The impact of a measurement and feedback intervention on blood pressure control in ambulatory cardiology practice. Am Heart J 2014 Apr;167(4):466-71
Date
03/25/2014Pubmed ID
24655694DOI
10.1016/j.ahj.2013.12.015Scopus ID
2-s2.0-84897051542 (requires institutional sign-in at Scopus site) 4 CitationsAbstract
BACKGROUND: Although hypertension is a modifiable cardiovascular risk factor, up to one-third of ambulatory patients have uncontrolled blood pressure (BP). We evaluated the impact of a targeted provider feedback intervention on rates of BP control.
METHODS: Clinic BP readings were aggregated among approximately 3,000 hypertensive patients followed up in 42 outpatient cardiology clinic practices at a large quaternary care academic medical center. Physician practices received quarterly reports on BP control rates. Provider-specific reports were benchmarked vs overall peer performance and distributed quarterly between September 2011 and September 2012. Rates of BP control were evaluated before and after the intervention. Medical record reviews were performed for a subset of patients with uncontrolled BP before (n = 300) and after (n = 300) the intervention to evaluate provider responses and interventions.
RESULTS: At baseline, 27.9% of clinic patients had uncontrolled BP. After one 1 of reports, the rate of uncontrolled BP remained unchanged (27.7%, P = .86). Analysis of provider performance revealed a subset of providers who consistently outperform their peers. In the sample of patients selected for medical record reviews, at baseline (n = 300) and follow-up (n = 300), cardiologists discussed BP in 80% of clinic notes for patients with uncontrolled BP. Cardiologists more frequently documented repeat measurements after the intervention (28.0% vs 35.7%, P = .04). No other changes were found in documentation of provider responses to BP.
CONCLUSIONS: Clinician-specific audit and feedback reports as a stand-alone intervention did not affect overall BP control rates in cardiology clinics. Future BP control interventions should consider real-time patient-specific reminders, provider incentive programs, and patient engagement interventions.
Author List
Navar-Boggan AM, Fanaroff A, Swaminathan A, Belasco A, Stafford J, Shah B, Peterson EDAuthor
Adrienne Klement MD Assistant Professor in the Medicine department at Medical College of WisconsinMESH terms used to index this publication - Major topics in bold
AgedAntihypertensive Agents
Blood Pressure
Blood Pressure Monitoring, Ambulatory
Clinical Audit
Female
Humans
Hypertension
Male
Middle Aged
North Carolina
Quality Assurance, Health Care
