Search

ObjectiveTo describe the National Heart Lung and Blood Institute (NHLBI) sponsored Disparities Elimination through Coordinated Interventions to Prevent and Control Heart and Lung Disease (DECIPHeR) Alliance to support late-stage implementation research aimed at reducing disparities in communities with high burdens of cardiovascular and/or pulmonary disease.Study settingNHBLI funded seven DECIPHeR studies and a Coordinating Center. Projects target high-risk diverse populations including racial and ethnic minorities, urban, rural, and low-income communities, disadvantaged children, and persons with serious mental illness. Two projects address multiple cardiovascular risk factors, three focus on hypertension, one on tobacco use, and one on pediatric asthma.Study designThe initial phase supports planning activities for sustainable uptake of evidence-based interventions in targeted communities. The second phase tests late-stage evidence-based implementation strategies.Data collection/extraction methodsNot applicable.Principal findingsWe provide an overview of the DECIPHeR Alliance and individual study designs, populations, and settings, implementation strategies, interventions, and outcomes. We describe the Alliance's organizational structure, designed to promote cross-center partnership and collaboration.ConclusionsThe DECIPHeR Alliance represents an ambitious national effort to develop sustainable implementation of interventions to achieve cardiovascular and pulmonary health equity.

BackgroundThe inclusion of race in equations to estimate the glomerular filtration rate (GFR) has become controversial. Alternative equations that can be used to achieve similar accuracy without the use of race are needed.MethodsIn a large national study involving adults with chronic kidney disease, we conducted cross-sectional analyses of baseline data from 1248 participants for whom data, including the following, had been collected: race as reported by the participant, genetic ancestry markers, and the serum creatinine, serum cystatin C, and 24-hour urinary creatinine levels.ResultsUsing current formulations of GFR estimating equations, we found that in participants who identified as Black, a model that omitted race resulted in more underestimation of the GFR (median difference between measured and estimated GFR, 3.99 ml per minute per 1.73 m2 of body-surface area; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.17 to 5.62) and lower accuracy (percent of estimated GFR within 10% of measured GFR [P10], 31%; 95% CI, 24 to 39) than models that included race (median difference, 1.11 ml per minute per 1.73 m2; 95% CI, -0.29 to 2.54; P10, 42%; 95% CI, 34 to 50). The incorporation of genetic ancestry data instead of race resulted in similar estimates of the GFR (median difference, 1.33 ml per minute per 1.73 m2; 95% CI, -0.12 to 2.33; P10, 42%; 95% CI, 34 to 50). The inclusion of non-GFR determinants of the serum creatinine level (e.g., body-composition metrics and urinary excretion of creatinine) that differed according to race reported by the participants and genetic ancestry did not eliminate the misclassification introduced by removing race (or ancestry) from serum creatinine-based GFR estimating equations. In contrast, the incorporation of race or ancestry was not necessary to achieve similarly statistically unbiased (median difference, 0.33 ml per minute per 1.73 m2; 95% CI, -1.43 to 1.92) and accurate (P10, 41%; 95% CI, 34 to 49) estimates in Black participants when GFR was estimated with the use of cystatin C.ConclusionsThe use of the serum creatinine level to estimate the GFR without race (or genetic ancestry) introduced systematic misclassification that could not be eliminated even when numerous non-GFR determinants of the serum creatinine level were accounted for. The estimation of GFR with the use of cystatin C generated similar results while eliminating the negative consequences of the current race-based approaches. (Funded by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases and others.).

IntroductionManagement of chronic kidney disease (CKD) entails high medical complexity and often results in high hospitalization burden. There are limited data on the associations of longitudinal hospital utilization patterns with adverse clinical outcomes in individuals with CKD.MethodsWe derived cumulative all-cause hospitalization trajectory groups using latent class trajectory analysis in 3012 participants of the Chronic Renal Insufficiency Cohort (CRIC) Study who were alive and did not reach end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) within 4 years of study entry. Cox proportional hazards models tested the associations between hospitalization trajectory groups and risks of ESKD and death prior to the onset of ESKD (ESKD-censored death).ResultsWithin 4 years of study entry, there were 5658 hospitalizations among 3012 participants. We identified 3 distinct subgroups of individuals with CKD based on cumulative all-cause hospitalization trajectories over 4 years: low-utilizer (n = 1066), intermediate-utilizer (n = 1802), and high-utilizer (n = 144). High-utilizers represented a patient population of lower socioeconomic status who had a greater prevalence of comorbid conditions and lower kidney function compared with intermediate- and low-utilizers. After the 4-year ascertainment period to form the trajectory subgroups, there were 544 ESKD events and 437 ESKD-censored deaths during a median follow-up time of 5.1 years. Compared with low-utilizers, intermediate-utilizers and high-utilizers were at 1.49-fold (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.22-1.84) and 1.75-fold (95% CI 1.20-2.56) higher risk of ESKD in adjusted analyses, respectively. Compared with low-utilizers, intermediate-utilizers and high-utilizers were at 1.48-fold (95% CI 1.17-1.87) and 2.58-fold (95% CI 1.74-3.83) higher risk of ESKD-censored death in adjusted analyses, respectively.ConclusionsTrajectories of cumulative all-cause hospitalization identify subgroups of individuals with CKD who are at high risk of ESKD and death.

Background. Uncontrolled hypertension is a major public health challenge in low‐ and middle‐income countries. The Hypertension Control Program in Argentina (HCPIA) showed that a community health worker‐led multicomponent intervention was effective for blood pressure (BP) reduction in resource‐limited settings, but whether the intervention was equally effective across participant subgroups is unknown. Objective. To identify participants who benefit the most from the HCPIA BP control intervention. Methods. This secondary analysis used data from HCPIA, a successful 18‐month cluster‐randomized trial in 18 health centers with 1,432 low‐income hypertensive patients in Argentina. Fifteen baseline characteristics were used to define subgroups. The proportion of controlled BP (<140/90 mmHg) was estimated using generalized linear mixed models with arm‐by‐subgroup interaction terms. The distribution of trial BP response among intervention patient subgroups was assessed. Results. Participants were 53.0% female, a mean age of 56 years, and 17.4% controlled BP at baseline. After the intervention, 72.9% of intervention and 52.2% of control participants had controlled BP. The intervention was more effective in physically inactive patients (OR = 2.76, 95% CI: 1.82 and 4.21; p for interaction = 0.04), moderately active patients (OR = 3.08, 95% CI: 1.90 and 4.99; p for interaction = 0.03), and those with uncontrolled BP at baseline (OR = 2.77, 95% CI: 2.15 and 3.57; p for interaction = 0.05). Among intervention participants, 20.2% had no BP response (BP change < −4 mmHg), 41.3% had a moderate BP response (BP change: −4 mmHg to −24 mmHg), and 38.5% had a high BP response (BP change > −24 mmHg). Women (p = 0.01), those who were physically inactive (p = 0.03), and those not taking antihypertensive medications at baseline (p = 0.001) had the greatest BP response. Conclusion. The effect of the intervention was consistent across many subgroups with some key groups showing a particularly strong intervention effect. These findings could be useful for planning future hypertension control programs in low‐ and middle‐income countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Globally, only 13.8% of patients with hypertension have their blood pressure (BP) controlled. Trials testing interventions to overcome barriers to BP control have produced mixed results. Type of health care professional delivering the intervention may play an important role in intervention success. The goal of this meta-analysis is to determine which health care professionals are most effective at delivering BP reduction interventions. METHODS: We searched Medline and Embase (until December 2023) for randomized controlled trials of interventions targeting barriers to hypertension control reporting who led intervention delivery. One hundred articles worldwide with 116 comparisons and 90 474 participants with hypertension were included. Trials were grouped by health care professional, and the effects of the intervention on systolic and diastolic BP were combined using random effects models and generalized estimating equations. RESULTS: Pharmacist-led interventions, community health worker-led interventions, and health educator-led interventions resulted in the greatest systolic BP reductions of -7.3 (95% CI, -9.1 to -5.6), -7.1 (95% CI, -10.8 to -3.4), and -5.2 (95% CI, -7.8 to -2.6) mm Hg, respectively. Interventions led by multiple health care professionals, nurses, and physicians also resulted in significant systolic BP reductions of -4.2 (95% CI, -6.1 to -2.4), -3.0 (95% CI, -4.2 to -1.9), and -2.4 (95% CI, -3.4 to -1.5) mm Hg, respectively. Similarly, the greatest diastolic BP reductions were -3.9 (95% CI, -5.2 to -2.5) mm Hg for pharmacist-led and -3.7 (95% CI, -6.6 to -0.8) mm Hg for community health worker-led interventions. In pairwise comparisons, pharmacist were significantly more effective than multiple health care professionals, nurses, and physicians at delivering interventions. CONCLUSIONS: Pharmacists and community health workers are most effective at leading BP intervention implementation and should be prioritized in future hypertension control efforts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]