Dataset Information

Does a colour-coded blood pressure diary improve blood pressure control for patients in general practice: the CoCo trial.

ABSTRACT: Insufficient blood pressure control is a frequent problem despite the existence of effective treatment. Insufficient adherence to self-monitoring as well as to therapy is a common reason. Blood pressure self-measurement at home (Home Blood Pressure Measurement, HBPM) has positive effects on treatment adherence and is helpful in achieving the target blood pressure. Only a few studies have investigated whether adherence to HBPM can be improved through simple measures resulting also in better blood pressure control.Improvement of self-monitoring and improved blood pressure control by using a new colour-coded blood pressure diary.Change in systolic and/or diastolic blood pressure 6 months after using the new colour-coded blood pressure diary.Secondary outcome: Adherence to blood pressure self-measurement (number of measurements/entries).Randomised controlled study.138 adult patients in primary care with uncontrolled hypertension despite therapy. The control group uses a conventional blood pressure diary; the intervention group uses the new colour-coded blood pressure diary (green, yellow, red according a traffic light system). EXPECTED RESULTS/CONCLUSION: The visual separation and entries in three colour-coded areas reflecting risk (green: blood pressure in the target range 140/>90 mmHg, red: blood pressure in danger zone > 180 mmHg/>110 mmHg) lead to better self-monitoring compared with the conventional (non-colour-coded) blood pressure booklet. The colour-coded, visualised information supports improved perception (awareness and interpretation) of blood pressure and triggers correct behaviour, in the means of improved adherence to the recommended treatment as well as better communication between patients and doctors resulting in improved blood pressure control.ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT01013467.

SUBMITTER: Steurer-Stey C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2873272 | biostudies-literature | 2010 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Does a colour-coded blood pressure diary improve blood pressure control for patients in general practice: the CoCo trial.

Steurer-Stey Claudia C Zoller Marco M Chmiel Moshinsky Corinne C Senn Oliver O Rosemann Thomas T

Trials 20100414

<h4>Background</h4>Insufficient blood pressure control is a frequent problem despite the existence of effective treatment. Insufficient adherence to self-monitoring as well as to therapy is a common reason. Blood pressure self-measurement at home (Home Blood Pressure Measurement, HBPM) has positive effects on treatment adherence and is helpful in achieving the target blood pressure. Only a few studies have investigated whether adherence to HBPM can be improved through simple measures resulting a ...[more]

PMID: 20398258

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Inadequate blood pressure (BP) control is a frequent challenge in general practice. The objective of this study was to determine whether a color-coded BP booklet using a traffic light scheme (red, >180 mmHg systolic BP and/or >110 mmHg diastolic BP; yellow, >140-180 mmHg systolic BP or >90-110 mmHg diastolic BP; green, ≤140 mmHg systolic BP and ≤90 mmHg diastolic BP) improves BP control and adherence with home BP measurement. METHODS:In this two-group, randomized controlled trial, general practitioners recruited adult patients with a BP >140 mmHg systolic and/or >90 mmHg diastolic. Patients in the control group received a standard BP booklet and the intervention group used a color-coded booklet for daily home BP measurement. The main outcomes were changes in BP, BP control (treatment goal <140/90 mmHg), and adherence with home BP measurement after 6 months. RESULTS:One hundred and twenty-one of 137 included patients qualified for analysis. After 6 months, a significant decrease in systolic and diastolic BP was achieved in both groups, with no significant difference between the groups (16.1/7.9 mmHg in the intervention group versus 13.1/8.6 mmHg in the control group, P=0.3/0.7). BP control (treatment target <140/90 mmHg) was achieved significantly more often in the intervention group (43% versus 25%; P=0.037; number needed to treat of 5). Adherence with home BP measurement overall was high, with a trend in favor of the intervention group (98.6% versus 96.2%; P=0.1). CONCLUSION:Color-coded BP self-monitoring significantly improved BP control (number needed to treat of 5, meaning that every fifth patient utilizing color-coded self-monitoring achieved better BP control after 6 months), but no significant between-group difference was observed in BP change. A markedly higher percentage of patients achieved BP values in the normal range. This simple, inexpensive approach of color-coded BP self-monitoring is user-friendly and applicable in primary care, and should be implemented in the care of patients with arterial hypertension.

Project description:BackgroundPractice facilitators (PFs) provide tailored support to primary care practices to improve the quality of care delivery. Often used by PFs, the "Key Driver Implementation Scale" (KDIS) measures the degree to which a practice implements quality improvement activities from the Chronic Care Model, but the scale's psychometric properties have not been investigated. We examined construct validity, reliability, floor and ceiling effects, and a longitudinal trend test of the KDIS items in the Southeastern Collaboration to Improve Blood Pressure Control trial.MethodsThe KDIS items assess a practice's progress toward implementing: a clinical information system (using their own data to drive change); standardized care processes; optimized team care; patient self-management support; and leadership support. We assessed construct validity and estimated reliability with a multilevel confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). A trend test examined whether the KDIS items increased over time and estimated the expected number of months needed to move a practice to the highest response options.ResultsPFs completed monthly KDIS ratings over 12 months for 32 primary care practices, yielding a total of 384 observations. Data was fitted to a unidimensional CFA model; however, parameter fit was modest and could be improved. Reliability was 0.70. Practices started scoring at the highest levels beginning in month 5, indicating low variability. The KDIS items did show an upward trend over 12 months (all p < .001), indicating that practices were increasingly implementing key activities. The expected time to move a practice to the highest response category was 9.1 months for standardized care processes, 10.2 for clinical information system, 12.6 for self-management support, 13.1 for leadership, and 14.3 months for optimized team care.ConclusionsThe KDIS items showed acceptable reliability, but work is needed in larger sample sizes to determine if two or more groups of implementation activities are being measured rather than one.

Project description:Summary Background Long-term hypertension control prevents heart attacks and other cardiovascular diseases, yet implementation is insufficient worldwide. The redesign of hypertension management by information and communication technology (ICT) improved hypertension control, e.g., by transmission of blood pressure (BP) measurements to a central webspace. However, an easy-to-use secure patient app connected with a practice management centre is lacking. This study evaluates the effectiveness of the newly developed PIA (PC-supported case management of hypertensive patients to implement guideline-based hypertension therapy using a physician-defined and -supervised, patient-specific therapeutic algorithm) intervention with PIA-ICT and eLearning for general practices. Methods The effectiveness of the PIA intervention was evaluated in a cluster-randomised study. Practices were randomly allocated (1:1) to the intervention or the control group (usual care). Group allocation was unmasked for participants and researchers. The primary outcome was the BP control rate (BP < 140/90 mmHg) after 6–12 months. Secondary outcomes included BP changes and satisfaction with PIA-ICT. The trial is registered in the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS00012680). Findings Starting from December 1, 2019, 64 general practices were recruited over 1 year during the COVID-19 pandemic. Overall, 848 patients were enrolled between April 15, 2020 and March 31, 2021. The study was completed Sept 30, 2021. At baseline, 636 patients (intervention: 331; control: 305) of 50 general practices met the inclusion criteria. The final dataset for analyses comprised 47 practices and 525 patients (intervention 265; control 260). In the adjusted hierarchical model, the PIA intervention increased the BP control rate significantly by 23.1% points (95% CI: 5.4–40.8%): intervention 59.8% (95% CI: 47.4–71.0%) compared to 36.7% (95% CI: 24.9–50.3%) in the control group. Systolic BP decreased by 21.1 mmHg in the intervention and 15.5 mmHg in the control group. Interpretation The PIA redesign of care processes improved BP in an outcome-relevant way. Prospectively, it may constitute an important model for hypertension care in Germany. Funding This study is funded by the German Innovation Fund (Grant number: 01NVF17002).

Project description:ObjectiveTo examine the UK practice patterns in treating newly diagnosed hypertension and to determine whether subgroups of high-risk patients are more or less likely to follow particular therapeutic protocols and to reach blood pressure goals.DesignRetrospective cohort study.SettingThis study examined adults in The Health Improvement Network (THIN) UK general practice medical records database who were initiated on medication for hypertension.Participants48 131 patients with essential hypertension diagnosed between 2008 and 2010 who were registered with a participating practice for a minimum of 13 months prior to, and 6 months following, initiation of therapy. We excluded patients with gestational hypertension or secondary hypertension. Patients were classified into risk groups based on blood pressure readings and comorbid conditions.Primary and secondary outcome measuresOdds of receiving single versus fixed or free-drug combination therapy and odds of achieving blood pressure control were assessed using multivariable logistic regression.ResultsThe vast majority of patients (95.8%) were initiated on single drug therapy. Patients with high cardiovascular risk (patients with grade 2-3 hypertension or those with high normal/grade 1 hypertension plus at least one cardiovascular condition pretreatment) had a statistically significant benefit of starting immediately on combination therapy when blood pressure control was the desired goal (OR: 1.23; 95% CI: 1.06 to 1.42) but, surprisingly, were less likely than patients with no risk factors to receive combination therapy (OR: 0.53; 95% CI: 0.47 to 0.59).ConclusionsOur results suggest that combination therapy may be indicated for patients with high cardiovascular risk, who accounted for 60.6% of our study population. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guideline CG34 of 2006 (in effect during the study period) recommended starting with single drug class therapy for most patients, and this advice does seem to have been followed even in cases where a more aggressive approach might have been considered.

Project description:BackgroundHypertension is the most common condition seen in Australian general practice. Despite hypertension being amenable to lifestyle modifications and pharmacological treatment, only around half of these patients have controlled blood pressure levels (< 140/90 mmHg), placing them at an increased risk of cardiovascular disease.ObjectiveWe aimed to estimate the health and acute hospitalisation costs of uncontrolled hypertension among patients attending general practice.MethodsWe used population data and electronic health records from 634,000 patients aged 45-74 years who regularly attended an Australian general practice between 2016 and 2018 (MedicineInsight database). An existing worksheet-based costing model was adapted to calculate the potential cost savings for acute hospitalisation of primary cardiovascular disease events by reducing the risk of a cardiovascular event over the next 5 years through improved systolic blood pressure control. The model estimated the number of expected cardiovascular disease events and associated acute hospital costs under current levels of systolic blood pressure and compared this estimate with the expected number of cardiovascular disease events and costs under different levels of systolic blood pressure control.ResultsThe model estimated that across all Australians aged 45-74 years who visit their general practitioner (n = 8.67 million), 261,858 cardiovascular disease events can be expected over the next 5 years at current systolic blood pressure levels (mean 137.8 mmHg, standard deviation = 12.3 mmHg), with a cost of AUD$1813 million (in 2019-20). By reducing the systolic blood pressure of all patients with a systolic blood pressure greater than 139 mmHg to 139 mmHg, 25,845 cardiovascular disease events could be avoided with an associated reduction in acute hospital costs of AUD$179 million. If systolic blood pressure is lowered further to 129 mmHg for all those with systolic blood pressure greater than 129 mmHg, 56,169 cardiovascular disease events could be avoided with potential cost savings of AUD$389 million. Sensitivity analyses indicate that potential cost savings range from AUD$46 million to AUD$1406 million and AUD$117 million to AUD$2009 million for the two scenarios, respectively. Cost savings by practice range from AUD$16,479 for small practices to AUD$82,493 for large practices.ConclusionsThe aggregate cost effects of poor blood pressure control in primary care are high, but cost implications at the individual practice level are modest. The potential cost savings improve the potential to design cost-effective interventions, but such interventions may be best targeted at a population level rather than at individual practices.

Dataset Information

Does a colour-coded blood pressure diary improve blood pressure control for patients in general practice: the CoCo trial.

Publications

Does a colour-coded blood pressure diary improve blood pressure control for patients in general practice: the CoCo trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets