Literature DB >> 25228778

Personalised physician learning intervention to improve hypertension and lipid control: randomised trial comparing two methods of physician profiling.

Patrick J O'Connor1, David J Magid2, JoAnn M Sperl-Hillen1, David W Price2, Stephen E Asche3, William A Rush3, Heidi L Ekstrom3, David W Brand2, Heather M Tavel2, Olga V Godlevsky3, Paul E Johnson4, Karen L Margolis1.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To assess the impact of personalised physician learning (PPL) interventions using simulated learning cases on control of hypertension and dyslipidaemia in primary care settings.
METHODS: A total of 132 primary care physicians, 4568 eligible patients with uncontrolled hypertension, and 15 392 eligible patients with uncontrolled dyslipidaemia were cluster-randomised to one of three conditions: (a) no intervention, (b) PPL-electronic medical record (EMR) intervention in which 12 PPL cases were assigned to each physician based on observed patterns of care in the EMR in the previous year, or (c) PPL-ASSESS intervention in which 12 PPL cases were assigned to each physician based on their performance on four standardised assessment cases. General and generalised linear mixed models were used to account for clustering and to model differences in patient outcomes in the study arms.
RESULTS: Among patients with uncontrolled hypertension at baseline, 49.1%, 46.6% and 47.3% (p=0.43) achieved blood pressure (BP) targets at follow-up. Among patients with uncontrolled dyslipidaemia at baseline, 37.5%, 37.3% and 38.1% (p=0.72) achieved low density lipoprotein cholesterol targets at follow-up in PPL-EMR, PPL-ASSESS and the control group, respectively. Although systolic (BP) (p<0.001) and lipid (p<0.001) values significantly improved during the study, the group-by-time interaction term showed no differential change in systolic BP values (p=0.51) or lipid values (p=0.61) among the three study arms. No difference in intervention effect was noted when comparing the PPL-EMR with the PPL-ASSESS intervention (p=0.47).
CONCLUSIONS: The two PPL interventions tested in this study did not lead to improved control of hypertension or dyslipidaemia in primary care clinics during a mean 14-month follow-up period. This null result may have been due in part to substantial overall improvement in BP and lipid control at the study sites during the study. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT00903071. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Chronic disease management; Decision support, computerized; Healthcare quality improvement

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25228778      PMCID: PMC4557778          DOI: 10.1136/bmjqs-2014-002807

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BMJ Qual Saf        ISSN: 2044-5415            Impact factor:   7.035


  21 in total

1.  Measuring blood pressure accurately: new and persistent challenges.

Authors:  Daniel W Jones; Lawrence J Appel; Sheldon G Sheps; Edward J Roccella; Claude Lenfant
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2003-02-26       Impact factor: 56.272

2.  Third Report of the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) Expert Panel on Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol in Adults (Adult Treatment Panel III) final report.

Authors: 
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2002-12-17       Impact factor: 29.690

3.  Overcome clinical inertia to control systolic blood pressure.

Authors:  Patrick J O'Connor
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  2003 Dec 8-22

4.  Impact of poorly controlled hypertension on healthcare resource utilization and cost.

Authors:  L C Paramore; M T Halpern; P Lapuerta; J S Hurley; F J Frost; D G Fairchild; D Bates
Journal:  Am J Manag Care       Date:  2001-04       Impact factor: 2.229

5.  Blood pressure trajectories and associations with treatment intensification, medication adherence, and outcomes among newly diagnosed coronary artery disease patients.

Authors:  Thomas M Maddox; Colleen Ross; Heather M Tavel; Ella E Lyons; Maggie Tillquist; P Michael Ho; John S Rumsfeld; Karen L Margolis; Patrick J O'Connor; Joe V Selby; David J Magid
Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes       Date:  2010-05-20

6.  Initial cognitive performance predicts longitudinal aviator performance.

Authors:  Jerome A Yesavage; Booil Jo; Maheen M Adamson; Quinn Kennedy; Art Noda; Beatriz Hernandez; Jamie M Zeitzer; Leah F Friedman; Kaci Fairchild; Blake K Scanlon; Greer M Murphy; Joy L Taylor
Journal:  J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci       Date:  2011-05-17       Impact factor: 4.077

7.  Age-dependent gender differences in hypertension management.

Authors:  Stacie L Daugherty; Frederick A Masoudi; Jennifer L Ellis; P Michael Ho; Julie A Schmittdiel; Heather M Tavel; Joe V Selby; Patrick J O'Connor; Karen L Margolis; David J Magid
Journal:  J Hypertens       Date:  2011-05       Impact factor: 4.844

8.  Understanding variation in chronic disease outcomes.

Authors:  Paul E Johnson; Peter J Veazie; Laura Kochevar; Patrick J O'Connor; Sandra J Potthoff; Devesh Verma; Pradyumna Dutta
Journal:  Health Care Manag Sci       Date:  2002-08

9.  Simulated physician learning program improves glucose control in adults with diabetes.

Authors:  JoAnn M Sperl-Hillen; Patrick J O'Connor; William A Rush; Paul E Johnson; Todd Gilmer; George Biltz; Stephen E Asche; Heidi L Ekstrom
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2010-08       Impact factor: 19.112

10.  Benefits of early hypertension control on cardiovascular outcomes in patients with diabetes.

Authors:  Patrick J O'Connor; Gabriela Vazquez-Benitez; Julie A Schmittdiel; Emily D Parker; Nicole K Trower; Jay R Desai; Karen L Margolis; David J Magid
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2012-09-10       Impact factor: 19.112

View more
  5 in total

Review 1.  Comparison of study samples recruited with virtual versus traditional recruitment methods.

Authors:  Heidi Moseson; Shefali Kumar; Jessie L Juusola
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials Commun       Date:  2020-06-17

2.  The effect of computerized decision support systems on cardiovascular risk factors: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  T Katrien J Groenhof; Folkert W Asselbergs; Rolf H H Groenwold; Diederick E Grobbee; Frank L J Visseren; Michiel L Bots
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2019-06-10       Impact factor: 2.796

3.  A primary healthcare information intervention for communicating cardiovascular risk to patients with poorly controlled hypertension: The Education and Coronary Risk Evaluation (Educore) study-A pragmatic, cluster-randomized trial.

Authors:  Esperanza Escortell-Mayor; Isabel Del Cura-González; Elena Ojeda-Ruiz; Teresa Sanz-Cuesta; Isidro Rodríguez-Salceda; Jesús García-Soltero; María-José Rojas-Giraldo; Pedro Herrera-Municio; Alicia Jorge-Formariz; Ángela Lorenzo-Lobato; Luisa Cabello-Ballesteros; Rosario Riesgo-Fuertes; Sofía Garrido-Elustondo; Mariel Morey-Montalvo; Milagros Rico-Blázquez; Ricardo Rodríguez-Barrientos; María-Dolores Fuente-Arriaran; Gloria Sierra-Ocaña; Encarnación Serrano-Serrano; Carmelina Sanz-Velasco; Roberto Carrascoso-Calvo; Juan Carlos Recio-Velasco; Marta Sanz-Sanz; Mercedes Rumayor-Zarzuelo; Olga-Inés Bermejo-Mayoral; Josefina Galán-Esteban; Antonio Sarría-Santamera
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-01-23       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Provider- and Patient-Related Barriers to and Facilitators of Digital Health Technology Adoption for Hypertension Management: Scoping Review.

Authors:  Ramya Sita Palacholla; Nils Fischer; Amanda Coleman; Stephen Agboola; Katherine Kirley; Jennifer Felsted; Chelsea Katz; Stacy Lloyd; Kamal Jethwani
Journal:  JMIR Cardio       Date:  2019-03-26

Review 5.  Digital Health Interventions to Enhance Prevention in Primary Care: Scoping Review.

Authors:  Van C Willis; Kelly Jean Thomas Craig; Yalda Jabbarpour; Elisabeth L Scheufele; Yull E Arriaga; Monica Ajinkya; Kyu B Rhee; Andrew Bazemore
Journal:  JMIR Med Inform       Date:  2022-01-21
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.