Heart Disease and Stroke Prevention: Team-Based Care to Improve Blood Pressure Control 2012 archived review

The CPSTF finding is based on evidence from a systematic review published in 2006 (Walsh et al., 28 studies, search period January 1980-July 2003) combined with more recent evidence (52 studies, search period July 2003-May 2012).

The review was conducted on behalf of the CPSTF by a team of specialists in systematic review methods, and in research, practice, and policy related to cardiovascular disease prevention and control.

• Team members who most often worked with patients and primary care providers were pharmacists and nurses.
• Medication management roles for team members were implemented in three different ways. Team members could
  • Change medications independent of the primary care provider
  • Change medications with primary care provider approval or consultation
  • Provide only adherence support and hypertension-related information, with no direct influence on prescribed medications

More details about study results are available in the CPSTF Finding and Rationale Statement.

Previous Review Walsh et al. (search period January 1980- July 2003)

The systematic review included 28 studies.

• Overall, there was an increase in the proportion of patients with controlled blood pressure (less than or equal to 140/90 mmHg).
  • Controlled systolic blood pressure: median increase of 21.8 percentage points (9 studies)
  • Controlled diastolic blood pressure: median increase of 17.0 percentage points (6 studies)
• Systolic blood pressure decreased by a median of 9.7 mmHg (17 studies).
• Diastolic blood pressure decreased by 4.2 mmHg (21 studies).

Community Guide Review (search period July 2003- May 2012)

The systematic review included 52 studies.

• The proportion of patients with controlled blood pressure (less than or equal to 140/90 mmHg) increased by a median of 12.0 percentage points (33 studies).
• Systolic blood pressure decreased by a median of 5.4 mmHg (44 studies).
• Diastolic blood pressure decreased by 1.8 mmHg (38 studies).
• In addition to improvements in blood pressure outcomes, team-based care was effective in improving other cardiovascular disease risk factors, including
  • Diabetes (HbA1c and blood glucose levels)
  • Cholesterol (total and LDL cholesterol)
• When teams included pharmacists, the median improvement in the proportion of patients with controlled blood pressure was considerably higher than the median increase reported overall.
• The effectiveness of team-based care was greater when team members could change hypertensive medications independent of the primary care provider, or with primary care provider approval or consultation.

More details about study results are available in the CPSTF Finding and Rationale Statement.

The economic review included 31 studies (search period January 1980 May 2012). Studies provided cost-effectiveness estimates (11 studies) or estimates for the cost of intervention and change in health care cost (20 studies). All monetary values reported are in 2010 U.S. dollars.

• The median intervention cost per patient per year was $284 (29 estimates from 20 studies).
  • Intervention cost was the cost of labor and resources needed to complement the activities of primary care providers. This typically included process support and shared responsibility for hypertension care.
• Compared to usual care, the median health care cost per patient per year was $65 higher for team-based care (23 estimates from 20 studies).
  • Health care costs included outpatient visits, emergency department visits, hospital stays, and medications.
• Cost effectiveness is intervention cost per quality adjusted life year (QALY) saved.
  • One study directly estimated intervention cost per QALY saved to be $4763.
  • The economic review team translated estimates from 10 additional studies to cost per QALY saved.
    • Median intervention cost per QALY saved was $13,992 based on a formula from Mason et al. (2005).
    • Median intervention cost per QALY saved was $9716 based on a formula from McEwan et al. (2006).

Of the 29 cost-effectiveness estimates (from 11 studies), 27 were below the conservative threshold of $50,000 per QALY saved, which indicates that team-based care for blood pressure control is cost-effective.

Based on the settings and populations from studies included in the Community Guide review, the CPSTF finding should be applicable to the following:

• Adults and older adults
• Women and men
• White and African-American populations
• Health care and community-based settings

CPSTF identified several areas that have limited information. Additional research and evaluation could help answer the following questions and fill remaining gaps in the evidence base. (What are evidence gaps?)

• Only a few of the included studies used large sample sizes. What is the effectiveness of team-based care when used for large populations?
• How effective are team-based care interventions among patients from low socioeconomic status (SES) groups and racial and ethnic groups other than Whites and African-Americans?
• How does effectiveness vary by patients’ race, ethnicity, income, education level, or insurance status?
• Most of the included studies evaluated teams with primary care providers, nurses and pharmacists; very few included other providers, such as community health workers or dietitians. How does intervention effectiveness vary by the type of professional included on a team?
• How do communication channels used within teams (e.g., face-to-face, telephone, e-mail, text message) and communication frequency between patients and providers (e.g., weekly, monthly) effect outcomes?
• What is the role of technology in facilitating team-based care?
• What are patient-centered outcomes associated with team-based care, such as satisfaction with care and adherence to healthy behaviors (e.g. increased physical activity)?
• How sustainable are the benefits from team-based care over time?
• How are reimbursement mechanisms, including incentives, used to support team-based care? How do these mechanisms effect outcomes?
• What are the primary components and drivers of intervention cost and economic benefits of team-based care?
• What are the economic benefits and costs of intervention?
• What are intervention effects on worker productivity?
• There is no standard translation of QALY saved from reduction in blood pressure at the population level. How can a translation be developed as an approximation to long term benefits that are impractical and expensive to measure in research studies?

• Thirty-eight studies were conducted in the United States; remaining studies were from Europe, Canada, and Japan.
• Studies were implemented solely within healthcare settings (41 studies), in community settings (9 studies), or in both a healthcare system and community setting (1 study).
• Team members who collaborated with patients and primary care providers were predominantly pharmacists (15 interventions), nurses (28 interventions), or both (5 interventions).
• The median duration of team-based care interventions was 12 months. Only six studies addressed team-based care interventions delivered to more than 500 patients.
• Study populations included adults and older adults and were balanced across sexes. For most studies, the majority of patients were either white or African American.
• Eight studies focused predominantly on populations where more than 50% of participants identified as low-income. In studies providing information on education level, the majority of participants identified as having a high school education or less.
• Limitations identified in the included studies showed significant differences in patient demographics between intervention and comparison groups at baseline, possible contamination within intervention and comparison groups, and issues related to inadequate description of populations and implemented interventions.

Effectiveness Review

Analytic Framework

When starting an effectiveness review, the systematic review team develops an analytic framework. The analytic framework illustrates how the intervention approach is thought to affect public health. It guides the search for evidence and may be used to summarize the evidence collected. The analytic framework often includes intermediate outcomes, potential effect modifiers, potential harms, and potential additional benefits.

Effectiveness Review

Summary Evidence Table Effectiveness Review

Economic Review

Summary Evidence Table Economic Review

The Community Preventive Services Task Force recommendation on team-based care to improve blood pressure control is based on evidence from two systematic reviews.

• 52 studies published between 2003-2012 (Community Guide review of updated evidence)
• 28 studies published between 1980-2003 (Walsh J, McDonald K, Shojania K, et al. Quality improvement strategies for hypertension management: a systematic review. Medical Care 2006;44:646-57.)

The number of studies and publications do not always correspond (e.g., a publication may include several studies or one study may be explained in several publications).

Effectiveness Review

Studies from The Community Guide Updated Review (52 studies, search period 2003-2012)

Allen JK, Dennison-Himmelfarb CR, Szanton SL, Bone L, Hill MN, Levine DM, et al. Community Outreach and Cardiovascular Health (COACH) Trial: a randomized, controlled trial of nurse practitioner/community health worker cardiovascular disease risk reduction in urban community health centers. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes 2011;4(6):595-602.

Artinian NT, Flack JM, Nordstrom CK, Hockman EM, Washington OG, Jen KL, et al. Effects of nurse-managed telemonitoring on blood pressure at 12-month follow-up among urban African Americans. Nurs Res 2007;56(5):312-22.

Becker DM, Yanek LR, Johnson WR, Jr., Garrett D, Moy TF, Reynolds SS, et al. Impact of a community-based multiple risk factor intervention on cardiovascular risk in black families with a history of premature coronary disease. Circulation 2005;111(10):1298-304.

Bogner HR, de Vries HF. Integration of depression and hypertension treatment: a pilot, randomized controlled trial. Ann Fam Med 2008;6(4):295-301.

Bosworth HB, Olsen MK, Dudley T, Orr M, Goldstein MK, Datta SK, et al. Patient education and provider decision support to control blood pressure in primary care: a cluster randomized trial. Am Heart J 2009;157(3):450-6.

Bosworth HB, Olsen MK, Grubber JM, Neary AM, Orr MM, Powers BJ, et al. Two self-management interventions to improve hypertension control: a randomized trial. Ann Intern Med 2009;151(10):687-95.

Bosworth HB, Powers BJ, Olsen MK, McCant F, Grubber J, Smith V, et al. Home blood pressure management and improved blood pressure control: results from a randomized controlled trial. Arch Intern Med 2011;171(13):1173-80.

Brennan T, Spettell C, Villagra V, Ofili E, McMahill-Walraven C, Lowy EJ, et al. Disease management to promote blood pressure control among African Americans. Popul Health Manag 2010;13(2):65-72.

Bunting BA, Smith BH, Sutherland SE. The Asheville Project: clinical and economic outcomes of a community-based long-term medication therapy management program for hypertension and dyslipidemia. J Am Pharm Assoc 2008;48(1):23-31.

Carter BL, Ardery G, Dawson JD, James PA, Bergus GR, Doucette WR, et al. Physician and pharmacist collaboration to improve blood pressure control. Arch Intern Med 2009;169(21):1996-2002.

Carter BL, Bergus GR, Dawson JD, Farris KB, Doucette WR, Chrischilles EA, et al. A cluster randomized trial to evaluate physician/pharmacist collaboration to improve blood pressure control. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich) 2008;10(4):260-71.

Chabot I, Moisan J, Gregoire JP, Milot A. Pharmacist intervention program for control of hypertension. Ann Pharmacother 2003;37(9):1186-93.

Chen EH, Thom DH, Hessler DM, Phengrasamy L, Hammer H, Saba G, et al. Using the Teamlet Model to improve chronic care in an academic primary care practice. J Gen Intern Med 2010;25 Suppl 4:S610-4.

Cohen LB, Taveira TH, Khatana SA, Dooley AG, Pirraglia PA, Wu WC. Pharmacist-led shared medical appointments for multiple cardiovascular risk reduction in patients with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Educ 2011;37(6):801-12.

Edelman D, Fredrickson SK, Melnyk SD, Coffman CJ, Jeffreys AS, Datta S, et al. Medical clinics versus usual care for patients with both diabetes and hypertension: a randomized trial. Ann Intern Med 2010;152(11):689-96.

El Fakiri F, Bruijnzeels MA, Uitewaal PJ, Frenken RA, Berg M, Hoes AW. Intensified preventive care to reduce cardiovascular risk in healthcare centres located in deprived neighbourhoods: a randomized controlled trial. Eur J Cardiovasc Prev Rehabil 2008;15(4):488-93.

Fiscella K, Volpe E, Winters P, Brown M, Idris A, Harren T. A novel approach to quality improvement in a safety-net practice: concurrent peer review visits. J Natl Med Assoc 2010;102(12):1231-6.

Green BB, Cook AJ, Ralston JD, Fishman PA, Catz SL, Carlson J, et al. Effectiveness of home blood pressure monitoring, Web communication, and pharmacist care on hypertension control: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2008;299(24):2857-67.

Haskell WL, Berra K, Arias E, Christopherson D, Clark A, George J, et al. Multifactor cardiovascular disease risk reduction in medically underserved, high-risk patients. Am J Cardiol 2006;98(11):1472-9.

Hennessy S, Leonard CE, Yang W, Kimmel SE, Townsend RR, Wasserstein AG, et al. Effectiveness of a two-part educational intervention to improve hypertension control: a cluster-randomized trial. Pharmacotherapy 2006;26(9):1342-7.

Hicks LS, Sequist TD, Ayanian JZ, Shaykevich S, Fairchild DG, Orav EJ, et al. Impact of computerized decision support on blood pressure management and control: a randomized controlled trial. J Gen Intern Med 2008;23(4):429-41.

Hill MN, Han HR, Dennison CR, Kim MT, Roary MC, Blumenthal RS, et al. Hypertension care and control in underserved urban African American men: behavioral and physiologic outcomes at 36 months. Am J Hypertens 2003;16(11 Pt 1):906-13.

Hunt JS, Siemienczuk J, Pape G, Rozenfeld Y, MacKay J, LeBlanc BH, et al. A randomized controlled trial of team-based care: impact of physician-pharmacist collaboration on uncontrolled hypertension. J Gen Intern Med 2008;23(12):1966-72.

Ishani A, Greer N, Taylor BC, Kubes L, Cole P, Atwood M, et al. Effect of nurse case management compared with usual care on controlling cardiovascular risk factors in patients with diabetes: a randomized controlled trial. Diabetes Care 2011;34(8):1689-94.

Johnson W, Shaya FT, Khanna N, Warrington VO, Rose VA, Yan X, et al. The Baltimore Partnership to Educate and Achieve Control of Hypertension (The BPTEACH Trial): a randomized trial of the effect of education on improving blood pressure control in a largely African American population. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich) 2011;13(8):563-70.

Katon WJ, Lin EH, Von Korff M, Ciechanowski P, Ludman EJ, Young B, et al. Collaborative care for patients with depression and chronic illnesses. N Engl J Med 2010;363(27):2611-20.

Lee JK, Grace KA, Taylor AJ. Effect of a pharmacy care program on medication adherence and persistence, blood pressure, and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2006;296(21):2563-71.

Levine DM, Bone LR, Hill MN, Stallings R, Gelber AC, Barker A, et al. The effectiveness of a community/academic health center partnership in decreasing the level of blood pressure in an urban African-American population. Ethn Dis 2003;13(3):354-61.

Litaker D, Mion L, Planavsky L, Kippes C, Mehta N, Frolkis J. Physician – nurse practitioner teams in chronic disease management: the impact on costs, clinical effectiveness, and patients’ perception of care. J Interprof Care 2003;17(3):223-37.

Ma J, Berra K, Haskell WL, Klieman L, Hyde S, Smith MW, et al. Case management to reduce risk of cardiovascular disease in a county health care system. Arch Intern Med 2009;169(21):1988-95.

Magid DJ, Ho PM, Olson KL, Brand DW, Welch LK, Snow KE, et al. A multimodal blood pressure control intervention in 3 healthcare systems. Am J Manag Care 2011;17(4):e96-103.

Marquez Contreras E, Vegazo Garcia O, Claros NM, Gil Guillen V, de la Figuera von Wichmann M, Casado Martinez JJ, et al. Efficacy of telephone and mail intervention in patient compliance with antihypertensive drugs in hypertension. ETECUM-HTA study.Blood Press 2005;14(3):151-8.

McLean DL, McAlister FA, Johnson JA, King KM, Makowsky MJ, Jones CA, et al. A randomized trial of the effect of community pharmacist and nurse care on improving blood pressure management in patients with diabetes mellitus: study of cardiovascular risk intervention by pharmacists-hypertension (SCRIP-HTN). Arch Intern Med 2008;168(21):2355-61.

Morgado M, Rolo S, Castelo-Branco M. Pharmacist intervention program to enhance hypertension control: a randomised controlled trial. Int J Clin Pharm 2011;33(1):132-40.

Murray MD, Harris LE, Overhage JM, Zhou XH, Eckert GJ, Smith FE, et al. Failure of computerized treatment suggestions to improve health outcomes of outpatients with uncomplicated hypertension: results of a randomized controlled trial. Pharmacotherapy 2004;24(3):324-37.

New JP, Mason JM, Freemantle N, Teasdale S, Wong L, Bruce NJ, et al. Educational outreach in diabetes to encourage practice nurses to use primary care hypertension and hyperlipidaemia guidelines (EDEN): a randomized controlled trial. Diabet Med 2004;21(6):599-603.

New JP, Mason JM, Freemantle N, Teasdale S, Wong LM, Bruce NJ, et al. Specialist nurse-led intervention to treat and control hypertension and hyperlipidemia in diabetes (SPLINT): a randomized controlled trial. Diabetes Care 2003;26(8):2250-5.

Ogedegbe G, Chaplin W, Schoenthaler A, Statman D, Berger D, Richardson T, et al. A practice-based trial of motivational interviewing and adherence in hypertensive African Americans. Am J Hypertens 2008;21(10):1137-43.

Pezzin LE, Feldman PH, Mongoven JM, McDonald MV, Gerber LM, Peng TR. Improving blood pressure control: results of home-based post-acute care interventions. J Gen Intern Med 2011;26(3):280-6.

Reid F, Murray P, Storrie M. Implementation of a pharmacist-led clinic for hypertensive patients in primary care–a pilot study. Pharm World Sci 2005;27(3):202-7.

Rinfret S, Lussier MT, Peirce A, Duhamel F, Cossette S, Lalonde L, et al. The impact of a multidisciplinary information technology-supported program on blood pressure control in primary care. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes 2009;2(3):170-7.

Rocco N, Scher K, Basberg B, Yalamanchi S, Baker-Genaw K. Patient-centered plan-of-care tool for improving clinical outcomes. Qual Manag Health Care 2011;20(2):89-97.

Rudd P, Miller NH, Kaufman J, Kraemer HC, Bandura A, Greenwald G, et al. Nurse management for hypertension. A systems approach. Am J Hypertens 2004;17(10):921-7.

Ruppar TM. Randomized pilot study of a behavioral feedback intervention to improve medication adherence in older adults with hypertension. J Cardiovasc Nurs 2010;25(6):470-9.

Simpson SH, Majumdar SR, Tsuyuki RT, Lewanczuk RZ, Spooner R, Johnson JA. Effect of adding pharmacists to primary care teams on blood pressure control in patients with type 2 diabetes: a randomized controlled trial. Diabetes Care 2011;34(1):20-6.

Svetkey LP, Pollak KI, Yancy WS, Jr., Dolor RJ, Batch BC, Samsa G, et al. Hypertension improvement project: randomized trial of quality improvement for physicians and lifestyle modification for patients. Hypertension 2009;54(6):1226-33.

Tobari H, Arimoto T, Shimojo N, Yuhara K, Noda H, Yamagishi K, et al. Physician-pharmacist cooperation program for blood pressure control in patients with hypertension: a randomized-controlled trial. Am J Hypertens 2010;23(10):1144-52.

Tobe SW, Pylypchuk G, Wentworth J, Kiss A, Szalai JP, Perkins N, et al. Effect of nurse-directed hypertension treatment among First Nations people with existing hypertension and diabetes mellitus: the Diabetes Risk Evaluation and Microalbuminuria (DREAM 3) randomized controlled trial. CMAJ 2006;174(9):1267-71.

Ulm K, Huntgeburth U, Gnahn H, Briesenick C, Purner K, Middeke M. Effect of an intensive nurse-managed medical care programme on ambulatory blood pressure in hypertensive patients. Arch Cardiovasc Dis 2010;103(3):142-9.

Wakefield BJ, Holman JE, Ray A, Scherubel M, Adams MR, Hillis SL, et al. Effectiveness of home telehealth in comorbid diabetes and hypertension: a randomized, controlled trial. Telemed J E Health 2011;17(4):254-61.

Wood DA, Kotseva K, Connolly S, Jennings C, Mead A, Jones J, et al. Nurse-coordinated multidisciplinary, family-based cardiovascular disease prevention programme (EUROACTION) for patients with coronary heart disease and asymptomatic individuals at high risk of cardiovascular disease: a paired, cluster-randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2008;371(9629):1999-2012.

Zillich AJ. Hypertension outcomes through blood pressure monitoring and evaluation by pharmacists (HOME study). J Gen Intern Med 2005;20(12):1091.

Additional References Linked to Included Studies from The Community Guide Updated Review (search period 2003-2012)

These additional references provide important supporting information to supplement the content available from the included studies listed above.

Bosworth HB, Olsen MK, Dudley T, Orr M, Neary A, Harrelson M, et al. The Take Control of Your Blood pressure (TCYB) study: study design and methodology. Contemp Clin Trials 2007;28(1):33-47.

Bosworth HB, Olsen MK, Gentry P, Orr M, Dudley T, McCant F, et al. Nurse administered telephone intervention for blood pressure control: a patient-tailored multifactorial intervention. Patient Educ Couns 2005;57(1):5-14.

Bosworth HB, Olsen MK, McCant F, Harrelson M, Gentry P, Rose C, et al. Hypertension Intervention Nurse Telemedicine Study (HINTS): testing a multifactorial tailored behavioral/educational and a medication management intervention for blood pressure control. Am Heart J 2007;153(6):918-24.

Cene CW, Yanek LR, Moy TF, Levine DM, Becker LC, Becker DM. Sustainability of a multiple risk factor intervention on cardiovascular disease in high-risk African American families. Ethn Dis 2008;18(2):169-75.

Datta SK, Oddone EZ, Olsen MK, Orr M, McCant F, Gentry P, et al. Economic analysis of a tailored behavioral intervention to improve blood pressure control for primary care patients. Am Heart J 2010;160(2):257-63.

Dennison CR, Post WS, Kim MT, Bone LR, Cohen D, Blumenthal RS, et al. Underserved urban African American men: hypertension trial outcomes and mortality during 5 years.Am J Hypertens 2007;20(2):164-71.

Dolor RJ, Yancy WS, Jr., Owen WF, Matchar DB, Samsa GP, Pollak KI, et al. Hypertension Improvement Project (HIP): study protocol and implementation challenges. Trials 2009;10:13.

Goessens BM, Visseren FL, Sol BG, de Man-van Ginkel JM, van der Graaf Y, Group SS. A randomized, controlled trial for risk factor reduction in patients with symptomatic vascular disease: the multidisciplinary Vascular Prevention by Nurses Study (VENUS).Eur J Cardiovasc Prev Rehabil 2006;13(6):996-1003.

Green BB, Anderson ML, Ralston JD, Catz S, Fishman PA, Cook AJ. Patient ability and willingness to participate in a web-based intervention to improve hypertension control. J Med Internet Res 2011;13(1):e1.

Green BB, Ralston JD, Fishman PA, Catz SL, Cook A, Carlson J, et al. Electronic communications and home blood pressure monitoring (e-BP) study: design, delivery, and evaluation framework. Contemp Clin Trials 2008;29(3):376-95.

Ma J, Lee KV, Berra K, Stafford RS. Implementation of case management to reduce cardiovascular disease risk in the Stanford and San Mateo Heart to Heart randomized controlled trial: study protocol and baseline characteristics. Implement Sci 2006;1:21.

McLean DL, McAlister FA, Johnson JA, King DM, Jones CA, Tsuyuki RT. Improving blood pressure management in patients with diabetes: the design of the SCRIP-HTN study.Can Pharm J 2006;139(4):36-39.

Ogedegbe G, Schoenthaler A, Richardson T, Lewis L, Belue R, Espinosa E, et al. An RCT of the effect of motivational interviewing on medication adherence in hypertensive African Americans: rationale and design. Contemp Clin Trials 2007;28(2):169-81.

Powers BJ, Olsen MK, Oddone EZ, Bosworth HB. The effect of a hypertension self-management intervention on diabetes and cholesterol control. Am J Med 2009;122(7):639-46.

Rozenfeld Y, Hunt JS. Effect of patient withdrawal on a study evaluating pharmacist management of hypertension. Pharmacotherapy 2006;26(11):1565-71.

Von Muenster SJ, Carter BL, Weber CA, Ernst ME, Milchak JL, Steffensmeier JJ, et al. Description of pharmacist interventions during physician-pharmacist co-management of hypertension. Pharm World Sci 2008;30(1):128-35.

Weber CA, Ernst ME, Sezate GS, Zheng S, Carter BL. Pharmacist-physician comanagement of hypertension and reduction in 24-hour ambulatory blood pressures.Arch Intern Med 2010;170(18):1634-9.

Wentzlaff DM, Carter BL, Ardery G, Franciscus CL, Doucette WR, Chrischilles EA, et al. Sustained blood pressure control following discontinuation of a pharmacist intervention. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich) 2011;13(6):431-7.

Studies from Walsh et al. (28 studies, search period 1980-2003)

Five-year findings of the hypertension detection and follow-up program. II. Mortality by race-sex and age. Hypertension Detection and Follow-up Program Cooperative Group. JAMA 1979;242(23):2572-7.

Mortality after 10 1/2 years for hypertensive participants in the Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial. Circulation 1990;82(5):1616-28.

Artinian NT, Washington OG, Templin TN. Effects of home telemonitoring and community-based monitoring on blood pressure control in urban African Americans: a pilot study. Heart Lung 2001;30(3):191-9.

Blenkinsopp A, Blenkinsopp. Extended adherence support by community pharmacists for patients with hypertension: a randomised controlled trial. Int J Pharma Pract 2011;8(3):165.

Bogden PE, Abbott RD, Williamson P, Onopa JK, Koontz LM. Comparing standard care with a physician and pharmacist team approach for uncontrolled hypertension. J Gen Intern Med 1998;13(11):740-5.

Borenstein JE, Graber G, Saltiel E, Wallace J, Ryu S, Archi J, et al. Physician-pharmacist comanagement of hypertension: a randomized, comparative trial. Pharmacotherapy 2003;23(2):209-16.

Campbell NC, Ritchie LD, Thain J, Deans HG, Rawles JM, Squair JL. Secondary prevention in coronary heart disease: a randomised trial of nurse led clinics in primary care. Heart 1998;80(5):447-52.

Carter BL, Barnette DJ, Chrischilles E, Mazzotti GJ, Asali ZJ. Evaluation of hypertensive patients after care provided by community pharmacists in a rural setting.Pharmacotherapy 1997;17(6):1274-85.

Curzio JL, Rubin PC, Kennedy SS, Reid JL. A comparison of the management of hypertensive patients by nurse practitioners compared with conventional hospital care. J Hum Hypertens 1990;4(6):665-70.

Earp JA, Ory MG, Strogatz DS. The effects of family involvement and practitioner home visits on the control of hypertension. Am J Public Health 1982;72(10):1146-54.

Erfurt JC, Foote A, Heirich MA. Worksite wellness programs: incremental comparison of screening and referral alone, health education, follow-up counseling, and plant organization. Am J Health Promot 1991;5(6):438-48.

Erickson SR, Slaughter R, Halapy H. Pharmacists’ ability to influence outcomes of hypertension therapy. Pharmacotherapy 1997;17(1):140-7.

Foote A, Erfurt JC. Hypertension control at the work site. Comparison of screening and referral alone, referral and follow-up, and on-site treatment. N Engl J Med 1983;308(14):809-13.

Garcao JA, Cabrita J. Evaluation of a pharmaceutical care program for hypertensive patients in rural Portugal. J Am Pharm Assoc (Wash) 2002;42(6):858-64.

Garcia-Pena C, Thorogood M, Armstrong B, Reyes-Frausto S, Munoz O. Pragmatic randomized trial of home visits by a nurse to elderly people with hypertension in Mexico. Int J Epidemiol 2001;30(6):1485-91.

Goldberg HI, Wagner EH, Fihn SD, Martin DP, Horowitz CR, Christensen DB, et al. A randomized controlled trial of CQI teams and academic detailing: can they alter compliance with guidelines? Jt Comm J Qual Improv 1998;24(3):130-42.

Hill MN, Bone LR, Hilton SC, Roary MC, Kelen GD, Levine DM. A clinical trial to improve high blood pressure care in young urban black men: recruitment, follow-up, and outcomes. Am J Hypertens 1999;12(6):548-54.

Hla KM, Feussner JR, Blessing-Feussner CL, Neelon FA, Linfors EW, Starmer CF, et al. BP control. Improvement in a university medical clinic by use of a physician’s associate.Arch Intern Med 1983;143(5):920-3.

Krishan I, Davis CS, Nobrega FT, Smoldt RK. The Mayo three-community hypertension control program. IV. Five-year outcomes of intervention in entire communities. Mayo Clin Proc 1981;56(1):3-10.

Logan AG, Milne BJ, Achber C, Campbell WP, Haynes RB. Cost-effectiveness of a worksite hypertension treatment program. Hypertension 1981;3(2):211-8.

Logan AG, Milne BJ, Flanagan PT, Haynes RB. Clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of monitoring blood pressure of hypertensive employees at work.Hypertension 1983;5(6):828-36.

McClellan WM, Craxton LC. Improved follow-up care of hypertensive patients by a nurse practitioner in a rural clinic. J Rural Health 1985;1(2):34-41.

McGhee SM, McInnes GT, Hedley AJ, Murray TS, Reid JL. Coordinating and standardizing long-term care: evaluation of the west of Scotland shared-care scheme for hypertension. Br J Gen Pract 1994;44(387):441-5.

Mehos BM, Saseen JJ, MacLaughlin EJ. Effect of pharmacist intervention and initiation of home blood pressure monitoring in patients with uncontrolled hypertension.Pharmacotherapy 2000;20(11):1384-9.

Park JJ, Kelly P, Carter BL, Burgess PP. Comprehensive pharmaceutical care in the chain setting. J Am Pharm Assoc (Wash) 1996;NS36(7):443-51.

Schneider PJ, Larrimer JN, Visconti JA, Miller WA. Role effectiveness of a pharmacist in the maintenance of patients with hypertension and congestive heart failure. Contemp Pharm Pract 1982;5(2):74-9.

Solomon DK, Portner TS, Bass GE, Gourley DR, Gourley GA, Holt JM, et al. Clinical and economic outcomes in the hypertension and COPD arms of a multicenter outcomes study. J Am Pharm Assoc (Wash) 1998;38(5):574-85.

Vivian EM. Improving blood pressure control in a pharmacist-managed hypertension clinic. Pharmacotherapy 2002;22(12):1533-40.

Economic Review (search period January 1980-May 2012)

Artinian NT, Washington OG, Templin TN. Effects of home telemonitoring and community-based monitoring on blood pressure control in urban African Americans: a pilot study. Heart Lung 2001;30(3):191-9.

Bertera EM, Bertera RL. The cost-effectiveness of telephone vs clinic counseling for hypertensive patients: a pilot study. Am J Public Health 1981;71(6):626-9.

Bogden PE, Abbott RD, Williamson P, Onopa JK, Koontz LM. Comparing standard care with a physician and pharmacist team approach for uncontrolled hypertension. J Gen Intern Med 1998;13(11):740-5.

Borenstein JE, Graber G, Saltiel E, et al. Physician-pharmacist comanagement of hypertension: a randomized, comparative trial. Pharmacotherapy 2003;23(2):209-16.

Bosworth HB, Olsen MK, Grubber JM, et al. Two self-management interventions to improve hypertension control: a randomized trial. Ann Intern Med 2009;151(10):687-95.

Bosworth HB, Powers BJ, Olsen MK, et al. Home blood pressure management and improved blood pressure control: results from a randomized controlled trial. Arch Intern Med 2011;171(13):1173-80.

Bunting BA, Smith BH, Sutherland SE. The Asheville Project: clinical and economic outcomes of a community-based long-term medication therapy management program for hypertension and dyslipidemia. J Am Pharm Assoc (2003) 2008;48(1):23-31.

Carter BL, Barnette DJ, Chrischilles E, Mazzotti GJ, Asali ZJ. Evaluation of hypertensive patients after care provided by community pharmacists in a rural setting. Pharmacotherapy 1997;17(6):1274-85.

Cote I, Gregoire JP, Moisan J, Chabot I, Lacroix G. A pharmacy-based health promotion programme in hypertension: cost-benefit analysis. Pharmaco Economics 2003;21(6):415-28.

Datta SK, Oddone EZ, Olsen MK, et al. Economic analysis of a tailored behavioral intervention to improve blood pressure control for primary care patients. Am Heart J 2010;160(2):257-63.

Devine EB, Hoang S, Fisk AW, Wilson-Norton JL, Lawless NM, Louie C. Strategies to optimize medication use in the physician group practice: the role of the clinical pharmacist. J Am Pharm Assoc (2003) 2009;49(2):181-91.

Eckerlund I, Jonsson E, Ryden L, Rastam L, Berglund G, Isacsson SO. Economic evaluation of a Swedish medical care program for hypertension. Health Policy 1985;5(4):299-306.

Edelman D, Fredrickson SK, Melnyk SD, et al. Medical clinics versus usual care for patients with both diabetes and hypertension: a randomized trial. Ann Intern Med 2010;152(11):689-96.

Fedder DO, Chang RJ, Curry S, Nichols G. For the patient. The effectiveness of a community health worker outreach program on healthcare utilization of west Baltimore City Medicaid patients with diabetes, with or without hypertension. Ethn Dis 2003;13(1):146.

Forstrom MJ, Ried LD, Stergachis AS, Corliss DA. Effect of a clinical pharmacist program on the cost of hypertension treatment in an HMO family practice clinic. DICP 1990;24(3):304-9.

Isetts BJ, Schondelmeyer SW, Artz MB, et al. Clinical and economic outcomes of medication therapy management services: the Minnesota experience. J Am Pharm Assoc (2003) 2008;48(2):203-11; 3 p following 11.

Katon WJ, Lin EH, Von Korff M, et al. Collaborative care for patients with depression and chronic illnesses. N Engl J Med 2010;363(27):2611-20.

Kulchaitanaroaj P, Brooks JM, Ardery G, Newman D, Carter BL. Incremental costs associated with physician and pharmacist collaboration to improve blood pressure control. Pharmacotherapy 2012;32(8):772-80.

Litaker D, Mion L, Planavsky L, Kippes C, Mehta N, Frolkis J. Physician – nurse practitioner teams in chronic disease management: the impact on costs, clinical effectiveness, and patients’ perception of care. J Interprof Care 2003;17(3):223-37.

Logan AG, Milne BJ, Achber C, Campbell WP, Haynes RB. Cost-effectiveness of a worksite hypertension treatment program. Hypertension 1981;3(2):211-8.

Logan AG, Milne BJ, Flanagan PT, Haynes RB. Clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of monitoring blood pressure of hypertensive employees at work.Hypertension 1983;5(6):828-36.

Lowey A, Moore S, Norris C, Wright D, Silcock J, Hammond P. The cost-effectiveness of pharmacist-led treatment of cardiac risk in patients with type 2 diabetes. Pharm World Sci 2007;29(5):541-5.

Ma J, Berra K, Haskell WL, et al. Case management to reduce risk of cardiovascular disease in a county health care system. Arch Intern Med 2009;169(21):1988-95.

Mason JM, Freemantle N, Gibson JM, New JP. Specialist nurse-led clinics to improve control of hypertension and hyperlipidemia in diabetes: economic analysis of the SPLINT trial. Diabetes Care 2005;28(1):40-6.

McGhee SM, McInnes GT, Hedley AJ, Murray TS, Reid JL. Coordinating and standardizing long-term care: evaluation of the west of Scotland shared-care scheme for hypertension. Br J Gen Pract 1994;44(387):441-5.

Munroe WP, Kunz K, Dalmady-Israel C, Potter L, Schonfeld WH. Economic evaluation of pharmacist involvement in disease management in a community pharmacy setting. Clin Ther 1997;19(1):113-23.

Murray MD, Harris LE, Overhage JM, et al. Failure of computerized treatment suggestions to improve health outcomes of outpatients with uncomplicated hypertension: results of a randomized controlled trial. Pharmacotherapy 2004;24(3):324-37.

Okamoto MP, Nakahiro RK. Pharmacoeconomic evaluation of a pharmacist-managed hypertension clinic. Pharmacotherapy 2001;21(11):1337-44.

Pezzin LE, Feldman PH, Mongoven JM, McDonald MV, Gerber LM, Peng TR. Improving blood pressure control: results of home-based post-acute care interventions. J Gen Intern Med 2011;26(3):280-6.

Reed SD, Li Y, Oddone EZ, et al. Economic evaluation of home blood pressure monitoring with or without telephonic behavioral self-management in patients with hypertension. Am J Hypertens 2010;23(2):142-8.

Wertz D, Hou L, DeVries A, et al. Clinical and economic outcomes of the Cincinnati Pharmacy Coaching Program for diabetes and hypertension. Manag Care 2012;21(3):44-54.

Studies Used for Economics Methods

Mason JM, Freemantle N, Gibson JM, New JP. Specialist nurse-led clinics to improve control of hypertension and hyperlipidemia in diabetes: economic analysis of the SPLINT trial. Diabetes Care 2005;28(1):40-6.

McEwan P, Peters JR, Bergenheim K, Currie CJ. Evaluation of the costs and outcomes from changes in risk factors in type 2 diabetes using the Cardiff stochastic simulation cost-utility model (DiabForecaster). Curr Med Res Opin 2006;22(1):121-9.

Implementation Resources

• Best Practices for Cardiovascular Disease Prevention Programs: A Guide to Effective Health Care System Interventions and Community-Clinical Links
  Developed by CDC’s Division for Heart Disease and Stroke Prevention
• HEARTS Technical Package for Cardiovascular Disease Management in Primary Health Care: Team-based Care [PDF – 941 kB]
  Developed by the World Health Organization

The Community Preventive Services Task Force finding is based on evidence from a systematic review published in 2006 (Walsh et al., search period January 1980-July 2003) and a more recent Community Guide review (search period July 2003-May 2012). In updating the evidence, The Community Guide used the same search strategy that was used for the Walsh 2006 review. The following databases were searched from 1980 up to 2012 to identify studies of team-based care: MEDLINE and the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) registry.

Search Terms

1.) Keywords for intervention of interest: Team-based Care

1. disease management/
2. patient care planning/
3. patient-centered care/
4. primary health care/
5. progressive patient care/
6. critical pathways/
7. delivery of health care, integrated/
8. health services accessibility/
9. managed care programs/
10. product line management/
11. patient care team/
12. patient care team/
13. patient-centered care/
14. behavior control/
15. counseling/
16. health promotion/
17. patient compliance/
18. after-hours care/
19. (coordination or coordinated or multifactorial or multicomponent or multidisciplinary or interdisciplinary or integrated or community-based or organized).m_titl.
20. (care or approach or intervention or strategy or strategies or management or managing or center* or clinic*).m_titl.
21. 19 and 20
22. organization-and-administration/
23. or/1-18
24. or/21-23
25. total quality management/
26. quality control/
27. (tqm or cqi).m_titl.
28. quality.m_titl.
29. (continuous or total).m_titl.
30. 28 and 29
31. (management or improvement).m_titl.
32. 30 and 31
33. 25 or 26 or 27 or 32
34. education, continuing/
35. education.m_titl.
36. continuing.m_titl.
37. 35 and 36
38. (medical or professional* or nursing or physician* or nurse*).m_titl.
39. 37 and 38
40. outreach.m_titl.
41. (visit* or educational).m_titl.
42. academic.m_titl.
43. detailing.m_titl.
44. 42 and 43
45. 41 or 44
46. 34 or 39 or 45
47. diffusion of innovation/
48. diffusion.m_titl.
49. (innovation or technology).m_titl.
50. 48 and 49
51. 47 or 50
52. medical audit/
53. (audit or feedback or compliance or adherence or training).m_titl.
54. (improvement* or improving or improves or improve or guideline* or practice* or medical or provider* or physician* or nurse* or clinician* or academic or visit*).m_titl.
55. practice guidelines/
56. 54 or 55
57. 53 and 56
58. (financial or economic or physician*).m_titl.
59. patient*.mp.
60. 58 or 59
61. “incentive*”.m_titl.
62. 60 and 61
63. reminder systems/
64. reminder.m_titl.
65. reimbursement mechanisms/
66. 52 or 57 or 62 or 63 or 64 or 65
67. medical informatics/ or computer.ti. or (decision and support).ti. or telemedicine/ or telemedicine.ti. or telecommunication*.ti. or internet/ or web.ti. or modem.ti. or telephone*.ti. or telephone/
68. 24 or 33 or 46 or 51 or 66 or 67

2.) Blood Pressure Keywords

69. 68 and (hypertension/ or hypertension.ti. or (blood and pressure).ti.)

3.) Keywords for existing reviews

70. ((meta-analysis.pt. or meta-analysis.tw.) or ((review.pt. or guideline.pt. or consensus.ti. or guideline*.ti. or literature.ti. or overview.ti. or review.ti. or decision support techniques/) and ((cochrane.tw. or medline.tw. or cinahl.tw. or (national.tw. and library.tw.)) or (handsearch*.tw. or search*.tw. or searching.tw.) and (hand.tw. or manual.tw. or electronic.tw. or bibliograph*.tw. or database* or (cochrane.tw. or medline.tw. or cinahl.tw. or (national.tw. and library.tw.))))) or ((synthesis.ti. or overview.ti. or review.ti. or survey.ti.) and (systematic.ti. or critical.ti. or methodologic.ti. or quantitative.ti. or qualitative.ti. or literature.ti. or evidence.ti. or evidence-based.ti.))) {No Related Terms}
71. meta-analysis.pt. or meta-analysis.tw.
72. (review or guideline).pt. or consensus.ti. or guideline*.ti. or literature.ti. or overview.ti. or review.ti. or decision support techniques/
73. (cochrane or medline or cinahl).tw.
74. (national and library).tw.
75. (handsearch* or search* or searching).tw
76. (hand or manual or electronic or bibliograph*).tw. or database*.mp.
77. (synthesis or overview or review or survey).ti.
78. (systematic or critical or methodologic or quantitative or qualitative or literature or evidence or evidence-based).ti.
79. 71 or 72
80. 73 or 74
81. 79 and 80
82. 77 and 78
83. 73 or 74 or 76
84. 75 and 83
85. 72 and 80
86. 71 or 82 or 84 or 85
87. 71 or 81 or 82 or 84
88. 71 or 81 or 82 or 84
89. 86 or 87 or 88

4.) Keywords for study design

90. case report/
91. (case* or report).m_titl.
92. (editorial or comment or letter).pt.
93. 90 or 91 or 92
94. 89 not 93
95. (randomized or randomised or controlled or intervention* or evaluation* or impact* or effective* or study or studies or comparative feasibility or program* or design*).m_titl
96. (clinical trial or randomized controlled trial).pt. or epidemiologic studies/ or evaluation studies/ or comparative study/ or feasibility studies/ or intervention studies/ or program evaluation/ or epidemiologic research design/
97. 95 or 96
98. 94 or 97
99. 69 and 98
100. limit 99 to english language

5.) Keywords for journals and authors

101. new-england-journal-of-medicine.jn.
102. jama.jn.
103. annals-of-internal-medicine.jn.
104. american-journal-of-medicine.jn.
105. archives-of-internal-medicine.jn.
106. journal-of-general-internal-medicine.jn.
107. bmj.jn.
108. lancet.jn.
109. canadian-medical-association-journal.jn.
110. clinical & investigative medicine medecine clinique et experimentale.jn.
111. archives-of-family-medicine.jn.
112. journal-of-family-practice.jn.
113. family-practice.jn.
114. annals-of-medicine.jn.
115. british-journal-of-general-practice.jn.
116. journal-of-internal-medicine.jn.
117. medical-journal-of-australia.jn.
118. southern-medical-journal.jn.
119. western-journal-of-medicine.jn.
120. “australian & new zealand journal of medicine”.jn.
121. medical-care.jn.
122. health-services-research.jn.
123. inquiry.jn.
124. milbank-quarterly.jn.
125. health affairs.jn.
126. “health care financing review”.jn.
127. “medical care research & review”.jn.
128. effective clinical practice.jn.
129. evaluation & the health professions.jn.
130. joint commission journal on quality improvement.jn.
131. quality & safety in health care.jn.
132. international journal for quality in health care.jn.
133. quality in health care.jn.
134. qualitative health research.jn.
135. (reproductive and outcomes and research).jw.
136. (reproductive and guidelines).jw.
137. american-journal-of-managed-care.jn.
138. “american journal of medical quality”.jn.
139. “journal of continuing education in the health professions”.jn.
140. preventive-medicine.jn.
141. american-journal-of-preventive-medicine.jn.
142. patient education & counseling.jn.
143. annals-of-behavioral-medicine.jn.
144. journal-of-human-hypertension.jn.
145. hypertension.jn.
146. “or/116-160”.jn.
147. or/116-160
148. “root (berwick d* or berlowitz d* or davidd* or kiefe c* or wagner c* or glasgow r* or boddenheimer t* or hulscher m* or grol r* or grimshaw j* or haynes b* or haynes rb or sacket d* or goldberg h* or hirschi* or nash d* or roper w* or weingarten s*”.m_auts.
149. “root (berwick d* or berlowitz d* or davidd* or kiefe c* or wagner c* or glasgow r* or boddenheimer t* or hulscher m* or grol r* or grimshaw j* or haynes b* or haynes rb or sacket d* or goldberg h* or hirschi* or nash d* or roper w* or weingarten s*)”.m_auts.
150. berwick d*.au.
150. berlowitz d*.au.
152. kiefe c*.au.
153. davis d*.au.
154. (wagner e* or glasgow r or boddenheimer t*).au.
155. (hulscher m* or grol r* or grimshaw j* or haynes b* or haynes rb* or sacket d*).au.
156. (sackett d* or goldberg h* or hirsch i* or nash d* or roper w* or weingarten s*).au.
157. or/165-171
158. (69 and 162) not (99 or 92)
159. 113 and 173
160. 115 or 174
161. (69 and 172) not (99 or 92)
162. 113 and 176
163. 175 or 177
164. from 178 keep 1-1106

References

Walsh JM, McDonald KM, Shojania KG, Sundaram V, Nayak S, Lewis R, et al. Quality improvement strategies for hypertension management: a systematic review. Med Care 2006;44(7):646-57.

Search Strategy — Economic Review

The economic review is based on evidence from the Community Guide search for effectiveness evidence (search period January 1980-May 2012) and an earlier search for economic evidence conducted by CDC’s Division of Heart Disease and Stroke Prevention (DHDSP) (search period January 1985 March 2011).

The DHDSP review searched eight bibliographic databases: Medline, Embase, PsycInfo, CINAHL, EconLit, Socio Abs, Web of Science, and Cochrane. The types of documents retrieved by the search included journal articles, books, book chapters, reports, and conference papers.

Search terms and strategies were adjusted to each database, based on controlled and uncontrolled vocabularies and search software.

Limits:
January 1985- March 2011
All languages
Humans (Not limited to humans in the dbs. Using Endnote, the following were eliminated: rat or rats or cattle or cow or cows or calves or chick or chicks or chicken or chickens or dog or dogs or goat or goats or pig or pigs or hamster or hamsters or horse or horses or mouse or mice or rabbit or rabbits or sheep or swine or animal or animals)

MEDLINE (2478 results)

A. Cost Effectiveness
((exp “costs and cost analysis”/ or exp health care costs/ or exp “cost of illness”/ or *economics/) and (benefit or cost$ or expenditure$ or Life years or exp Quality-Adjusted Life Years/ or “disability adjusted life years” or effectiveness)) or exp cost-benefit analysis/ or cost-effectiveness analysis or cost-utility analysis or economic evaluation

B. Hypertension
exp Hypertension/ or (hypertensi* or blood pressure* or SBP or DBP or BP).tw

EMBASE (4844 results)

A. Cost Effectiveness
((exp *”cost”/ or exp *”health care cost”/ or exp *”cost of illness”/ or *economics/) and (benefit or cost$ or expenditure$ or Life years or exp Quality Adjusted Life Year/ or “disability adjusted life years” or effectiveness)) or exp “cost benefit analysis”/ or cost-effectiveness analysis or cost-utility analysis or economic evaluation

B. Hypertension
exp Hypertension/ or (hypertensi* or blood pressure* or SBP or DBP or BP).tw

PSYCINFO (117 results)

A. Cost Effectiveness
((exp “costs and cost analysis”/ or exp health care costs/ or *economics/) and (benefit or cost$ or expenditure$ or Life years or “disability adjusted life years” or effectiveness)) or cost-benefit analys* or cost-effectiveness analysis or cost-utility analysis or economic evaluation

B. Hypertension
exp Hypertension/ or (hypertensi* or blood pressure* or SBP or DBP or BP).tw

CINAHL (123 results)

A. Cost Effectiveness
(((MH “Costs and Cost Analysis+”) or (MH “Health Care Costs+”) or (MH “Economic Aspects of Illness”) or (MM “Economics”)) and (benefit or cost* or expenditure* or Life years or (MH “Quality-Adjusted Life Years”) or “disability adjusted life years” or effectiveness)) or (MH “Cost Benefit Analysis”) or cost-effectiveness analysis or cost-utility analysis or economic evaluation

B. Hypertension
(MH “Hypertension+”) or (hypertensi* or blood pressure* or SBP or DBP or BP)

ECONLIT (159 results)

A. Cost Effectiveness
terms not used due to the nature of the database

B. Hypertension
hypertensi* or blood pressure*

SOCIO ABS (818 results)

A. Cost Effectiveness
(DE=(“costs” or “economics” or “health care costs” or “cost benefit analysis”)) or cost* or economic*

B. Hypertension
DE=(“blood pressure”) or (hypertensi* or blood pressure* or SBP or DBP or BP)

WEB OF SCIENCE (409 results)

A. Cost Effectiveness
TS=((cost* or economic*) same (benefit or “life years” or effectiveness or utility or evaluation))

B. Hypertension
TS=(hypertensi* or “blood pressure*” or SBP or DBP or BP)

COCHRANE (1951 results)

A. Cost Effectiveness
(((MeSH descriptor Costs and Cost Analysis explode all trees) or (MeSH descriptor Economics, this term only))
and
(benefit or cost* or expenditure* or Life years or “disability adjusted life years” or effectiveness or (MeSH descriptor Quality-Adjusted Life Years explode all trees)))
or
(MeSH descriptor Cost-Benefit Analysis explode all trees) or cost-effectiveness analysis or cost-utility analysis or economic evaluation

B. Hypertension
(MeSH descriptor Hypertension explode all trees) or (hypertensi* or blood pressure* or SBP or DBP or BP)

Mason JM, Freemantle N, Gibson JM, New JP. Specialist nurse-led clinics to improve control of hypertension and hyperlipidemia in diabetes: economic analysis of the SPLINT trial. Diabetes Care 2005;28(1):40-6.

McEwan P, Peters JR, Bergenheim K, Currie CJ. Evaluation of the costs and outcomes from changes in risk factors in type 2 diabetes using the Cardiff stochastic simulation cost-utility model (DiabForecaster). Curr Med Res Opin 2006;22(1):121-9.

Walsh J, McDonald K, Shojania K, et al. Quality improvement strategies for hypertension management: a systematic review. Medical Care 2006;44:646-57.

The following considerations are drawn from studies included in the evidence review, the broader literature, and expert opinion.

• In most U.S. health systems, successful implementation will require reorganization of patient care roles and responsibilities.
• Health systems need to make decisions about team size, the number and type of team members, and team member roles that are best suited for their specific needs.
• An important consideration is resource allocation to support providers who implement team-based care. Reimbursement mechanisms need to support key elements that sustain benefits from team-based care:
  • Incentives for improving patient outcomes
  • Training
  • Performance feedback
  • Clinical decision support systems
  • Communications support
• Findings suggest that programs are more effective when team members can change medication regimens using evidence-based clinical protocols, either independent of primary care providers or with their approval.
• Providing patient support for participation in self-management activities is vital. Support can range from educational resources on health behavior change to community-based peer support groups. It also may rely on other forms of communication, such as mobile phones, smartphones, and patient web portals.

CDC’s Division for Heart Disease and Stroke Prevention developed Best Practices for Cardiovascular Disease Prevention Programs: A Guide to Effective Health Care System Interventions and Community-Clinical Links to help communities select and implement successful interventions. The guide summarizes the effectiveness and economic evidence behind eight strategies, including team-based care to prevent cardiovascular disease. For each strategy, the guide offers information on implementation, such as settings where the strategies have been successful, resources available to support implementation, and policy considerations. “Stories from the Field” feature specific settings where strategies have been successfully implemented.

Healthy People 2020

Healthy People 2020 includes the following objectives related to this CPSTF recommendation.

• Access to Health Services, Objective 5 (AHS-5): Increase the proportion of persons who have a specific source of ongoing care
• Heart Disease and Stroke, Objective 5 (HDS-5): Reduce the proportion of persons in the population with hypertension
• Heart Disease and Stroke, Objective 10 (HDS-10): Increase the proportion of adults with hypertension who meet the recommended guidelines
• Heart Disease and Stroke, Objective 11 (HDS-11): Increase the proportion of adults with hypertension who are taking the prescribed medications to lower their blood pressure
• Heart Disease and Stroke, Objective 12 (HDS-12): Increase the proportion of adults with hypertension whose blood pressure is under control