Dataset Information

Monitoring Study Participants and Implementation with Phone Calls to Support Hypertension Control During the COVID-19 Pandemic: The Case of a Multicomponent Intervention Trial in Guatemala.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic presents a challenge to health care for patients with chronic diseases, especially hypertension, because of the important association and increased risk of these patients with a severe presentation of COVID-19 disease. The Guatemalan Ministry of Health has been implementing a multi-component program aimed at improving hypertension control in rural communities since 2019 as a part of an intervention research cluster randomized trial. When the first cases of COVID-19 were reported (March 13, 2020) in Guatemala, our study paused all study field activities, and began monitoring participants through phone calls. The objective of this paper is to describe the approach used to monitor study participants during the COVID-19 pandemic and compare data obtained during phone calls for intervention and control group participants.

Methods

We developed a cross-sectional study within the HyTREC (Hypertension Outcomes for T4 Research within Lower Middle-Income Countries) project 'Multicomponent Intervention to Improve Hypertension Control in Central America: Guatemala' in which phone calls were made to participants from both intervention and control groups to monitor measures important to the study: delivery of antihypertensive medications in both groups, receipt of coaching sessions and use of a home blood pressure monitor by intervention group participants, as well as reasons that they were not implemented.

Results

Regarding the delivery of antihypertensive drugs by the MoH to participants, those in the intervention group had a higher level of medication delivery (73%) than the control group (51%), p<0.001. Of the total participants in the intervention group, 62% had received at least one health coaching session in the previous three months and 81% used a digital home blood pressure monitor at least twice a week. Intervention activities were lower than expected due to restricted public transportation on top of decreased availability of health providers.

Conclusion

In Guatemala, specifically in rural settings, access to antihypertensive medications and health services during pandemic times was impaired and less than expected, even after accounting for the program's implementation activities and actions.

SUBMITTER: Hernandez-Galdamez D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8622336 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundHypertension is a major risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD). Despite advances in hypertension prevention and treatment, the proportion of patients who are aware, treated and controlled is low, particularly in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). We will evaluate an adapted version of a multilevel and multicomponent hypertension control program in Guatemala, previously proven effective and feasible in Argentina. The program components are: protocol-based hypertension treatment using a standardized algorithm; team-based collaborative care; health provider education; health coaching sessions; home blood pressure monitoring; blood pressure audit; and feedback.MethodsUsing a hybrid type 2 effectiveness-implementation design, we will evaluate clinical and implementation outcomes of the multicomponent program in Guatemala over an 18-month period. Through a cluster randomized trial, we will randomly assign 18 health districts to the intervention arm and 18 to enhanced usual care across five departments, enrolling 44 participants per health district and 1584 participants in total. The clinical outcomes are (1) the difference in the proportion of patients with controlled hypertension (< 130/80 mmHg) between the intervention and control groups at 18 months and (2) the net change in systolic and diastolic blood pressure from baseline to 18 months. The context-enhanced Reach, Efficacy, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance (RE-AIM)/Practical Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model (PRISM) framework will guide the evaluation of the implementation at the level of the patient, provider, and health system. Using a mixed-methods approach, we will evaluate the following implementation outcomes: acceptability, adoption, feasibility, fidelity, adaptation, reach, sustainability, and cost-effectiveness.DiscussionWe will disseminate the study findings, and promote scale up and scale out of the program, if proven effective. This study will generate urgently needed data on effective, adoptable, and sustainable interventions and implementation strategies to improve hypertension control in Guatemala and other LMICs.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03504124. Registered on 20 April 2018.

Project description:BackgroundLong-term retention of research participants in studies is challenging. In research in sub-Saharan Africa, phone calls are the most frequently used method to distantly engage with participants.ObjectiveWe aimed to get insight into the effectiveness of phone calls to retain contact with participants and evaluated determinants of reachability.MethodsA cross-sectional study was performed using the databases of two randomized controlled trials investigating different kinds of antiretroviral therapy in HIV-positive patients. One trial finished in 2018 (study 1), and the other finished in 2015 (study 2). A random sample size of 200 participants per study was obtained. There were up to 3 phone numbers available per participant collected during the studies. Participants received a maximum of 3 phone calls on every available number on different days and at different times. Voicemails were left, and emails sent wherever possible. We documented how many calls were answered, who answered, as well as after how many attempts participants were reached. To further increase our understanding of reachability, we conducted a short questionnaire assessing factors contributing to reachability. The study was approved by the Research Ethics Committee of the University of Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa (reference number M1811107).ResultsIn our sample size of n=200 per study, study 1, with a median time of 11 months since the last visit at the research site, had a response rate of 70.5% (141/200) participants while study 2, with a median duration of 55 months since the last visit, had a response rate of 50.0% (100/200; P<.001). In study 1, 61.5% (123/200) of calls were answered directly by the participant while this was 36.0% (72/200) in study 2 (P=.003). The likelihood of reaching a participant decreased with time (odds ratio [OR] 0.73, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.84) for every year since the last face-to-face visit. Having more phone numbers per participant increased reachability (OR 2.32, 95% CI 1.24 to 4.36 for 2 phone numbers and OR 3.03, 95% CI 1.48 to 6.22 for 3 phone numbers compared with 1 number). A total of 141 of 241 reached participants responded to the questionnaire. Of the 93 participants who had changed phone numbers, 5% (50/93) had changed numbers because their phone was stolen. The most preferred method of being contacted was direct calling (128/141) with participants naming this method followed by WhatsApp (69/141).ConclusionsTime since last visit and the number of phone numbers listed were the only determinants of reachability. Longer follow-up time is accompanied with a decrease in reachability by phone while more listed phone numbers increases the likelihood that someone can be reached.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT02671383; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02671383 and ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02670772; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02670772.

Project description:Monitoring and evaluating policies and programs in low- and middle-income countries are often difficult because of the lack of routine data. High mobile phone ownership in these countries presents an opportunity for efficient data collection through telephone interviews. This study examined the feasibility of collecting data on medicines through telephone interviews in Kenya. Data on the availability and prices of medicines at 137 health facilities and 639 patients were collected in September 2016 via in-person interviews. Between December 2016 and December 2017, monthly telephone interviews were conducted with health facilities and patients. An unannounced in-person interview was conducted with respondents to validate the telephone interview within 24 h. A bottom-up itemization costing approach was used to estimate the costs of telephone and in-person data collection. In-depth interviews were conducted with data collectors and respondents to explore their perceptions on both modes of data collection. The level of agreement between data on medicines availability collected through phone and in-person interviews was strong at the health facility level [kappa = 0.90; confidence interval (CI) 0.88-0.92] and moderate at the household level (kappa = 0.50, CI 0.39-0.60). Price data from telephone and in-person interviews showed strong intra-class correlation at health facilities [intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) = 0.96] and moderate intra-class correlation at households (ICC = 0.47). The cost per phone interview at health facilities and households were $19.73 and $16.86, respectively, compared to $186.20 for a baseline in-person interview. Participants considered telephone interviews to be more convenient. In countries with high cell phone penetration, telephone data collection should be considered in monitoring and evaluating public health programs especially at health facilities. Additional strategies may be needed to optimize this mode of data collection at the household level. Variations in cell phone ownership, telecommunication network and data collection costs across different settings may limit the generalizability of the findings from this study.

Project description:ImportanceThere is a lack of information regarding the impact of implementing a protocol-driven, team-based, multicomponent intervention in public primary care settings on hypertension-related complications and health care burden over the long term.ObjectiveTo compare hypertension-related complications and health service use at 5 years among patients managed with Risk Assessment and Management Program for Hypertension (RAMP-HT) vs usual care.Design, setting, and participantsIn this population-based prospective matched cohort study, patients were followed up until the date of all-cause mortality, an outcome event, or last follow-up appointment before October 2017, whichever occurred first. Participants included 212 707 adults with uncomplicated hypertension managed at 73 public general outpatient clinics in Hong Kong between 2011 and 2013. RAMP-HT participants were matched to patients receiving usual care using propensity score fine stratification weightings. Statistical analysis was conducted from January 2019 to March 2023.InterventionsNurse-led risk assessment linked to electronic action reminder system, nurse intervention, and specialist consultation (as necessary), in addition to usual care.Main outcomes and measuresHypertension-related complications (cardiovascular diseases, end-stage kidney disease), all-cause mortality, public health service use (overnight hospitalization, attendances at accident and emergency department, specialist outpatient clinic, and general outpatient clinic).ResultsA total of 108 045 RAMP-HT participants (mean [SD] age: 66.3 [12.3] years; 62 277 [57.6%] female) and 104 662 patients receiving usual care (mean [SD] age 66.3 [13.5] years; 60 497 [57.8%] female) were included. After a median (IQR) follow-up of 5.4 (4.5-5.8) years, RAMP-HT participants had 8.0% absolute risk reduction in cardiovascular diseases, 1.6% absolute risk reduction in end-stage kidney disease, and 10.0% absolute risk reduction in all-cause mortality. After adjusting for baseline covariates, the RAMP-HT group was associated with lower risk of cardiovascular diseases (hazard ratio [HR], 0.62; 95% CI, 0.61-0.64), end-stage kidney disease (HR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.50-0.59), and all-cause mortality (HR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.50-0.54) compared with the usual care group. The number needed to treat to prevent 1 cardiovascular disease event, end-stage kidney disease, and all-cause mortality was 16, 106, and 17, respectively. RAMP-HT participants had lower hospital-based health service use (incidence rate ratios ranging from 0.60 to 0.87) but more general outpatient clinic attendances (IRR, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.06-1.06) compared with usual care patients.Conclusions and relevanceIn this prospective matched cohort study involving 212 707 primary care patients with hypertension, participation in RAMP-HT was associated with statistically significant reductions in all-cause mortality, hypertension-related complications, and hospital-based health service use after 5 years.

Project description:BackgroundThere has been an international shift in health care, which has seen an increasing focus and development of technological and personalized at-home interventions that aim to improve health outcomes and patient-clinician communication. However, there is a notable lack of empirical evidence describing the preparatory steps of adapting and implementing technology of this kind across multiple countries and clinical settings.ObjectiveThis study aimed to describe the steps undertaken in the preparation of a multinational, multicenter randomized controlled trial (RCT) to test a mobile phone-based remote symptom monitoring system, that is, Advanced Symptom Management System (ASyMS), designed to enhance management of chemotherapy toxicities among people with cancer receiving adjuvant chemotherapy versus standard cancer center care.MethodsThere were 13 cancer centers across 5 European countries (Austria, Greece, Ireland, Norway, and the United Kingdom). Multiple steps were undertaken, including a scoping review of empirical literature and clinical guidelines, translation and linguistic validation of study materials, development of standardized international care procedures, and the integration and evaluation of the technology within each cancer center.ResultsThe ASyMS was successfully implemented and deployed in clinical practices across 5 European countries. The rigorous and simultaneous steps undertaken by the research team highlighted the strengths of the system in clinical practice, as well as the clinical and technical changes required to meet the diverse needs of its intended users within each country, before the commencement of the RCT.ConclusionsAdapting and implementing this multinational, multicenter system required close attention to diverse considerations and unique challenges primarily related to communication and clinical and technical issues. Success was dependent on collaborative and transparent communication among academics, the technology industry, translation partners, patients, and clinicians as well as a simultaneous and rigorous methodological approach within the 5 relevant countries.