programme group maintained drug-withdrawal status. With the programme, net weight loss was 3.3 kg (P < 0.001) at 4 months and 3.0 kg (P < 0.001) at follow-up; respective net decreases in waist girth were 3.3 cm (P < 0.001) and 3.5 cm (P < 0.001).
                A 4-month multifactorial lifestyle modification in patients with treated hypertension reduced blood pressure in the short-term. Decreased central obesity persisted 1 year later and could reduce overall cardiovascular risk. The present study describes a 16-week trial of the use of a combination of biofeedback and relaxation techniques for the treatment of hypertension. Twenty-two hypertensive patients were randomly allocated to one of three groups: (1) diastolic blood pressure feedback, electromyographic feedback, and verbal relaxation; (2) sham blood pressure feedback; and (3) no treatment. For the 14 patients completing active treatment during an initial or crossover period, the average changes in blood pressure as measured outside the laboratory were minimal (0/-1 and +1/0 mm Hg, supine and standing, respectively). Average blood pressure reduction in the laboratory was no greater with active than with sham blood pressure feedback (-3/-2 vs. -5/-2 mm Hg). One subject, however, after showing no change in blood pressure during sham feedback, achieved pronounced and prolonged improvement following active treatment. Overall results do not support the usefulness of these techniques as primary therapy in most hypertensives. To measure clinical, economic, and humanistic outcomes associated with a pharmacist-managed hypertension clinic compared with physician-managed clinics.
                Prospective, randomized, comparative study.
                Managed care organization.
                A total of 330 patients with mild-to-moderate essential hypertension.
                Hypertension care provided by either the pharmacist-managed hypertension clinic or physician-managed general medical clinics.
                Baseline and 6-month evaluations consisted of systolic and diastolic blood pressure measurements, a short-form health survey, and collection of health care utilization information. After treatment, blood pressure measurements were significantly lower (p<0.001) in the pharmacist-managed hypertension clinic group than in the physician-managed clinic group. Patient satisfaction was significantly higher in the hypertension clinic group. Total costs for the hypertension clinic group were not different from those of the physician-managed clinic group ($242.46 vs $233.20, p=0.71), but cost:effectiveness ratios were lower in the hypertension clinic group ($27 vs $193/mm Hg for systolic blood pressure readings, and $48 vs $151/mm Hg for diastolic blood pressure readings).
                In a hypertension clinic, pharmacists can be a cost-effective alternative to physicians in management of patients, and they can improve clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction. To investigate the effect of a computer based clinical decision support system and a risk chart on absolute cardiovascular risk, blood pressure, and prescribing of cardiovascular drugs in hypertensive patients.
                Cluster randomised controlled trial.
                27 general practices in Avon.
                614 patients aged between 60 and 79 years with high blood pressure.
                Patients were randomised to computer based clinical decision support system plus cardiovascular risk chart; cardiovascular risk chart alone; or usual care.
                Percentage of patients in each group with a five year cardiovascular risk >/=10%, systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, prescribing of cardiovascular drugs.
                Patients in the computer based clinical decision support system and chart only groups were no more likely to have cardiovascular risk reduced to below 10% than patients receiving usual care. Patients in the computer based clinical decision support group were more likely to have a cardiovascular risk >/=10% than chart only patients, odds ratio 2.3 (95% confidence interval 1.1 to 4.8). The chart only group had significantly lower systolic blood pressure compared with the usual care group (difference in means -4.6 mm Hg (95% confidence interval -8.4 to -0.8)). Reduction of diastolic blood pressure did not differ between the three groups. The chart only group were twice as likely to be prescribed two classes of cardiovascular drugs and over three times as likely to be prescribed three or more classes of drugs compared with the other groups.
                The computer based clinical decision support system did not confer any benefit in absolute risk reduction or blood pressure control and requires further development and evaluation before use in clinical care can be recommended. Use of chart guidelines are associated with a potentially important reduction in systolic blood pressure. Although nonpharmacologic interventions are widely recommended in the therapy of high blood pressure in older adults, surprisingly little data exist to confirm the efficacy of these interventions in older persons.
                We conducted a randomized, controlled clinical trial in persons aged 60 to 85 years with a diastolic blood pressure of 85 to 100 mm Hg. The experimental arm was a nonpharmacologic intervention combining weight reduction, sodium restriction, and increased physical activity. The nonpharmacologic intervention consisted of eight weekly group and two individual sessions during the intensive phase, followed by four monthly group sessions during the maintenance phase. The control group received no treatment during the study. Blood pressure was assessed by certified technicians (blinded to group assignment) using random zero sphygmomanometers.
                Of 56 participants randomized, 47 completed the entire 6-month trial (21 in the intervention group and 26 in the control group). Attendance at the intervention sessions was excellent. The intervention group lost more weight (-2.1 kg) over 6 months than the control group (+0.3 kg). Trends for decreasing 24-hour urine sodium excretion in both the intervention and control groups, with greater trend in the intervention group, were not statistically significant. The intervention group experienced more reduction in systolic and diastolic blood pressure than did the control group (mean differences between groups at 6 months, 4.2/4.9 mm Hg, respectively).
                Our data indicate that a nonpharmacologic intervention will lower systolic and diastolic blood pressure levels in older people with borderline or mild elevations of diastolic blood pressure. Lifestyle factors like weight, alcohol consumption, salt intake and physical activity have shown to be important in treating hypertension. There have been made some randomised trials about the effects of lifestyle interventions, but the numbers of patients have been relatively small and the durations of follow-ups have been short. No controlled trials assessing the effects of lifestyle intervention in a rehabilitation setting have been reported. In this study, the effects of multidisciplinary lifestyle intervention in rehabilitation centres among middle-aged hypertensive employees were described. A total of 731 hypertensives from 45 worksites were randomised to lifestyle intervention in a rehabilitation centre or to usual care in an occupational or primary health-care centre for 12 months. Standard measurements were conducted before the intervention and 1-year later. Blood pressure (BP) levels were clearly reduced in the intervention group, while only minor changes were observed in the control group. The net changes between the two groups both for systolic and diastolic BPs were -2.1 mmHg (95% confidence intervals (CI) -4.0 to -0.1) and -1.5 mmHg (95% CI -2.6 to -0.4), respectively. The net changes were greater among men than women. The multidisciplinary lifestyle intervention in a rehabilitation centre setting produced significant reductions in BP among middle-aged employees with hypertension.
Family practices and community-based clinics need to have an organized system of regular follow-up and review of their hypertensive patients. Antihypertensive drug therapy should be implemented by means of a vigorous stepped care approach when patients do not reach target blood pressure levels. Self-monitoring and appointment reminders may be useful adjuncts to the above strategies to improve blood pressure control but require further evaluation.