Impact of Computerized Decision Support on Blood Pressure Management and Control: A Randomized Controlled Trial
- 261 Downloads
We conducted a cluster randomized controlled trial to examine the effectiveness of computerized decision support (CDS) designed to improve hypertension care and outcomes in a racially diverse sample of primary care patients.
We randomized 2,027 adult patients receiving hypertension care in 14 primary care practices to either 18 months of their physicians receiving CDS for each hypertensive patient or to usual care without computerized support for the control group. We assessed prescribing of guideline-recommended drug therapy and levels of blood pressure control for patients in each group and examined if the effects of the intervention differed by patients’ race/ethnicity using interaction terms.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS
Rates of blood pressure control were 42% at baseline and 46% at the outcome visit with no significant differences between groups. After adjustment for patients’ demographic and clinical characteristics, number of prior visits, and levels of baseline blood pressure control, there were no differences between intervention groups in the odds of outcome blood pressure control. The use of CDS to providers significantly improved Joint National Committee (JNC) guideline adherent medication prescribing compared to usual care (7% versus 5%, P < 0.001); the effects of the intervention remained after multivariable adjustment (odds ratio [OR] 1.39 [CI, 1.13–1.72]) and the effects of the intervention did not differ by patients’ race and ethnicity.
CDS improved appropriate medication prescribing with no improvement in disparities in care and overall blood pressure control. Future work focusing on improvement of these interventions and the study of other practical interventions to reduce disparities in hypertension-related outcomes is needed.
KEY WORDShypertension race and ethnicity implementation research randomized trials
The authors would like to thank Deborah H. Williams for programming assistance. This study was supported by a grant from the Agency of Healthcare Research and Quality (#3U18 HS11046). Dr. Hicks was supported by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation’s Harold Amos Medical Faculty Development Program.
Conflict of Interest
- 16.Institute of Medicine. Unequal Treatment: Confronting Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Health Care. Washington: National Academy Press; 2003.Google Scholar
- 21.Nilasena DS, Lincoln MJ. A computer-generated reminder system improves physician compliance with diabetes preventive care guidelines. Proc Annu Symp Comput Appl Med Care. 1995;640–5.Google Scholar
- 25.Smith SC Jr, Blair SN, Bonow RO, et al. AHA/ACC scientific statement: AHA/ACC guidelines for preventing heart attack and death in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease: 2001 update: a statement for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association and the American College of Cardiology. Circulation. 2001;104:1577–79.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 26.Quality compass 2003. Washington, DC: National Committee for Quality Assurance, 2003 (computer disk).Google Scholar
- 27.Frane J. SUDAAN: Professional Software for Survey Data Analysis. Research Triangle Park, NC: Research Triangle Institute; 1989.Google Scholar
- 30.Gerber JC, Stewart DL. Prevention and control of hypertension and diabetes in an underserved population through community outreach and disease management: a plan of action. J Assoc Acad Minor Physicians. 1998;9:48–52.Google Scholar