BACKGROUND: Despite the known health risks of hypertension, many hypertensive patients still have uncontrolled blood pressure. Clinical inertia, the tendency of physicians not to intensify treatment, is a common barrier in controlling chronic diseases. This trial is aimed at determining the impact of activating patients to ask providers to make changes to their care through tailored feedback. METHODS:Diagnosed hypertensive patients were enrolled in this RCT and randomized to one of two study groups: (1) the intervention condition--Web-based hypertension feedback, based on the individual patient's self-report of health variables and previous BP measurements, to prompt them to ask questions during their next physician's visit about hypertension care (2) the control condition--Web-based preventive health feedback, based on the individual's self-report of receiving preventive care (e.g., pap testing), to prompt them to ask questions during their next physician's visit about preventive care. The primary outcome of the study is change in blood pressure and change in the percentage of patients in each group with controlled blood pressure. CONCLUSION:Five hundred participants were enrolled and baseline characteristics include a mean age of 60.0 years; 57.6% female; and 77.6% white. Overall 37.7% participants had uncontrolled blood pressure; the mean body mass index (BMI) was in the obese range (32.4) and 21.8% had diabetes. By activating patients to become involved in their own care, we believe the addition of the web-based intervention will improve blood pressure control compared to a control group who receive web-based preventive messages unrelated to hypertension.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Despite the known health risks of hypertension, many hypertensivepatients still have uncontrolled blood pressure. Clinical inertia, the tendency of physicians not to intensify treatment, is a common barrier in controlling chronic diseases. This trial is aimed at determining the impact of activating patients to ask providers to make changes to their care through tailored feedback. METHODS: Diagnosed hypertensivepatients were enrolled in this RCT and randomized to one of two study groups: (1) the intervention condition--Web-based hypertension feedback, based on the individual patient's self-report of health variables and previous BP measurements, to prompt them to ask questions during their next physician's visit about hypertension care (2) the control condition--Web-based preventive health feedback, based on the individual's self-report of receiving preventive care (e.g., pap testing), to prompt them to ask questions during their next physician's visit about preventive care. The primary outcome of the study is change in blood pressure and change in the percentage of patients in each group with controlled blood pressure. CONCLUSION: Five hundred participants were enrolled and baseline characteristics include a mean age of 60.0 years; 57.6% female; and 77.6% white. Overall 37.7% participants had uncontrolled blood pressure; the mean body mass index (BMI) was in the obese range (32.4) and 21.8% had diabetes. By activating patients to become involved in their own care, we believe the addition of the web-based intervention will improve blood pressure control compared to a control group who receive web-based preventive messages unrelated to hypertension.
Authors: Elizabeth A McGlynn; Steven M Asch; John Adams; Joan Keesey; Jennifer Hicks; Alison DeCristofaro; Eve A Kerr Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2003-06-26 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Erin G Stone; Sally C Morton; Marlies E Hulscher; Margaret A Maglione; Elizabeth A Roth; Jeremy M Grimshaw; Brian S Mittman; Lisa V Rubenstein; Laurence Z Rubenstein; Paul G Shekelle Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2002-05-07 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Santosh Krishna; Benjamin D Francisco; E Andrew Balas; Peter König; Gavin R Graff; Richard W Madsen Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2003-03 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: William M Tierney; J Marc Overhage; Michael D Murray; Lisa E Harris; Xiao-Hua Zhou; George J Eckert; Faye E Smith; Nancy Nienaber; Clement J McDonald; Fredric D Wolinsky Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2003-12 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Aram V Chobanian; George L Bakris; Henry R Black; William C Cushman; Lee A Green; Joseph L Izzo; Daniel W Jones; Barry J Materson; Suzanne Oparil; Jackson T Wright; Edward J Roccella Journal: Hypertension Date: 2003-12-01 Impact factor: 10.190
Authors: Miriam E Nelson; Jennifer E Layne; Melissa J Bernstein; Andrea Nuernberger; Carmen Castaneda; David Kaliton; Jeffrey Hausdorff; James O Judge; David M Buchner; Ronenn Roubenoff; Maria A Fiatarone Singh Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2004-02 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Michael D Murray; Lisa E Harris; J Marc Overhage; Xiao-Hua Zhou; George J Eckert; Faye E Smith; Nancy Nienaber Buchanan; Fredric D Wolinsky; Clement J McDonald; William M Tierney Journal: Pharmacotherapy Date: 2004-03 Impact factor: 4.705
Authors: Jeffrey Thiboutot; Christopher N Sciamanna; Bonita Falkner; Donna K Kephart; Heather L Stuckey; Alan M Adelman; William J Curry; Erik B Lehman Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2013-09-04 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Edward Zimbudzi; Clement Lo; Sanjeeva Ranasinha; Gregory R Fulcher; Stephen Jan; Peter G Kerr; Kevan R Polkinghorne; Grant Russell; Rowan G Walker; Sophia Zoungas Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2017-10-22 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Andrew C Pool; Jennifer L Kraschnewski; Jennifer M Poger; Joshua Smyth; Heather L Stuckey; Timothy J Craig; Erik B Lehman; Chengwu Yang; Christopher N Sciamanna Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-02-03 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Ke Gong; Yu-Ling Yan; Yu Li; Jun Du; Jing Wang; Yue Han; Ya Zou; Xin-Yu Zou; Hong Huang; Qiang She Journal: Medicine (Baltimore) Date: 2020-04 Impact factor: 1.817