Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41881536›Full record

Trial reportBMJ open2026

Community health worker-facilitated home visits for hypertension management in urban Nepal: a mixed-methods process evaluation.

Sanju Bhattarai, Lisasha Poudel, Bente Prytz Mjølstad, Bjørn Olav Åsvold, Eva Skovlund, Archana Shrestha, Abhijit Sen

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMJ open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05292469 (A Cluster Randomized Trial to Evaluate Comprehensive Approach to Hypertension Management in Nepal), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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.

NCT05292469 nacompletednot on this map

A Cluster Randomized Trial to Evaluate Comprehensive Approach to Hypertension Management in Nepal

TypeinterventionalSponsorNorwegian University of Science and TechnologyRan2022 to 2023Enrolled1,252ConditionsHypertensionArmsComprehensive approach to hypertension management
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

7 authors.

Sanju BhattaraiDepartment of Public Health and Nursing, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway sanju.bhattarai@ntnu.no.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4246-9117
Lisasha PoudelInstitute for Implementation Science and Health, Kathmandu, Nepal.
Bente Prytz MjølstadDepartment of Public Health and Nursing, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.
Bjørn Olav ÅsvoldDepartment of Public Health and Nursing, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.
Eva SkovlundDepartment of Public Health and Nursing, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.
Archana ShresthaDepartment of Public Health, Kathmandu University School of Medical Sciences, Dhulikhel, Nepal.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4741-090X
Abhijit SenDepartment of Public Health and Nursing, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9560-4226

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesHypertension remains poorly controlled globally, highlighting the need for scalable community-based strategies. Although community health worker (CHW)-facilitated interventions show promise, implementation evidence from low- and middle-income countries remains limited. This study assessed the implementation processes, mechanisms of impact and contextual factors influencing a CHW-facilitated home visit intervention for hypertension management.

designMixed-methods process evaluation nested within a randomised cluster trial.

settingAn urban municipality in Nepal.

participantsIndividuals with hypertension were surveyed at baseline (n=1252) and follow-up (n=1098). CHWs completed routine monitoring forms and home visits were observed (n=47). In-depth interviews were conducted with individuals with hypertension (n=20), spouses (n=7), adult children (n=13), CHWs (n=8) and public primary healthcare providers (n=5).

resultsOverall, 86% of participants completed all six planned home visits. Visits were generally delivered with fidelity, with minor adaptations to fit participant and family contexts. Participants reported high satisfaction and perceived benefits, including improved knowledge, family support and uptake of self-blood pressure monitoring. However, developed behavioural action plans often lacked specificity, limiting progress follow-up and accountability. Weak public primary care capacity, medication stockouts and preference for higher-level or private facilities constrained care linkage.

conclusionCHW-facilitated home visits addressed key individual and family-level barriers to hypertension management, but impact was limited by uneven behaviour uptake and constrained public primary healthcare capacity for medication supply and titration. Strengthened CHW training and mentorship are needed to support effective behaviour change. Integration of community interventions with functional primary care systems is essential for sustained hypertension control in low-resource urban settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05292469; date of registration: 22 March 2022; URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05292469?cntry=NP&draw=2&rank=6.

Indexed as

Community Health WorkersHouse CallsHypertensionAdultAntihypertensive AgentsBlood Pressure Monitoring, AmbulatoryFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNepalUrban PopulationAntihypertensive AgentsBlood PressureHypertensionRandomized Controlled Trial

Identifiers

PMID41881536
PMCPMC13034353

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.