ABSTRACT
Physician-pharmacist collaborative care (PPCC) is effective in improving blood pressure (BP) control, but primary care provider (PCP) engagement in such models has not been well-studied. The authors analyzed data from PPCC referrals to 108 PCPs, for patients with uncontrolled hypertension, assessing the proportion of referral requests approved, disapproved, and not responded to, and reasons for disapproval. Of 2232 persons with uncontrolled hypertension, PPCC referral requests were sent for 1516 (67.9%): 950 (62.7%) were approved, 406 (26.8%) were disapproved, and 160 (10.6%) received no response. Approval rates differed widely by PCP with a median approval rate of 75% (interquartile range, 41%-100%). The most common reasons for disapproval were: PCP prefers to manage hypertension (19%), and BP controlled per PCP (18%); 8% of cases were considered too complex for PPCC. Provider acceptance of a PPCC hypertension clinic was generally high and sustained but varied widely among PCPs. No single reason for disapproval predominated.
Subject(s)
Cooperative Behavior , Hypertension/drug therapy , Interprofessional Relations , Pharmacists/psychology , Physicians/psychology , Disease Management , Female , Humans , Hypertension/economics , Hypertension/epidemiology , Male , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Patient Care Team , Pharmacists/statistics & numerical data , Physicians/statistics & numerical data , Primary Health Care/methods , Prospective Studies , Referral and Consultation/statistics & numerical data , United States/epidemiologyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to prospectively evaluate the relationship between office, home, and ambulatory blood pressure (BP) in heart transplant recipients. METHODS AND RESULTS: The study enrolled 30 adults ≥ 6 months after heart transplantation. Morning seated office BP was measured with the use of an automatic device at 3 outpatient visits. Seated home BP was measured in the morning and evening for 5 consecutive days. Ambulatory BP was measured over 24 hours with the use of a Spacelabs monitor. The strongest correlation was observed between home and 24-hour ambulatory BP (r = 0.79 systolic; r = 0.72 diastolic). Office and home systolic BPs were significantly lower than daytime ambulatory BP (office, -3.7 mm Hg, P = .009; home, -2.6 mm Hg, P = .05). Ambulatory monitoring identified more participants with BP above hypertensive limits than did office or home measurements (63%, 50%, and 13%, respectively; P = .003). Ambulatory monitoring also revealed high BP loads, abnormal nocturnal BP patterns (eg, 30% nondippers), and a high percentage of masked hypertension (37% home, 50% ambulatory). CONCLUSIONS: Office and home BP monitoring are acceptable but may underestimate BP burden in heart transplant recipients. Additional studies are needed to determine which BP method is superior for the management of hypertension and associated outcomes after heart transplantation.
