Healthcare system barriers and facilitators to hypertension management in Ghana.

Background: Hypertension continues to pose a significant burden on the health systems in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). Multiple challenges at the health systems level could impact patients' blood pressure outcomes. There is a need to understand the gaps in health systems to improve their readiness to manage the rising burden of hypertension Objective: To explore health system barriers and opportunities for improved management of hypertension in Ghana, West Africa. Methods: We conducted 5 focus group discussions involving 9 health facility leaders and 24 clinicians involved in hypertension treatment at 15 primary-level health facilities in Kumasi, Ghana. We held discussions remotely over Zoom and used thematic analysis methods. Results: Four themes emerged from the focus group discussions: (1) financial and geographic inaccessibility of hypertension services; (2) facilities' struggle to maintain the supply of antihypertensive medications and providers' perceptions of suboptimal quality of insured medications; (3) shortage of healthcare providers, especially physicians; and (4) patients' negative self-management practices. Facilitators identified included presence of wellness and hypertension clinics for screening and management of hypertension at some health facilities, nurses' request for additional roles in hypertension management, and the rising positive practice of patient home blood pressure monitoring. Conclusion: Our findings highlight critical barriers to hypertension service delivery and providers' abilities to provide quality services. Health facilities should build on ongoing innovations in hypertension screening, task-shifting strategies, and patient self-management to improve hypertension control. In Ghana and other countries, policies to equip healthcare systems with the resources needed for hypertension management could lead to a high improvement in hypertension outcomes among patients.

Exploring patient-, provider-, and health facility-level determinants of blood pressure among patients with hypertension: A multicenter study in Ghana.

Optimal blood pressure (BP) control is essential in averting cardiovascular disease and associated complications, yet multiple factors influence the achievement of BP targets. We explored patient-, provider-, and health facility-level factors of systolic and diastolic BP and controlled BP status among patients with hypertension in Ghana. Using a cross-sectional design, we recruited 15 health facilities, and from each facility, we recruited four healthcare providers involved in managing hypertension and 15 patients diagnosed with hypertension. The primary outcome of interest was systolic and diastolic BP; the secondary outcome was BP control (<140/90 mmHg) in compliance with Ghana's national standard treatment guidelines. We used mixed-effects regression models to explore the patient- and facility-level predictors of the outcomes. Two hundred twenty-four patients and 67 healthcare providers were sampled across 15 health facilities. The mean (SD) age of providers and patients was 32 (7) and 61 (13) years, respectively. Most (182 [81%]) of the patient participants were female, and almost half (109 [49%]) had controlled BP. At the patient level, traveling for 30 minutes to one hour to the health facility was associated with higher diastolic BP (Coeff.:3.75, 95% CI: 0.12, 7.38) and lower odds of BP control (OR: 0.51, 95% CI: 0.28, 0.92) compared to traveling for less than 30 minutes. Receiving hypertension care at government health facilities than at private health facilities was associated with lower systolic BP (Coeff.: -13.89; 95% CI: -23.99, -3.79). A higher patient-to-physician or physician-assistant ratio was associated with elevated systolic BP (Coeff.: 21.34; 95% CI: 8.94, 33.74) and lower odds of controlled BP (OR: 0.19, 95% CI: 0.05, 0.72). Along with addressing the patient-level factors influencing BP outcomes in Ghana, there is a need for public health and policy interventions addressing the inaccessibility of hypertension services, the shortage of clinical care providers, and the underperformance of private health facilities.

Multiethnic Perspectives of Shared Decision-Making in Hypertension: A Mixed-Methods Study.

BACKGROUND: Shared decision-making (SDM) has the potential to improve hypertension care quality and equity. However, research lacks diverse representation and evidence about how race and ethnicity affect SDM. Therefore, this study aims to explore SDM in the context of hypertension management. METHODS AND RESULTS: Explanatory sequential mixed-methods design was used. Quantitative data were sourced at baseline and 12-month follow up from RICH LIFE (Reducing Inequities in Care of Hypertension: Lifestyle Improvement for Everyone) participants (n=1212) with hypertension. Qualitative data were collected from semistructured individual interviews, at 12-month follow-up, with participants (n=36) selected based on their SDM scores and blood pressure outcome. Patients were cross- categorized based on high or low SDM scores and systolic blood pressure reduction of ≥10 or <10 mm Hg. Multinomial logistic regression analysis showed that predictors of SDM scores and blood pressure outcome were race and ethnicity (relative risk ratio [RRR], 1.64; P=0.029), age (RRR, 1.03; P=0.002), educational level (RRR, 1.87; P=0.016), patient activation (RRR, 0.98; P<0.001; RRR, 0.99; P=0.039), and hypertension knowledge (RRR, 2.2; P<0.001; and RRR, 1.57; P=0.045). Qualitative and mixed-methods findings highlight that provider-patient communication and relationship influenced SDM, being emphasized both as facilitators and barriers. Other facilitators were patients' understanding of hypertension; clinicians' interest in the patient, and clinicians' personality and attitudes; and barriers included perceived lack of compassion, relationship hierarchy, and time constraints. CONCLUSIONS: Participants with different SDM scores and blood pressure outcomes varied in determinants of decision and descriptions of contextual factors influencing SDM. Results provide actionable information, are novel, and expand our understanding of factors influencing SDM in hypertension.

Effectiveness of team-based care interventions in improving blood pressure outcomes among adults with hypertension in Africa: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the effectiveness of team-based care interventions in improving blood pressure (BP) outcomes among adults with hypertension in Africa. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCE: PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, HINARI and African Index Medicus databases were searched from inception to March 2023. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and pre-post study designs published in English language focusing on (1) Adults diagnosed with hypertension, (2) Team-based care hypertension interventions led by non-physician healthcare providers (HCPs) and (3) Studies conducted in Africa. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: We extracted study characteristics, the nature of team-based care interventions, team members involved and other reported secondary outcomes. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool for RCTs and the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute assessment tool for pre-post studies. Findings were summarised and presented narratively including data from pre-post studies. Meta-analysis was conducted using a random effects model for only RCT studies. Overall certainty of evidence was determined using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) tool for only the primary outcome (systolic BP). RESULTS: Of the 3375 records screened, 33 studies (16 RCTs and 17 pre-post studies) were included and 11 RCTs were in the meta-analysis. The overall mean effect of team-based care interventions on systolic BP reduction was -3.91 mm Hg (95% CI -5.68 to -2.15, I² = 0.0%). Systolic BP reduction in team-based care interventions involving community health workers was -4.43 mm Hg (95% CI -5.69 to -3.17, I² = 0.00%) and nurses -3.75 mm Hg (95% CI -10.62 to 3.12, I² = 42.0%). Based on the GRADE assessment, we judged the overall certainty of evidence low for systolic BP reduction suggesting that team-based care intervention may result in a small reduction in systolic BP. CONCLUSION: Evidence from this review supports the implementation of team-based care interventions across the continuum of care to improve awareness, prevention, diagnosis, treatment and control of hypertension in Africa. PROSPERO registration number CRD42023398900.

Fear in general populations: A cross-sectional study on perceived fear of common diseases, COVID-19, life events, and environmental threats in 30 countries.

Background: In this study, we assessed the general population's fears towards various diseases and events, aiming to inform public health strategies that balance health-seeking behaviours. Methods: We surveyed adults from 30 countries across all World Health Organization (WHO) regions between July 2020 and August 2021. Participants rated their fear of 11 factors on an 11-point Likert scale. We stratified the data by age and gender and examined variations across countries and regions through multidimensional preference analysis. Results: Of the 16 512 adult participants, 62.7% (n = 10 351) were women. The most feared factor was the loss of family members, reported by 4232 participants (25.9%), followed by cancer (n = 2248, 13.7%) and stroke (n = 1416, 8.7%). The highest weighted fear scores were for loss of family members (mean (x̄) = 7.46, standard deviation (SD) = 3.04), cancer (x̄ = 7.00, SD = 3.09), and stroke (x̄ = 6.61, SD = 3.24). The least feared factors included animals/insects (x̄ = 3.72, SD = 2.96), loss of a mobile phone (x̄ = 4.27, SD = 2.98), and social isolation (x̄ = 4.83, SD = 3.13). Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was the sixth most feared factor (x̄ = 6.23, SD = 2.92). Multidimensional preference analyses showed distinct fears of COVID-19 and job loss in Australia and Burundi. The other countries primarily feared loss of family members, cancer, stroke, and heart attacks; this ranking was consistent across WHO regions, economic levels, and COVID-19 severity levels. Conclusions: Fear of family loss can improve public health messaging, highlighting the need for bereavement support and the prevention of early death-causing diseases. Addressing cancer fears is crucial to encouraging the use of preventive services. Fear of non-communicable diseases remains high during health emergencies. Top fears require more resources and countries with similar concerns should collaborate internationally for effective fear management.

Key lifestyles and health outcomes across 16 prevalent chronic diseases: A network analysis of an international observational study.

Background: Central and bridge nodes can drive significant overall improvements within their respective networks. We aimed to identify them in 16 prevalent chronic diseases during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic to guide effective intervention strategies and appropriate resource allocation for most significant holistic lifestyle and health improvements. Methods: We surveyed 16 512 adults from July 2020 to August 2021 in 30 territories. Participants self-reported their medical histories and the perceived impact of COVID-19 on 18 lifestyle factors and 13 health outcomes. For each disease subgroup, we generated lifestyle, health outcome, and bridge networks. Variables with the highest centrality indices in each were identified central or bridge. We validated these networks using nonparametric and case-dropping subset bootstrapping and confirmed central and bridge variables' significantly higher indices through a centrality difference test. Findings: Among the 48 networks, 44 were validated (all correlation-stability coefficients >0.25). Six central lifestyle factors were identified: less consumption of snacks (for the chronic disease: anxiety), less sugary drinks (cancer, gastric ulcer, hypertension, insomnia, and pre-diabetes), less smoking tobacco (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease), frequency of exercise (depression and fatty liver disease), duration of exercise (irritable bowel syndrome), and overall amount of exercise (autoimmune disease, diabetes, eczema, heart attack, and high cholesterol). Two central health outcomes emerged: less emotional distress (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, eczema, fatty liver disease, gastric ulcer, heart attack, high cholesterol, hypertension, insomnia, and pre-diabetes) and quality of life (anxiety, autoimmune disease, cancer, depression, diabetes, and irritable bowel syndrome). Four bridge lifestyles were identified: consumption of fruits and vegetables (diabetes, high cholesterol, hypertension, and insomnia), less duration of sitting (eczema, fatty liver disease, and heart attack), frequency of exercise (autoimmune disease, depression, and heart attack), and overall amount of exercise (anxiety, gastric ulcer, and insomnia). The centrality difference test showed the central and bridge variables had significantly higher centrality indices than others in their networks (P < 0.05). Conclusion: To effectively manage chronic diseases during the COVID-19 pandemic, enhanced interventions and optimised resource allocation toward central lifestyle factors, health outcomes, and bridge lifestyles are paramount. The key variables shared across chronic diseases emphasise the importance of coordinated intervention strategies.

Shared Decision-Making in Cardiovascular Risk Factor Management: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Importance: The effect of shared decision-making (SDM) and the extent of its use in interventions to improve cardiovascular risk remain unclear. Objective: To assess the extent to which SDM is used in interventions aimed to enhance the management of cardiovascular risk factors and to explore the association of SDM with decisional outcomes, cardiovascular risk factors, and health behaviors. Data Sources: For this systematic review and meta-analysis, a literature search was conducted in the Medline, CINAHL, Embase, Cochrane, Web of Science, Scopus, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases for articles published from inception to June 24, 2022, without language restrictions. Study Selection: Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing SDM-based interventions with standard of care for cardiovascular risk factor management were included. Data Extraction and Synthesis: The systematic search resulted in 9365 references. Duplicates were removed, and 2 independent reviewers screened the trials (title, abstract, and full text) and extracted data. Data were pooled using a random-effects model. The review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline. Main Outcomes and Measures: Decisional outcomes, cardiovascular risk factor outcomes, and health behavioral outcomes. Results: This review included 57 RCTs with 88 578 patients and 1341 clinicians. A total of 59 articles were included, as 2 RCTs were reported twice. Nearly half of the studies (29 [49.2%]) tested interventions that targeted both patients and clinicians, and an equal number (29 [49.2%]) exclusively focused on patients. More than half (32 [54.2%]) focused on diabetes management, and one-quarter focused on multiple cardiovascular risk factors (14 [23.7%]). Most studies (35 [59.3%]) assessed cardiovascular risk factors and health behaviors as well as decisional outcomes. The quality of studies reviewed was low to fair. The SDM intervention was associated with a decrease of 4.21 points (95% CI, -8.21 to -0.21) in Decisional Conflict Scale scores (9 trials; I2 = 85.6%) and a decrease of 0.20% (95% CI, -0.39% to -0.01%) in hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels (18 trials; I2 = 84.2%). Conclusions and Relevance: In this systematic review and meta-analysis of the current state of research on SDM interventions for cardiovascular risk management, there was a slight reduction in decisional conflict and an improvement in HbA1c levels with substantial heterogeneity. High-quality studies are needed to inform the use of SDM to improve cardiovascular risk management.

Heterogeneity in the Prevalence of Cardiovascular Risk Factors by Ethnicity and Birthplace Among Asian Subgroups: Evidence From the 2010 to 2018 National Health Interview Survey.

BACKGROUND: Asian people in the United States have different sociodemographic and health-related characteristics that might affect cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk by ethnicity and birthplace. However, they are often studied as a monolithic group in health care research. This study aimed to examine heterogeneity in CVD risk factors on the basis of birthplace among the 3 largest Asian subgroups (Chinese, Asian Indian, and Filipino) compared with US-born non-Hispanic White (NHW) adults. METHODS AND RESULTS: A cross-sectional analysis was conducted using the 2010 to 2018 National Health Interview Survey data from 125 008 US-born and foreign-born Chinese, Asian Indian, Filipino, and US-born NHW adults. Generalized linear models with Poisson distribution were used to examine the prevalence and prevalence ratios of self-reported hypertension, diabetes, high cholesterol, physical inactivity, smoking, and overweight/obesity among Asian subgroups compared with US-born NHW adults. The study included 118 979 US-born NHW and 6029 Asian adults who self-identified as Chinese (29%), Asian Indian (33%), and Filipino (38%). Participants' mean (±SD) age was 49±0.1 years, and 53% were females. In an adjusted analysis, foreign-born Asian Indians had significantly higher prevalence of diabetes, physical inactivity, and overweight/obesity; foreign-born Chinese had higher prevalence of physical inactivity, and foreign-born Filipinos had higher prevalence of all 5 CVD risk factors except smoking compared with NHW adults. CONCLUSIONS: This study revealed significant heterogeneity in the prevalence of CVD risk factors among Asian subgroups by ethnicity and birthplace, stressing the necessity of disaggregating Asian subgroup data. Providers should consider this heterogeneity in CVD risk factors and establish tailored CVD prevention plans for Asian subgroups.

Grassroots and Digital Outreach Strategies Raise Awareness of COVID-19 Information and Research in Baltimore City.

We aimed to disseminate reliable COVID-19 information to the Black and Latino communities of Baltimore City, Maryland, between July 2020 and December 2022. With community partners, we disseminated evidence-based COVID-19 information via grassroots and digital strategies, including Hopkins Opportunity for Participant Engagement, and connected volunteers to COVID-19 research. Using a multimodal approach facilitated dissemination of reliable information and raised awareness of research; evaluation of trust is ongoing. Robust, multimodal strategies are needed to foster trust and equity among diverse communities. (Am J Public Health. 2024;114(S1):S69-S73. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2023.307492).