Nurse-led interventions to manage hypertension in general practice: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

To evaluate the impact of general practice nurse-led interventions for blood pressure control and cardiovascular disease risk factor reduction in patients with hypertension. Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized control trials. CINAHL, Medline and Scopus databases were searched to identify peer-reviewed studies published between 2000 and 2021. A systematic review of randomized control trials was conducted using a structured search strategy. The Meta-Analysis of Statistics Assessment and Review Instrument (JBI-MAStARI) was used to appraise study quality. Meta-analysis and narrative synthesis were performed to determine the effectiveness of the included interventions. Eleven trials comprising of 4454 participants were included in the review. Meta-analysis showed significant reductions in both systolic and diastolic blood pressure in trials with 6 months or less follow-up. Improvements were also demonstrated in reducing blood lipids, physical activity, general lifestyle measures and medication adherence. Evidence for dietary improvements and reduction in alcohol and smoking rates was inconclusive. Nurse-led interventions for patients with hypertension are heterogeneous in terms of the nature of the intervention and outcomes measured. However, nurse-led interventions in general practice demonstrate significant potential to improve blood pressure and support cardiovascular disease risk factor reduction. Future research should be directed towards elucidating the successful elements of these interventions, evaluating cost-effectiveness and exploring translation into usual care. This review provides evidence that nurses in general practice could enhance current hypertension management through nurse-led interventions.

Development and validation of a model for diagnosis of obstructive sleep apnoea in primary care.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Use of in-laboratory polysomnography (PSG) to diagnose obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) is cost and resource intensive. Questionnaires, physical measurements and home monitors have been studied as potential simpler alternatives. This study aimed to develop a diagnostic model for OSA for use in primary care. METHODS: Primary care practitioners were trained to recognize symptoms of sleep apnoea and recruited patients based on the clinical need to investigate OSA. Assessment was by symptom questionnaires, anthropomorphic measurements, digital facial photography, and a single-channel nasal flow monitor (Flow Wizard©, DiagnoseIT, Sydney, Australia) worn at home for 3 nights. The in-laboratory PSG was the reference test, with OSA defined as apnoea-hypopnoea index (AHI) ≥10 events/h. RESULTS: In the model development phase, 25 primary care practitioners studied 315 patients in whom they suspected OSA, of which 57% had AHI≥10 and 22% had AHI≥30. Published OSA questionnaires provided low to moderate prediction of OSA (area under the curve [AUC] 0.53-0.73). The nasal flow monitor alone yielded high accuracy for predicting OSA with AUC of 0.87. Sensitivity was 0.87 and specificity 0.77 at a threshold respiratory event index (REI) of 18 events/h. A model adding age, gender, symptoms and BMI to the nasal flow monitor REI only modestly improved OSA prediction (AUC 0.89), with similar AUC (0.88) confirmed in the validation population of 114 patients. CONCLUSION: Sleep apnoea can be diagnosed in the primary care setting with a combination of clinical judgement and portable monitor test outcomes.

The influence of personality on trajectories of distress, health and functioning in mild-to-moderately depressed adults with type 2 diabetes.

Identification of mental health risk is important for optimising diabetes care in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Personality is linked to diabetes health and may assist detection of individuals with T2DM most at risk of chronic mental health difficulties. This study examined the moderator effect of personality factors on changes in psychological distress and functioning in adults with T2DM and mild-to-moderate depressive symptoms across a 12-month period. Data were obtained from participants in a randomised controlled trial of adults with T2DM.  Participants completed measures of depression (Patient Health Questionnaire-9), anxiety (General Anxiety Disorder-7), general functioning (Work and Social Adjustment Scale), diabetes distress (Diabetes Distress Scale), and diabetes self-management (Self-Management Profile for Type 2 Diabetes) at baseline, 3-, 6- and 12-months. Glycaemic control (HbA1c) was measured at baseline, 6- and 12-months. Two hundred trial completers agreed to complete a personality inventory (Big Five Inventory). Low neuroticism was linked with reduced depression, anxiety, functional impairment and diabetes distress over the year. High extraversion was associated with decreased anxiety and functional impairment. High conscientiousness was linked to increased healthy eating. No personality trait moderated HbA1c levels. Personality screening may help identify mental health risk and guide medical carer approach in T2DM patients.

Effectiveness of quality incentive payments in general practice (EQuIP-GP): a study protocol for a cluster-randomised trial of an outcomes-based funding model in Australian general practice to improve patient care.

BACKGROUND: There is international interest in whether improved primary care, in particular for patients with chronic or complex conditions, can lead to decreased use of health resources and whether financial incentives help achieve this goal. This trial (EQuIP-GP) will investigate whether a funding model based upon targeted, continuous quality incentive payments for Australian general practices increases relational continuity of care, and lessens health-service utilisation, for high-risk patients and children. METHODS: We will use a mixed methods approach incorporating a two-arm pragmatic cluster randomised control trial with nested qualitative case studies. We aim to recruit 36 general practices from Practice-Based Research Networks (PBRN) covering urban and regional areas of Australia, randomised into intervention and control groups. Control practices will provide usual care while intervention practices will be supported to implement a new service model incorporating incentives for relational continuity and timely access to appointments. Patients will comprise three groups: older (over 65 years); 18-65 years with chronic and/or complex conditions; and those aged less than 16 years with increased risk of hospitalisation. The funding model includes financial incentives to general practitioners (GPs) for providing longer consultations, same day access and timely follow-up after hospitalisation to enrolled patients. The payments are proportional to expected health system savings associated with improved quality of GP care. An outreach facilitator will work with practices to help incorporate the incentive model into usual work. The main outcome measure is relational continuity of care (Primary Care Assessment Tool short-form survey), with secondary outcomes including health-related quality of life and health service use (hospitalisations, emergency presentations, GP and specialist services in the community, medicine prescriptions and targeted pathology and imaging ordering). Outcomes will be initially evaluated over a period of 12 months, with ongoing data collection for 5 years. DISCUSSION: The trial will provide robust evidence on a novel approach to providing continuous incentives for improving quality of general practice care, which can be compared to block payment incentives awarded at target quality levels of pay-for-performance, both within Australia and also internationally. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12618000105246. Registered on 23 January 2018.

Correction to: Effectiveness of quality incentive payments in general practice (EQuIP-GP): a study protocol for a cluster-randomised trial of an outcomes-based funding model in Australian general practice to improve patient care.

In the original publication of this article [1], the first name of the 3rd author is wrong.

Recruiting to a Randomized Controlled Trial of a Web-Based Program for People With Type 2 Diabetes and Depression: Lessons Learned at the Intersection of e-Mental Health and Primary Care.

BACKGROUND: E-mental health (eMH) interventions are now widely available and they have the potential to revolutionize the way that health care is delivered. As most health care is currently delivered by primary care, there is enormous potential for eMH interventions to support, or in some cases substitute, services currently delivered face to face in the community setting. However, randomized trials of eMH interventions have tended to recruit participants using online recruitment methods. Consequently, it is difficult to know whether participants who are recruited online differ from those who attend primary care. OBJECTIVE: This paper aimed to document the experience of recruiting to an eMH trial through primary care and compare the characteristics of participants recruited through this and other recruitment methods. METHODS: Recruitment to the SpringboarD randomized controlled trial was initially focused on general practices in 2 states of Australia. Over 15 months, we employed a comprehensive approach to engaging practice staff and supporting them to recruit patients, including face-to-face site visits, regular contact via telephone and trial newsletters, and development of a Web-based patient registration portal. Nevertheless, it became apparent that these efforts would not yield the required sample size, and we therefore supplemented recruitment through national online advertising and promoted the study through existing networks. Baseline characteristics of participants recruited to the trial through general practice, online, or other sources were compared using the analysis of variance and chi square tests. RESULTS: Between November 2015 and October 2017, 780 people enrolled in SpringboarD, of whom 740 provided information on the recruitment source. Of these, only 24 were recruited through general practice, whereas 520 were recruited online and 196 through existing networks. Key barriers to general practice recruitment included perceived mismatch between trial design and diabetes population, prioritization of acute health issues, and disruptions posed by events at the practice and community level. Participants recruited through the 3 different approaches differed in age, gender, employment status, depressive symptoms, and diabetes distress, with online participants being distinguished from those recruited through general practice or other sources. However, most differences reached only a small effect size and are unlikely to be of clinical importance. CONCLUSIONS: Time, labor, and cost-intensive efforts did not translate into successful recruitment through general practice in this instance, with barriers identified at several different levels. Online recruitment yielded more participants, who were broadly similar to those recruited via general practice.

Utilisation of Medicare-funded schemes for people with cardiovascular disease.

The aim of this study is to investigate the utilisation of Medicare Benefit Scheme items for chronic disease in the management of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in general practice and to compare characteristics of CVD patients with and without a General Practice Management Plan (GPMP). Subgroup analysis of Treatment of Cardiovascular Risk using Electronic Decision Support (TORPEDO) baseline data was collected in a cohort comprising 6123 patients with CVD. The mean age (s.d.) was 71 (±13) years, 55% were male, 64% had a recorded diagnosis of coronary heart disease, 31% also had a diagnosis of diabetes and the mean number of general practice (GP) visits (s.d.) was 11 (±9) in 12 months. A total of 1955/6123 (32%) received a GPMP in the 12 months before data extraction; 1% received a Mental Health Plan. Factors associated with greater likelihood of receiving a GPMP were: younger age, had a diagnosis of diabetes, BMI > 30kgm-2, prescription of blood pressure-lowering therapy and more than ten general practice visits. Enhancing utilisation of existing schemes could augment systematic follow up and support of patients with CVD.

Routine use of clinical management guidelines in Australian general practice.

Significant gaps remain between recommendations of evidence-based guidelines and primary health care practice in Australia. This paper aims to evaluate factors associated with the use of guidelines reported by Australian GPs. Secondary analysis was performed on a survey of primary care practitioners which was conducted by the Commonwealth Fund in 2009: 1016 general practitioners responded in Australia (response rate 52%). Two-thirds of Australian GPs reported that they routinely used evidence-based treatment guidelines for the management of four conditions: diabetes, depression, asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and hypertension - a higher proportion than in most other countries. Having non-medical staff educating patients about self-management, and a system of GP reminders to provide patients with test results or guideline-based intervention or screening tests, were associated with a higher probability of guidelines use. Older GP age was associated with lower probability of guideline usage. The negative association with age of the doctor may reflect a tendency to rely on experience rather than evidence-based guidelines. The association with greater use of reminders and self-management is consistent with the chronic illness model.

Investigating the effect of an online enhanced care program on the emotional and physical wellbeing of patients discharged from hospital with acute decompensated heart failure: Study protocol for a randomised controlled trial: Enhanced care program for heart failure.

Objective: Depression is highly prevalent and associated with increased hospitalisations and mortality among patients with heart failure (HF). This study will evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of an online wellbeing program for patients discharged from hospital with acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) in (i) improving emotional and physical wellbeing, and (ii) decreasing healthcare utilisation. Methods: Two-arm randomised controlled trial. Eligible patients with ADHF will be recruited pre-discharge from two hospitals. Five hundred and seventy participants will be randomised to receive the intervention (online enhanced care program for HF: 'Enhanced HF Care') or usual care. Enhanced HF Care includes health education (11 micro-learning modules) and monitoring of depression and clinical outcomes via fortnightly/monthly surveys for 6 months, with participants offered tailored advice via video email and SMS. Cardiac nurses track real-time patient data from a dashboard and receive automated email alerts when patients report medium- or high-risk levels of depression or clinical symptoms, to action where needed. General practitioners also receive automated alerts if patients report medium- or high-risk survey responses and are encouraged to schedule a patient consultation. Results: Sixty-five participants enrolled to-date. Co-primary outcomes ('Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire' Emotional and Physical subscales) and healthcare utilisation (secondary outcome) at 1- and 6-month post-recruitment will be compared between treatment arms using linear mixed effects regression models. Conclusions: This study has the potential to reduce the burden of depression for patients with HF by prioritising urgent mental health needs and clinical symptoms while simultaneously empowering patients with self-care knowledge. Trial registration: The trial was prospectively registered via the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: ACTRN12622001289707. Issue date: 4 October 2022.

National Heart Foundation of Australia consensus statement on catheter ablation as a therapy for atrial fibrillation.

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is estimated to affect 1%-2% of the population. It is increasing in prevalence and is associated with excess mortality, considerable morbidity and hospitalisations. AF is responsible for a significant and growing societal financial burden. Catheter ablation is an increasingly used therapeutic strategy for the management of AF; however, some confusion exists among those caring for patients with this condition about the role and optimal use of ablative treatments for AF. Our aim in this consensus statement is to provide recommendations on the use of primary catheter ablation for AF in Australia, on the basis of current evidence. Our consensus is that the primary indication for catheter ablation of AF is the presence of symptomatic AF that is refractory or intolerant to at least one Class 1 or Class 3 antiarrhythmic medication. In selecting patients for catheter ablation of AF, consideration should be given to the patient's age, duration of AF, left atrial size and the presence of significant structural heart disease. Best results are obtained in younger patients with paroxysmal AF, no structural heart disease and smaller atria. Ablation techniques for patients with persistent AF are still undergoing evaluation. Discontinuation of warfarin or equivalent therapies is not considered a sole indication for this procedure. After AF ablation, anticoagulation therapy is generally recommended for all patients for at least 1-3 months. Discontinuation of warfarin or equivalent therapies after ablation is generally not recommended in patients who have a CHADS 2 score (congestive heart failure, hypertension, age ≥ 75 years, diabetes, 1 point each; prior stroke or transient ischaemic attack, 2 points) of ≥ 2.

Effectiveness, safety and cost-effectiveness of vaporized nicotine products versus nicotine replacement therapy for tobacco smoking cessation in a low-socioeconomic status Australian population: a study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: In Australia, tobacco smoking rates have declined but inequalities remain with significantly higher smoking prevalence among low-socioeconomic populations. Clinical trial data suggest vaporized nicotine products (VNPs) aid smoking cessation. Most VNP trials have used refillable tank systems, but newer generation (pod) devices now comprise the largest market share yet have limited clinical trial evidence on safety and effectiveness. This study evaluates the effectiveness, safety and cost-effectiveness of VNPs (pod and tank device) compared with nicotine replacement therapy ([NRT]-gum or lozenge) for smoking cessation. METHODS: This is a two-arm, open-label, superiority, parallel group, randomized controlled trial (RCT) with allocation concealment and blinded outcome assessment. The RCT is conducted at the National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre at the University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia. Participants are people who smoke daily, are interested in quitting and receive a government pension or allowance (N = 1058). Participants will be randomized (1:1 ratio) to receive 8 weeks of free: VNPs, with pod (40 mg/mL nicotine salt) and tank device (18 mg/mL freebase nicotine) in mixed flavours; or NRT (gum or lozenge; 4 mg). All participants will receive daily text message behavioural support for 5 weeks. Assessments will be undertaken by telephone at baseline, with three follow-up calls (two check-in calls within the first month and final follow-up at 7 months post randomization) to ascertain smoking status, treatment adherence and adverse events. The primary outcome is 6-month continuous abstinence verified by carbon monoxide breath test of ≤5ppm at 7-month follow-up. Safety and cost-effectiveness of VNPs versus NRT will also be evaluated. DISCUSSION: Further data are required to strengthen certainty of evidence for VNPs aiding smoking cessation, particularly for newer generation pod devices. To our knowledge, this trial is the first to offer choice of VNPs and no comparative effectiveness trial data exists for new pod devices. If effective, the findings can inform wider implementation of VNPs to aid smoking cessation in a priority group. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12621000076875. Registered on 29 January 2021.  https://www.anzctr.org.au.

Satisfaction with referral relationships between general practice and allied health professionals in Australian primary health care.

Chronic diseases require a multidisciplinary approach to provide patients with optimal care in general practice. This often involves general practitioners (GPs) referring their patients to allied health professionals (AHPs). The Team-link study explored the impact of an intervention to enhance working relationships between GPs and AHPs in general practice regarding the management of two chronic diseases: diabetes and ischaemic heart disease (IHD) or hypertension. The Measure of Multidisciplinary Linkages (MoML) questionnaire was developed to assess professional interactions and satisfaction with various aspects of the multidisciplinary relationship. Questionnaires were completed at baseline and 6 months by GPs (n=29) participating in the Team-link project and by AHPs (n=39) who had a current working relationship with these GPs. The Chronic Care Team Profile (CCTP) and Clinical Linkages Questionnaire (CLQ) were also completed by GPs. There were significant changes from baseline to 6 months after the intervention measures for individual items and overall MoML scores for GPs, especially items assessing 'contact', 'shared care' and 'satisfaction with communication'. The comparable item in the CLQ, 'Shared Care', also showed significant improvement. However, there were no statistically significant correlations between the change in overall 'Referral Satisfaction' scores in the GP MoML and the CLQ. The CCTP also improved and was a weak negative correlation between the GP MoML and two of the subscores of this instrument. There were no changes in AHP measure. This study demonstrates that the instrument is sensitive to differences between providers and conditions and is sensitive to change over time following an intervention. There were few associations with the other measures suggesting that the MoML might assess other aspects of teamwork involving practitioners who are not collocated or in the same organisation.

Development and early experience from an intervention to facilitate teamwork between general practices and allied health providers: the Team-link study.

BACKGROUND: This paper describes the development and implementation of an intervention to facilitate teamwork between general practice and outside allied and community health services and providers. METHODS: A review of organizational theory and a qualitative study of 9 practices was used to design an intervention which was applied in four Divisions of General Practice and 26 urban practices. Clinical record review and qualitative interviews with participants were used to determine the key lessons from its implementation. RESULTS: Facilitating teamwork across organizational boundaries was very challenging. The quality of the relationship between professionals was of key importance. This was enabled by joint education and direct communication between providers. Practice nurses were key links between general practices and allied and community health services. CONCLUSIONS: Current arrangements for Team Care planning provide increased opportunities for access to allied health. However the current paper based system is insufficient to build relationships or effectively share roles as part of a patient care team. Facilitation is feasible but constrained by barriers to communication and trust.

Finding common ground? Evaluating an intervention to improve teamwork among primary health-care professionals.

OBJECTIVE: Multidisciplinary care has been shown as the most effective option for chronic disease. The aim of the Team-link study was to assess the effectiveness of an intervention to improve teamwork among general practitioners (GPs), practice staff and allied health professionals (AHPs). This paper describes changes to teamwork using qualitative data collected in the study. DESIGN: Qualitative data about changes in internal and external professional collaboration were collected from facilitators' observations, GPs' reports and responses to a survey of AHPs assessing multidisciplinary teamwork. SETTING: Multidisciplinary teams within general practices and external collaborations with AHPs including dietitians, diabetic educators, exercise physiologists, podiatrists, psychologists and physiotherapists. PARTICIPANTS: GPs, practice nurses, practice staff, AHPs. INTERVENTION: A 6-month intervention consisting of an educational workshop and structured facilitation using specially designed materials, backed up by informal telephone support, was delivered to 26 practices. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Data were analysed thematically using an approach based on identifying actors and associated collaborative actions. RESULTS: New and enhanced communication pathways were observed between GPs, practice staff, patients and AHPs following the intervention. The enhanced information sharing expedited communication and improved interprofessional collaboration within general practices and with AHPs. There was evidence of increased patient participation and empowerment in the care process and improved collaboration by practice staff and allied health providers. CONCLUSION: The Team-link intervention improved professional collaboration among GPs, practice staff, AHPs and patients, increasing understanding and trust and enhancing multidisciplinary teamwork for chronic disease care in primary care settings.

The International Primary Care Respiratory Group (IPCRG) Research Needs Statement 2010.

AIM: Respiratory diseases are a public health issue throughout the world, with high prevalence and morbidity. This Research Needs Statement from the International Primary Care Respiratory Group (IPCRG) aims to highlight unanswered questions on the management of respiratory diseases that are of importance to practising primary care clinicians. METHODS: An informal but inclusive consultation process was instigated in 2009. Draft statements in asthma, rhinitis, COPD, tobacco dependence, and respiratory infections were circulated widely to IPCRG members, other recognised experts, and representatives from a range of economic and healthcare backgrounds. An iterative process was used to generate, prioritise and refine research questions in each section. RESULTS: Two overarching themes emerged. Firstly, there is a real need for research to be undertaken within primary care, which recruits patients representative of primary care populations, evaluates interventions realistically delivered within primary care, and draws conclusions that will be meaningful to professionals working within primary care. Secondly, international and national guidelines exist, but there is little evidence on the best strategies for implementing recommendations. Disease-specific research questions focus on effective and cost-effective ways to prevent disease, confirm the diagnosis, assess control, manage treatment, and empower selfmanagement. Practical questions about how to deliver this comprehensive agenda in diverse primary care settings are highlighted. CONCLUSIONS: We hope that this Research Needs Statement will be used by clinicians and patients campaigning for answers to relevant questions, by researchers seeking funding to provide answers to these questions, and by funding bodies to enable them to prioritise research agendas.

Improving depression outcomes among Australian primary care patients: protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Depression is a common and debilitating condition. In Australia, general practitioners (GPs) are the key providers of depression care. However, available evidence suggests that case finding for depression in primary care is poor. This study will examine whether a systematic approach to screening for depression and assessing patient preferences for depression care improves depression outcomes among primary care patients. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A cluster randomised controlled design will be used with general practice clinics randomly assigned to either the intervention (n=12) or usual care group (n=12). Patients who are aged 18 and older, presenting for general practice care, will be eligible to participate. Eighty-three participants will be recruited at each clinic. Participants will be asked to complete a baseline survey administered on a touch screen computer at their GP clinic, and then a follow-up survey at 3, 6 and 12 months. Those attending usual care practices will receive standard care. GPs at intervention practices will complete an online Clinical e-Audit, and will be provided with provider and patient-directed resources for depression care. Patients recruited at intervention practices who score 10 or above on the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 will have feedback regarding their depression screening results and preferences for care provided to their GP. The primary analysis will compare the number of cases of depression between the intervention and control groups. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has been approved by the University of Newcastle Human Research Ethics Committee, and registered with Human Research Ethics Committees of the University of Wollongong, Monash University and University of New South Wales. Results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journal publications and conference presentations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12618001139268; Pre-results.

A digital health intervention for cardiovascular disease management in primary care (CONNECT) randomized controlled trial.

Digital health applications (apps) have the potential to improve health behaviors and outcomes. We aimed to examine the effectiveness of a consumer web-based app linked to primary care electronic health records (EHRs). CONNECT was a multicenter randomized controlled trial involving patients with or at risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) recruited from primary care (Clinical Trial registration ACTRN12613000715774). Intervention participants received an interactive app which was pre-populated and refreshed with EHR risk factor data, diagnoses and, medications. Interactive risk calculators, motivational messages and lifestyle goal tracking were also included. Control group received usual health care. Primary outcome was adherence to guideline-recommended medications (≥80% of days covered for blood pressure (BP) and statin medications). Secondary outcomes included attainment of risk factor targets and eHealth literacy. In total, 934 patients were recruited; mean age 67.6 (±8.1) years. At 12 months, the proportion with >80% days covered with recommended medicines was low overall and there was no difference between the groups (32.8% vs. 29.9%; relative risk [RR] 1.07 [95% CI, 0.88-1.20] p = 0.49). There was borderline improvement in the proportion meeting BP and LDL targets in intervention vs. control (17.1% vs. 12.1% RR 1.40 [95% CI, 0.97-2.03] p = 0.07). The intervention was associated with increased attainment of physical activity targets (87.0% intervention vs. 79.7% control, p = 0.02) and e-health literacy scores (72.6% intervention vs. 64.0% control, p = 0.02). In conclusion, a consumer app integrated with primary health care EHRs was not effective in increasing medication adherence. Borderline improvements in risk factors and modest behavior changes were observed.

Improving blood pressure control in primary care: The ImPress study.

BACKGROUND: Hypertension is a preventable risk factor for cardiovascular disease, the leading cause of death globally. When hypertension is present with tobacco smoking, poor nutrition, physical inactivity or excessive alcohol consumption, risk of cardiovascular disease is increased. Given the prolonged engagement and ongoing relationship with patients, general practice nurses are ideally situated to actively engage with patients about optimal blood pressure control and lifestyle risk reduction. OBJECTIVES: This study will test the effectiveness of a nurse-led intervention to reduce blood pressure in adults with hypertension and high cardiovascular risk. DESIGN: A multi-site, cluster randomised control trial where the general practice is the unit of randomisation. METHODS: General Practices (n = 20) will be block randomised to the intervention or usual care group. Adults with hypertension and high cardiovascular risk will be identified through an audit of electronic medical records and invited to attend an assessment visit. Eligible consenting patients will be recruited to the study. The intervention involves three face-to-face consultations and two telephone consultations with the nurse to assess lifestyle risk and develop an action plan. An appointment with the general practitioner will optimise pharmacotherapy. The primary outcome is blood pressure, with secondary outcomes of lifestyle risk factors; smoking, nutrition, alcohol and physical activity body mass index and medication adherence. Patients will have outcome measures evaluated at 6 and 12 months. DISCUSSION: ImPress is innovative in its proactive approach of identifying those at greatest risk of cardiovascular disease in combination with the emerging role of the general practice nurse to target care towards improved blood pressure control. If successful, findings from this trial could enhance the nursing role, improve health outcomes, inform health policy and provide an evidence base from which to transform blood pressure management in general practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial has been registered with the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry as ACTRN12618000169246.

General practitioners' views on the influence of cost on the prescribing of asthma preventer medicines: a qualitative study.

Objective Out-of-pocket costs strongly affect patient adherence with medicines. For asthma, guidelines recommend that most patients should be prescribed regular low-dose inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) alone, but in Australia most are prescribed combination ICS-long-acting ß2-agonists (LABA), which cost more to patients and government. The present qualitative study among general practitioners (GPs) explored the acceptability, and likely effect on prescribing, of lower patient copayments for ICS alone. Methods Semistructured telephone interviews were conducted with 15 GPs from the greater Sydney area; the interviews were transcribed and thematically analysed. Results GPs reported that their main criteria for selecting medicines were appropriateness and effectiveness. They did not usually discuss costs with patients, had low awareness of out-of-pocket costs and considered that these were seldom prohibitive for asthma patients. GPs strongly believed that patient care should not be compromised to reduce cost to government. They favoured ICS-LABA combinations over ICS alone because they perceived that ICS-LABA combinations enhanced adherence and reduced costs for patients. GPs did not consider that lower patient copayments for ICS alone would affect their prescribing. Conclusion The results suggest that financial incentives, such as lower patient copayments, would be unlikely to encourage GPs to preferentially prescribe ICS alone, unless accompanied by other strategies, including evidence for clinical effectiveness. GPs should be encouraged to discuss cost barriers to treatment with patients when considering treatment choices. What is known about the topic? Australian guidelines recommend that most patients with asthma should be treated with low-dose ICS alone to minimise symptom burden and risk of flare ups. However, most patients in Australian general practice are instead prescribed combination ICS-LABA preventers, which are indicated if asthma remains uncontrolled despite treatment with ICS alone. It is not known whether GPs are aware that the combination preventers have a higher patient copayment and a higher cost to government. What does this paper add? This qualitative study found that GPs favoured combination ICS-LABA inhalers over ICS alone because they perceived ICS-LABA combinations to have greater effectiveness and promote patient adherence. This aligned with GPs' views that their primary responsibility was patient care rather than generating cost savings for government. However, it emerged that GPs rarely discussed medicine costs with patients, had low knowledge of medicine costs to patients and the health system and reported that patients rarely volunteered cost concerns. GPs believed that lower patient copayments for asthma preventer medicines would have little effect on their prescribing practices. What are the implications for practitioners? This study suggests that, when considering asthma treatment choices, GPs should empathically explore with the patient whether cost-related medication underuse is an issue, and should be aware of the option of lower out-of-pocket costs with guideline-recommended ICS alone treatment. Policy makers must be aware that differential patient copayments for ICS preventer medicines are unlikely to act as an incentive for GPs to preferentially prescribe ICS alone preventers, unless the position of these preventers in guidelines and evidence for their clinical effectiveness are also reiterated.

Preventive evidence into practice (PEP) study: implementation of guidelines to prevent primary vascular disease in general practice protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: There are significant gaps in the implementation and uptake of evidence-based guideline recommendations for cardiovascular disease (CVD) and diabetes in Australian general practice. This study protocol describes the methodology for a cluster randomised trial to evaluate the effectiveness of a model that aims to improve the implementation of these guidelines in Australian general practice developed by a collaboration between researchers, non-government organisations, and the profession. METHODS: We hypothesise that the intervention will alter the behaviour of clinicians and patients resulting in improvements of recording of lifestyle and physiological risk factors (by 20%) and increased adherence to guideline recommendations for: the management of CVD and diabetes risk factors (by 20%); and lifestyle and physiological risk factors of patients at risk (by 5%). Thirty-two general practices will be randomised in a 1:1 allocation to receive either the intervention or continue with usual care, after stratification by state. The intervention will be delivered through: small group education; audit of patient records to determine preventive care; and practice facilitation visits adapted to the needs of the practices. Outcome data will be extracted from electronic medical records and patient questionnaires, and qualitative evaluation from provider and patient interviews. DISCUSSION: We plan to disseminate study findings widely and directly inform implementation strategies by governments, professional bodies, and non-government organisations including the partner organisations.