AzTrials
AzTrials

HypertensionPhase 2NCT00148434

Study on Impact of Patient-Held Guidelines on Blood Pressure

A Phase 2 study testing Patient-held guideline for hypertension in people with Hypertension, run by Ashgrove Research Practice at 1 site in United Kingdom.

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

While patient held guidelines for the management of chronic diseases have been employed in some countries. There is little evidence of their effectiveness in improving patient outcomes. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 0 years and older
Conditions the study is for
Hypertension
What is being tested?
Patient-held guideline for hypertension
How many people
300 participants
Where
1 siteUnited Kingdom
Study dates
Jan 2002to Mar 2003
Phase
Phase 2
Are there results?
None posted in the registry

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages 0 years and older
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Child, Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

  • All patients on the hypertension register of the practice

Who cannot join

  • Patients unable to consent

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country.

United Kingdom1 site
  • Ashgrove Health Centre

    Blackburn West Lothian, EH47 7LL

Other trials in United Kingdom

About this study

Official title: A Pilot Randomised Controlled Trial to Assess the Impact on Blood Pressure Control of Empowering Patients to Become Involved in Their Own Blood Pressure Management.

While patient held guidelines for the management of chronic diseases have been employed in some countries. There is little evidence of their effectiveness in improving patient outcomes. We hypothesised that a patient held guideline on the management of hypertension combined with a specific exhortation to patients to challenge their medical care where the guidelines did not appear to have been applied would improve blood pressure control, lower average blood pressure, lower average cholesterol, increase the appropriate use of statins and aspirin, and have no impact on patient anxiety. Patients were randomised to the guideline or to standard hypertension information. Measures of anxiety were taken at baseline 2 weeks and one year, blood pressure and cholesterol was measured at one year and case notes examined to determine appropriate statin and aspirin usage.

Read the detailed description

Prevention and treatment of hypertension and target organ disease remain important public health challenges which must be addressed (SIGN 2001). There is sound evidence that control of hypertension can significantly reduce the incidence of stroke and cardiac events (Mulrow and Pignone 2001). National guidelines for the identification and treatment of hypertension have been issued (Ramsey et al 1999, SIGN 2001) and a local version of the national guidelines has been issued to all GPs in Lothian. However, although there is evidence that most patients with hypertension are identified, many do not have their hypertension adequately controlled (Colhoun et al 1998), and GPs are reluctant to treat mild hypertension or hypertension in the elderly (Dickerson et al 1995a,b, Frijlen et al 2001).

Without additional interventions to encourage change in medical practice, the effects of clinical guidelines are generally limited (Effective Health Care 1994, Oxman et al 1995). A large number of additional interventions have been used to encourage the adoption of clinical guidelines including continuing medical education, dissemination of educational materials, educational outreach, local opinion leaders, audit and feedback, manual or computerised reminders, mass media campaigns, continuous quality improvement programmes (Effective Health Care 1999). All have some effect, but none are overwhelmingly successful or effective in all circumstances (Effective Health Care 1999, Davies et al 1995, Grimshaw et al 1995) It is suggested that multiple interventions may be more effective than single ones (Wensing and Grol 1994, Greco and Eisenberg 1993).

There is increasing evidence that in Primary Care patients' expectations have a significant effect on the treatment they get from their GP (Tomlin et al 1999, Howitt and Armstrong 1999). Mass media campaigns targeting patients have been found to influence professional practice (Grilli et al 2000). However, evaluation of the effect of locally provided patient information has been limited to the effect that it has on patient behaviour (e.g. compliance with dietary advice or medication) and not on the effect in may have on medical practice.

One initiative, which has not been fully evaluated, is distribution of the guidelines to patients. The large AHCPR guideline programme in the United States included the full guideline, a summary for professionals and a summary for patients (Colling 1994). Evaluation appeared to be limited to the distribution of these guidelines and the impact on practice was not measured (Colling 1994). When the Scottish (SIGN) clinical guideline programme was initiated much of the AHCPR methodology was adopted and acknowledged, but the patient guideline was not included. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effect of providing patients with a clinical guideline (edited to be understandable to a lay person) on the overall management and control of their hypertension coupled with an explicit exhortation from the medical team to become involved in their own care.

  1. Trial objectives and purpose: The trial aims to determine if the provision of a patient guideline on the management of hypertension.
  2. Improves control of hypertension
  3. Improves compliance by doctors with established guidelines
  4. Increases patient anxiety

Three research questions have been set up in an attempt to meet these aims. Does provision of a patient guideline on the management of hypertension along with explicit exhortation to patients to challenge care that does not meet the guideline.

  1. Improve control of hypertension, as evidence by average blood pressure achieved and numbers of patients who achieve control (i.e. BP < 150/90)
  2. Improve compliance by doctors with established guidelines as evidenced by recorded calculation of 10 year cardiovascular risk, appropriate use of aspirin and cholesterol lowering agents, checking of cholesterol and level of blood cholesterol achieved, appropriate checking of urea and electrolytes and frequency of blood pressure monitoring.
  3. Increase patient anxiety.
  4. Trial design:
  5. A randomised trial has been set up to assess these research questions.
  6. Selection and withdrawal of subjects:
  7. All hypertensive patients from the Ashgrove Health Centre Blood Pressure Clinic (435) for whom recent baseline information on their blood pressure and control is available (these data were recently collected for an extensive audit) will be selected for invitation to take part in the study. All will be sent an invitation/ information letter to their home address asking them to consent to the study Those participants who consent to the study will also be asked to complete a questionnaire to measure anxiety (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale: HADS) and return it to the surgery using an SAE. Those who fail to return a response will be sent a reminder in two weeks. Information booklets will be sent to all participants who have consented (whether their anxiety questionnaire has been returned or not).
  8. Treatment of subjects:
  9. All hypertensive patients( at least one systolic BP > 150) in Ashgrove Health Centre for whom recent baseline information is available will be invited to take part in this study. As there are many households (approx. 30) with more than one hypertensive patient, randomisation will take place at household, rather than individual level, so that people living at the same address will receive the same treatment. Participants will be randomised into two groups (using a random number generator). One group will receive a detailed guideline and record card derived from the Lothian Hypertension Guideline which gives general information about blood pressure, but also provides the patient with clear guidelines as to how their blood pressure should be managed by medical and nursing staff and a clear exhortation to question their care if the guideline is not being adhered to (see attached draft). They will also be given a standard, high quality patient information booklet produced by the British Hypertension Society. The second group will be given the British Hypertension Society booklet only . This group will not be specifically exhorted to challenge their care in the same way as the other group.

Doctors in the study will not be told to treat the groups differently. We anticipate a Hawthorn effect in that doctors will inevitably be sensitised to comply with guidelines more rigorously for both groups.

All patients will be sent a letter explaining the study, a consent form and a Hospital Anxiety and Depression Score questionnaire. Those wishing to take part in the study will be asked to return the consent form and questionnaire in the accompanying stamped addressed envelope.

Patients will then be sent the booklet and in the intervention groups case the booklet and guideline. A further HADS score will be sent two weeks after the guideline to identify any immediate anxiety caused by the guideline.

All patients will be called in at the end of a year for BP measurement. Case notes will be searched for records of BP monitoring, cardiovascular risk recording, cholesterol estimation, appropriate use of cholesterol lowering agents, appropriate use of aspirin, actual blood cholesterol level, appropriate checking of Urea and Electrolytes. Patients will be asked to complete a further HADS and a questionnaire which ask them how they found the intervention and their perception of their involvement in the management of their blood pressure. Doctors and nurses in the practice will be interviewed about their experience in relation to the project in terms of perceived increased workload and their experience (if so perceived) of managing consultations with empowered patients.

  1. Statistics:
  2. This project is a pilot and will help in calculating the power of future studies. However, we have calculated that this study has 80% power to detect as significant at the 5% level differences in mean blood pressure of the order of 2-3 mm Hg, or of 10-15% in the percentage of patients achieving BP targets. Statistical analyses will be carried out by Dr. Rob Elton, statistical consultant.
  3. Data handling and record keeping:
  4. All patient records will be pulled and perused only by the research nurse who is a member of staff at Ashgrove Health Centre. While research data are being collected, they will be kept completely confidential and stored on a password protected computer at Ashgrove Health Centre. Once all data are collected, they will be anonymised. No patients will be identifiable from any of the results, published or otherwise.
  5. Audio taping of focus groups with staff on completion of the study will take place. The tapes will be kept in a locked filing cabinet in the Department of General Practice at the University of Edinburgh. On completion of tape transcription, the tapes will be destroyed. All transcripts of tapes will be anonymised so that staff participants will not be identifiable.

Colhoun et al (1998) Blood pressure screening, management and control in England: results from the health survey for England 1994. J Hypertens 16(6):747-52

Colling 1994). Colling J (1994). An update on the AHCPR guideline implementation. Nurs Pract Forum,5,134-137

Davis DA Taylor-Vaisey MLS (1997) Translating guidelines into practice. Can Med Assoc J 157, (4) 408-416

Dickerson JE, Brown MJ (1995a). Influence of age on general practitioners' definition and treatment of hypertension. BMJ, 310, 574

Dickerson JE, Garratt CJ, Brown MJ (1995b) Management of hypertension in general practice: agreements with and variations from the British Hypertension Society guidelines. J Hum Hypertens; 9: 835-9

Effective health Care (1994) No 8 - Implementing Clinical Practice Guidelines. Leeds: University of Leeds

Effective Health Care (1999) 5 (1) Getting evidence into practice. York: NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination

Frijlen B, Spes T, Lobo C, Hulscher E et al. (2001) Blood pressure control in treated hypertensive patients: clinical performance of General Practitioners. BJGP 51(462), 9-15

Greco PJ, Eisenberg JM (1993) Changing physician's practices. New England Journal of Medicine, 329 (17), 1271-1274

Grilli R, Freemantle N, Minozzi S, Domenighetti G, Finer D.(2001) Mass media interventions: effects on health services utilisation (Cochrane Review). In: The Cochrane Library, Issue 2, . Oxford: Update Software.

Grimshaw J, Freemantle N, Wallace S, Russell I, Hurwitz B, Watt I, Long A, Sheldon T (1995) Developing and implementing clinical guidelines. Quality in Health Care, 4 55-64

Heaney, D., Wyke, S., Wilson, P., Elton, R. and Rutledge, P. (2001) Assessment of impact of information booklets on use of healthcare services: randomised control trial. British Medical Journal 322, 1-5.

Howitt A, Armstrong D (1999) Implementing evidence based medicine in general practice: audit and qualitative study of antithrombotic treatment for atrial fibrillation. BMJ, 318, 1324-1327

Mulrow CD, Pignone M (2001) What are the elements of good treatment for hypertension? BMJ, 322,1107-9

Oxman AD, Thomson MA, Davis DA, et al (1995) No magic bullets: a systematic review of 102 trials of interventions to improve professional practice. CMAJ, 153,1423-31

Ramsey LE, Williams B, Johnston GD et al (1999). British Hypertension Society guidelines for the management of hypertension: report of the third working party of the British Hypertension Society. J Hum Hypertens; 13:569-92

SIGN (2001) Hypertension in older people. Edinburgh: SIGN

Tomlin Z, Humphrey C, Rogers S (1999) General practitioners perceptions of effective health care. Brit Med J, 318, 1532-5

Wensing M. Grol R (1994) Single and combined strategies for implementing changes in primary care: a literature review. Quality in Health Care 6 (2) 115-132

Wilkie, T. (2001) Commentary: Public opinion may force researchers to seek "opt-in" consent for all studies. British Medical Journal 322, 5.

Conditions
Hypertension
Being tested
Patient-held guideline for hypertension
Keywords
hypertension, guidelines, patient empowerment, anxiety
Medical subject headings
Hypertension, Patient Participation, Anxiety Disorders

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • Patient-held guideline for hypertensionBehavioural

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Proportion of patients with systolic blood pressure <150 and diastolic blood pressure <90

Secondary outcomes (7)
  1. Average systolic blood pressure

  2. Average cholesterol

  3. Proportion of patients with cholesterol < 5.0mmol/l

  4. Hospital Anxiety and Depression Score

  5. Proportion with appropriate use of aspirin and statins according to UK guideline

  6. Satisfaction with care

  7. Perception of involvement with decision making

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted8 Sep 2005 (estimated)
  2. Study startJan 2002
  3. Study completionMar 2003

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Interventional
Phase
Phase 2
Primary purpose
Prevention
Allocation
Randomised
Intervention model
Parallel groups
Masking
Single blind
Enrolment
300 participants
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT00148434
Sponsor's protocol ID
OOB/3/19/F25
Other IDs
OOB/3/19/F25 CSO
Status last verified
Sep 2005
First submitted
7 Sep 2005
Last updated
27 Sep 2005
Results posted
No

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A Phase 2 study testing Patient-held guideline for hypertension in people with Hypertension, run by Ashgrove Research Practice at 1 site in United Kingdom.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 27 Sep 2005. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 1 site in United Kingdom. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

What does this phase mean?

Phase 2 studies give the treatment to a larger group to see whether it has the intended effect and to keep checking safety.

Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.

Are results available for this study?

The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Proportion of patients with systolic blood pressure <150 and diastolic blood pressure <90. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 27 Sep 2005.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in