BACKGROUND: Only one half of Americans have their blood pressure controlled, and there are significant racial differences in blood pressure control. The goal of this study was to examine the effectiveness of 2 patient-directed interventions designed to improve blood pressure control within white and non-white subgroups (African Americans, 49%). METHODS: Post hoc analysis of a 2 by 2 randomized trial with 2-year follow-up in 2 university-affiliated primary care clinics was performed. Within white and non-white patients (n=634), 4 groups were examined: 1) usual care; 2) home blood pressure monitoring (3 times per week); 3) tailored behavioral self-management intervention administered via telephone by a nurse every other month; and 4) a combination of the 2 interventions. RESULTS: The overall race by time by treatment group effect suggested differential intervention effects on blood pressure over time for whites and non-whites (systolic blood pressure, P=. 08; diastolic blood pressure, P=.01). Estimated trajectories indicated that among the 308 whites, there was no significant effect on blood pressure at 12 or 24 months for any intervention compared with the control group. At 12 months, the non-whites (n=328) in all 3 intervention groups had systolic blood pressure decreases of 5.3 to 5.7 mm Hg compared with usual care (P <.05). At 24 months, in the combined intervention, non-whites had sustained lower systolic blood pressure compared with usual care (7.5 mm Hg; P <.02). A similar pattern was observed for diastolic blood pressure. CONCLUSION: Combined home blood pressure monitoring and a tailored behavioral phone intervention seem to be particularly effective for improving blood pressure in non-white patients.
BACKGROUND: Only one half of Americans have their blood pressure controlled, and there are significant racial differences in blood pressure control. The goal of this study was to examine the effectiveness of 2 patient-directed interventions designed to improve blood pressure control within white and non-white subgroups (African Americans, 49%). METHODS: Post hoc analysis of a 2 by 2 randomized trial with 2-year follow-up in 2 university-affiliated primary care clinics was performed. Within white and non-white patients (n=634), 4 groups were examined: 1) usual care; 2) home blood pressure monitoring (3 times per week); 3) tailored behavioral self-management intervention administered via telephone by a nurse every other month; and 4) a combination of the 2 interventions. RESULTS: The overall race by time by treatment group effect suggested differential intervention effects on blood pressure over time for whites and non-whites (systolic blood pressure, P=. 08; diastolic blood pressure, P=.01). Estimated trajectories indicated that among the 308 whites, there was no significant effect on blood pressure at 12 or 24 months for any intervention compared with the control group. At 12 months, the non-whites (n=328) in all 3 intervention groups had systolic blood pressure decreases of 5.3 to 5.7 mm Hg compared with usual care (P <.05). At 24 months, in the combined intervention, non-whites had sustained lower systolic blood pressure compared with usual care (7.5 mm Hg; P <.02). A similar pattern was observed for diastolic blood pressure. CONCLUSION: Combined home blood pressure monitoring and a tailored behavioral phone intervention seem to be particularly effective for improving blood pressure in non-white patients.
Authors: Darren A Dewalt; Nancy D Berkman; Stacey Sheridan; Kathleen N Lohr; Michael P Pignone Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2004-12 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: H B Bosworth; L A Bastian; M N Kuchibhatla; D C Steffens; C M McBride; C S Skinner; B K Rimer; I C Siegler Journal: Psychosom Med Date: 2001 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 4.312
Authors: Judith E Neter; Bianca E Stam; Frans J Kok; Diederick E Grobbee; Johanna M Geleijnse Journal: Hypertension Date: 2003-09-15 Impact factor: 10.190
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: JAMA Date: 2003-05-14 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Aisha James; Seth A Berkowitz; Jeffrey M Ashburner; Yuchiao Chang; Daniel M Horn; Sandra M O'Keefe; Steven J Atlas Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2018-01-08 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Heather M Johnson; Lisa Sullivan-Vedder; KyungMann Kim; Patrick E McBride; Maureen A Smith; Jamie N LaMantia; Jennifer T Fink; Megan R Knutson Sinaise; Laura M Zeller; Diane R Lauver Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2019-01-21 Impact factor: 2.226
Authors: Maxwell D Anderegg; Tyler H Gums; Liz Uribe; Christopher S Coffey; Paul A James; Barry L Carter Journal: Hypertension Date: 2016-09-06 Impact factor: 10.190
Authors: Ruth S Shim; Peter Baltrus; L DiAnne Bradford; Kisha B Holden; Edith Fresh; Lonnie E Fuller Journal: J Natl Med Assoc Date: 2013 Impact factor: 1.798
Authors: Barry L Carter; Christopher S Coffey; Gail Ardery; Liz Uribe; Dixie Ecklund; Paul James; Brent Egan; Mark Vander Weg; Elizabeth Chrischilles; Thomas Vaughn Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes Date: 2015-03-24
Authors: Tanvir Hussain; Whitney Franz; Emily Brown; Athena Kan; Mekam Okoye; Katherine Dietz; Kara Taylor; Kathryn A Carson; Jennifer Halbert; Arlene Dalcin; Cheryl A M Anderson; Romsai T Boonyasai; Michael Albert; Jill A Marsteller; Lisa A Cooper Journal: Ethn Dis Date: 2016-07-21 Impact factor: 1.847
Authors: George L Jackson; Eugene Z Oddone; Maren K Olsen; Benjamin J Powers; Janet M Grubber; Felicia McCant; Hayden B Bosworth Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2012-08-03 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Crystal W Cené; Jacqueline R Halladay; Ziya Gizlice; Katrina E Donahue; Doyle M Cummings; Alan Hinderliter; Cassandra Miller; Larry F Johnson; Beverly Garcia; Jim Tillman; Edwin P Little; Marjorie R Rachide; Thomas C Keyserling; Alice Ammerman; Haibo Zhou; Jia-Rong Wu; Darren DeWalt Journal: J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich) Date: 2016-11-25 Impact factor: 3.738