Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21649843›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.)2011

Sustained blood pressure control following discontinuation of a pharmacist intervention.

Danielle M Wentzlaff, Barry L Carter, Gail Ardery, Carrie L Franciscus, William R Doucette, Elizabeth A Chrischilles, Kurt A Rosenkrans, Lucinda M Buys

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.), 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Danielle M WentzlaffDepartment of Pharmacy Practice and Science, College of Pharmacy, Roy J. and Lucille A. Carver College of Medicine, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA.
Barry L Carter
Gail Ardery
Carrie L Franciscus
William R Doucette
Elizabeth A Chrischilles
Kurt A Rosenkrans
Lucinda M Buys

Funding

University of Iowa Older Adults CERTU18HS016094 · AHRQ · UNIVERSITY OF IOWA · PI CHRISCHILLES, ELIZABETH A · 2006 to 2010
$4.0M
Improving Adherence to Blood Pressure GuidelinesR01HL070740 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF IOWA · PI CARTER, BARRY L · 2003 to 2007
$3.2M
Collaborative Management of HypertensionR01HL069801 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF IOWA · PI CARTER, BARRY L · 2003 to 2005
$2.0M
AHRQ HHS 5U18HS016094AHRQ HHS U18 HS016094NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL069801NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL070740NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL69801
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Team-based care can improve hypertension control. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate blood pressure (BP) control 18 months following the discontinuation of a physician-pharmacist collaborative intervention. This was a retrospective analysis of patients who had previously participated in a prospective, cluster randomized, controlled clinical trial. Six community-based family medicine offices were randomized to control or intervention groups. Research nurses measured BPs using an automated device during the prospective trial. The research nurses then abstracted data from medical records, including BPs, medications, changes in therapy, and laboratory values for 18 months following the discontinuation of the 6-month prospective trial. The study included 228 patients in the control (n = 146) or intervention (n = 82) groups. The control group contained more patients with diabetes or chronic kidney disease (P < .013), were older (P = .047), and had more coexisting conditions (P < .001) than the intervention group. Systolic BP 9 months following discontinuation of the physician-pharmacist intervention was 137.2 ± 18.2 mm Hg and 129.8 ± 13.3 mm Hg in the control and intervention groups, respectively (P = .0015). BP control was maintained in 61 (41.8%) control patients and 55 (67.1%) intervention patients (P = .0003). At 18 months post-intervention, systolic BP was 138.1 ± 20.4 mm Hg and 130.0 ± 16.0 mm Hg in the control and intervention groups, respectively (P = .023). BP control was maintained in 53 (36.3%) control patients and 55 (67.1%) intervention patients at 18 months post-intervention (P < .0001). A sensitivity analysis was conducted to address the uneven distribution of patients with diabetes or chronic kidney disease, and the differences between groups were still significant. BP control rates remained significantly higher following a physician-pharmacist intervention compared with usual care for 18 months after discontinuation of the intervention. This model has the potential value as a useful long-term strategy to benefit patients with hypertension.

Indexed as

Health Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticePatient Education as TopicPharmacistsPractice Patterns, Physicians'Antihypertensive AgentsBlood PressureCooperative BehaviorFemaleGuideline AdherenceHumansHypertensionMaleMedication AdherenceMiddle AgedMultivariate AnalysisPatient Care TeamAntihypertensive Agents

Identifiers

PMID21649843
PMCPMC4126237

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.