Dataset Information

Rationale and design of a pragmatic clinical trial to assess the impact of self-monitoring blood pressure at home and self-titration of antihypertensive medication in poorly controlled hypertension: the ADAMPA study protocol.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Lack of control of hypertension is one of the most prevalent problems encountered by general practitioners (GPs). Self-measured blood pressure monitoring at home (SMBP) and self-titration of medication could be a good strategy to improve hypertension management, however, evidence is limited and not conclusive. We aimed to assess the effectiveness, in the primary care setting, of an intervention that includes educational components, SMBP and self-titration of antihypertensive medication to decrease systolic blood pressure compared to usual care, in a population with poorly controlled hypertension, during a 12-month period. METHODS:Pragmatic, controlled, randomized, unblinded clinical trial with two parallel groups assigned in a ratio of 1:1 to self-management (which includes educational components, SBMP and self-titration of antihypertensive medication based on a patient's GP's pre-established adjustment plan) or to usual care (with educational components too). DISCUSSION:If the data from this trial show positive results, the study may contribute to a change of strategy in the treatment of hypertension, focusing on the patient as the main actor to achieve blood pressure control. Furthermore, this approach might contribute to the financial sustainability of the National Health Service. TRIAL REGISTRATION:This trial has been registered in the database with reference number EudraCT: 2016-003986-25. Registered 05 May 2017, https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu/ctr-search/search?query=2016-003986-25.

SUBMITTER: Sanfelix-Genoves J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6154875 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Rationale and design of a pragmatic clinical trial to assess the impact of self-monitoring blood pressure at home and self-titration of antihypertensive medication in poorly controlled hypertension: the ADAMPA study protocol.

Sanfélix-Genovés José J Rodríguez-Bernal Clara L CL Marco-Moreno Irene I Martinez-Ibañez Patricia P Martinez-Ibañez Lucía L Bóveda-García María M Barreira-Franch Ignacio I Calleja-Del Ser Mercedes M Borrás-Moreno Greta G Avelino-Hidalgo Eugenia E Escrig-Veses Marina M Lauriano Margherita M Giménez-Loreiro Margarita M Bellot-Pujalte Laura L García-Sempere Aníbal A Peiró Salvador S Sanfélix-Gimeno Gabriel G

BMC family practice 20180924 1

<h4>Background</h4>Lack of control of hypertension is one of the most prevalent problems encountered by general practitioners (GPs). Self-measured blood pressure monitoring at home (SMBP) and self-titration of medication could be a good strategy to improve hypertension management, however, evidence is limited and not conclusive. We aimed to assess the effectiveness, in the primary care setting, of an intervention that includes educational components, SMBP and self-titration of antihypertensive m ...[more]

PMID: 30249203

Similar Datasets

Project description:Patient empowerment through pharmacological self-management is a common strategy in some chronic diseases such as diabetes, but it is rarely used for controlling blood pressure. This study aimed to assess self-monitoring plus self-titration of antihypertensive medication versus usual care for reducing systolic blood pressure (SBP) at 12 months in poorly controlled hypertensive patients. The ADAMPA study was a pragmatic, controlled, randomized, non-masked clinical trial with two parallel arms in Valencia, Spain. Hypertensive patients older than 40 years, with SBP over 145 mmHg and/or diastolic blood pressure (DBP) over 90 mmHg, were recruited from July 2017 to June 2018. Participants were randomized 1:1 to usual care versus an individualized, pre-arranged plan based on self-monitoring plus self-titration. The primary outcome was the adjusted mean difference (AMD) in SBP between groups at 12 months. Primary outcome data were available for 312 patients (intervention n=156, control n=156) of the 366 who were initially recruited. The AMD in SBP at 12 months (main analysis) was -2.9 mmHg (95% CI, -5.9 to 0.1, p=0.061), while the AMD in DBP was -1.9 mmHg (95% CI, -3.7 to 0.0, p=0.052). The results of the subgroup analysis were consistent with these for the main outcome measures. More patients in the intervention group achieved good blood pressure control (<140/90 mmHg) at 12 months than in the control group (55.8% vs 42.3%, difference 13.5%, 95% CI, 2.5 to 24.5%, p=0.017). At 12 months, no differences were observed in behavior, quality of life, use of health services, or adverse events. Self-monitoring plus self-titration of antihypertensive medication based on an individualized pre-arranged plan used in primary care may be a promising strategy for reducing blood pressure at 12 months compared to usual care, without increasing healthcare utilization or adverse events. EudraCT, number 2016-003986-25 (registered 17 March 2017) and clinicaltrials.gov , NCT03242785.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Patients with diabetes and poorly controlled hypertension are at increased risk for adverse renal and cardiovascular outcomes. Identifying these patients early and addressing modifiable risk factors is central to delaying renal complications such as diabetic kidney disease. Mobile health (mHealth), a relatively inexpensive and easily scalable technology, can facilitate patient-centered care and promote engagement in self-management, particularly for patients of lower socioeconomic status. Thus, mHealth may be a cost-effective way to deliver self-management education and support. OBJECTIVE:This feasibility study aimed to build a population management program by identifying patients with diabetes and poorly controlled hypertension who were at risk for adverse renal outcomes and evaluate a multifactorial intervention to address medication self-management. We recruited patients from a federally qualified health center (FQHC) in an underserved, diverse county in the southeastern United States. METHODS:Patients were identified via electronic health record. Inclusion criteria were age between 18 and 75 years, diagnosis of type 2 diabetes, poorly controlled hypertension over the last 12 months (mean clinic systolic blood pressure [SBP] ?140 mm Hg and/or diastolic blood pressure [DBP] ?90 mm Hg), access to a mobile phone, and ability to receive text messages and emails. The intervention consisted of monthly telephone calls for 6 months by a case manager and weekly, one-way informational text messages. Engagement was defined as the number of phone calls completed during the intervention; individuals who completed 4 or more calls were considered engaged. The primary outcome was change in SBP at the conclusion of the intervention. RESULTS:Of the 141 patients enrolled, 84.0% (118/141) of patients completed 1 or more phone calls and had follow-up SBP measurements for analysis. These patients were on average 56.9 years of age, predominately female (73/118, 61.9%), and nonwhite by self-report (103/118, 87.3%). The proportion of participants with poor baseline SBP control (50/118, 42.4%) did not change significantly at study completion (53/118, 44.9%) (P=.64). Participants who completed 4 or more phone calls (98/118, 83.1%) did not experience a statistically significant decrease in SBP when compared to those who completed fewer calls. CONCLUSION:We did not reduce uncontrolled hypertension even among the more highly engaged. However, 83% of a predominately minority and low-income population completed at least 67% of the multimodal mHealth intervention. Findings suggest that combining an automated electronic health record system to identify at-risk patients with a tailored mHealth protocol can provide education to this population. While this intervention was insufficient to effect behavioral change resulting in better hypertension control, it does suggest that this FQHC population will engage in low-cost population health applications with a potentially promising impact. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02418091; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02418091 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/76RBvacVU).

Project description:BackgroundStudies evaluating titration of antihypertensive medication using self-monitoring give contradictory findings and the precise place of telemonitoring over self-monitoring alone is unclear. The TASMINH4 trial aimed to assess the efficacy of self-monitored blood pressure, with or without telemonitoring, for antihypertensive titration in primary care, compared with usual care.MethodsThis study was a parallel randomised controlled trial done in 142 general practices in the UK, and included hypertensive patients older than 35 years, with blood pressure higher than 140/90 mm Hg, who were willing to self-monitor their blood pressure. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to self-monitoring blood pressure (self-montoring group), to self-monitoring blood pressure with telemonitoring (telemonitoring group), or to usual care (clinic blood pressure; usual care group). Randomisation was by a secure web-based system. Neither participants nor investigators were masked to group assignment. The primary outcome was clinic measured systolic blood pressure at 12 months from randomisation. Primary analysis was of available cases. The trial is registered with ISRCTN, number ISRCTN 83571366.Findings1182 participants were randomly assigned to the self-monitoring group (n=395), the telemonitoring group (n=393), or the usual care group (n=394), of whom 1003 (85%) were included in the primary analysis. After 12 months, systolic blood pressure was lower in both intervention groups compared with usual care (self-monitoring, 137·0 [SD 16·7] mm Hg and telemonitoring, 136·0 [16·1] mm Hg vs usual care, 140·4 [16·5]; adjusted mean differences vs usual care: self-monitoring alone, -3·5 mm Hg [95% CI -5·8 to -1·2]; telemonitoring, -4·7 mm Hg [-7·0 to -2·4]). No difference between the self-monitoring and telemonitoring groups was recorded (adjusted mean difference -1·2 mm Hg [95% CI -3·5 to 1·2]). Results were similar in sensitivity analyses including multiple imputation. Adverse events were similar between all three groups.InterpretationSelf-monitoring, with or without telemonitoring, when used by general practitioners to titrate antihypertensive medication in individuals with poorly controlled blood pressure, leads to significantly lower blood pressure than titration guided by clinic readings. With most general practitioners and many patients using self-monitoring, it could become the cornerstone of hypertension management in primary care.FundingNational Institute for Health Research via Programme Grant for Applied Health Research (RP-PG-1209-10051), Professorship to RJM (NIHR-RP-R2-12-015), Oxford Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care, and Omron Healthcare UK.

Project description:Adherence to medication has been repeatedly proposed to represent a major cause of treatment-resistant hypertension (TRH); however, treatment decisions such as treating TRH with renal denervation depend on accurate judgment of adherence. We carefully analyzed adherence rates to medication before and after renal denervation and its effect on blood pressure (BP) control. Eighty patients with TRH were included in 2 prospective observational studies that assessed the difference of potential antihypertensive and nephroprotective effects of renal denervation. To compare prescribed with actual medication intake (representing a measure of adherence), we analyzed urine samples collected at baseline and at 6 months after renal denervation for antihypertensive compounds or metabolites (by liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry). In addition to office BP, 24-hour ambulatory BP and central hemodynamics (central systolic pressure, central pulse pressure) were assessed. Informed consent for analyses of urine metabolites was obtained from 79 of 80 patients. Actual intake of all antihypertensive drugs was detected at baseline and at 6 months after renal denervation in 44 (56%) and 52 (66%) patients, respectively; 1 drug was missing in 22 (28%) and 17 (22%) patients, respectively, and ≥2 drugs were missing in 13 (16%) and 10 (13%) patients, respectively. At baseline, 24-hour ambulatory BP (P=0.049) and central systolic BP (P=0.012) were higher in nonadherent patients. Adherence did not significantly change overall (McNemar-Bowker test, P=0.362). An increase in adherence was observed in 21 patients, and a decrease was observed in 11 patients. The decrease in 24-hour ambulatory BP was not different in those with stable adherence 6 months after renal denervation (n=41, -7±13 mm Hg) compared with those with increased adherence (n=21, -10±13 mm Hg) and decreased adherence (n=11, -7±14 mm Hg) (P>0.20). Our study is limited by the relatively small sample size and potentially by the specific health environment of our university center (Northern Bavaria, Germany). Nonadherence to medication among patients with TRH was relatively low: ≈1 of 6 patients with TRH did not take ≥2 of the prescribed drugs. Adherence pattern did not change significantly after renal denervation and had no impact on the overall observed BP changes, supporting the concept that renal denervation is an effective treatment in patients with TRH. URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifiers: NCT00888433, NCT01442883 and NCT01687725.

Dataset Information

Rationale and design of a pragmatic clinical trial to assess the impact of self-monitoring blood pressure at home and self-titration of antihypertensive medication in poorly controlled hypertension: the ADAMPA study protocol.

Publications

Rationale and design of a pragmatic clinical trial to assess the impact of self-monitoring blood pressure at home and self-titration of antihypertensive medication in poorly controlled hypertension: the ADAMPA study protocol.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets