Improving Blood Pressure Control and Tobacco Use Cessation Intervention In Primary Care: Protocol for the Alabama Cardiovascular Cooperative Heart Health Improvement Project
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Alabama has the second highest rate of cardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality of any US state and a high prevalence of CVD risk factors such as hypertension, diabetes, obesity, and smoking. Within the state, there are disparities in CVD outcomes and risk factors by race or ethnicity and geography. Many primary care practices do not have the capacity for full-scale quality improvement (QI) initiatives. The Alabama Cardiovascular Cooperative (ALCC), which includes academic and community stakeholders, was formed to support primary care practices to implement QI initiatives to improve cardiovascular health. The ALCC is implementing a Heart Health Improvement Project (HHIP) in primary care practices with suboptimal rates of blood pressure (BP) control and tobacco use screening. OBJECTIVE: The study aimed to support primary care practices to increase BP control among adults with hypertension and increase rates of tobacco use screening and cessation intervention. METHODS: We are using a type 1 hybrid design to test the effects of the HHIP on BP control among adults with hypertension and tobacco use screening and cessation intervention, while collecting information on implementation. Primary care practices were recruited through existing practice networks and additional electronic and in-person outreach. To ensure participation from a broad range of clinics, we required at least 50% of practices to be Federally Qualified Health Centers or look-alikes and to include representation from practices in rural areas. At baseline, we collected information about practice characteristics and preintervention rates of BP control and tobacco use screening and cessation intervention. The QI intervention includes quarterly activities conducted over a 12-month period. The HHIP uses a multipronged approach to QI, including practice facilitation and technical assistance, on-site and e-learning, and improvement through data transparency. We will conduct a pre-post analysis to estimate the effects of the HHIP and whether there is an enduring change in outcomes after the 12 months of HHIP activities beyond what would be expected due to secular trends. RESULTS: Practice recruitment took place between April 2021 and October 2022. After contacting 417 primary care practices, 51 were enrolled, including 28 Federally Qualified Health Centers or look-alikes; 47 practices implemented the HHIP. Among 45 practices that completed the baseline survey, 11 (24%) were solo practices, while 28 (62%) had 1-5 clinicians, and 6 (13%) had 6 or more clinicians. The median number of patient visits per year was 5819 (IQR 3707.3-8630.5). Practices had been in operation for a mean of 19.2 (SD 13.0) years. At baseline, the mean BP control rate was 49.6% and the rate of tobacco use screening and cessation intervention was 67.4%. CONCLUSIONS: If successful, the ALCC and HHIP may improve the implementation of evidence-based guidelines in primary care and, subsequently, cardiovascular health and health equity in the state of Alabama. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/63685.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,006 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».