Back

Optimized hypertension care for people with high blood pressure by improved integrated care and self-management tools: a mixed-methods study

van Grondelle, S. E.; van Ede, A. F. T. M.; ter Braake, J. G.; van Bruggen, S.; Rutten, G. E. H. M.; Bots, M.; Vos, H. M. M.; Numans, M. E.; Vos, R. C.

2026-05-25 primary care research
10.64898/2026.05.14.26352728 medRxiv
Show abstract

Background: High blood pressure (BP) is an often treatable cause of cardiovascular disease. We developed an intervention, featuring a cardiovascular expert team and a toolbox, to support healthcare professionals (HCPs) in hypertension management and enhance patient self-management. Aim: This study evaluates the adoption and feasibility of this intervention. Design and Setting: A mixed-methods study in general practices in the Netherlands. Methods: HCPs could consult a cardiovascular expert team and use a self-management toolbox for their patients as preferred. We interviewed HCPs guided by the Consolidated Framework of Implementation Research (CFIR), and HCPs completed the Determinants of Implementation Behaviour Questionnaire (DIBQ). Using CFIR-ERIC matching tool, we matched implementation strategies to identified barriers. Adults with elevated BP, who were prescribed at least two blood pressure lowering medications were eligible to participate. Patient and disease characteristics were extracted from the electronical medical record. Results: Of 591 eligible patients at thirteen general practices, 176 participated. The cardiovascular expert team was well-received, with 33 unique consultations, although nurse practitioners (NPs) might need the expertise of the expert team more frequently than general practitioners (GP) (adoption). The toolbox was perceived as challenging to use (feasibility). We subsequently identified three key strategies to improve implementation. Mean systolic and diastolic BP were 158/87 mmHg at baseline and 148/85 mmHg after 12 months, although this change cannot be conclusively linked to the intervention. Conclusions: Structured implementation strategies may be helpful in hypertension management. The cardiovascular expert team was considered valuable, but might be better targeted to NPs rather than GPs.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
British Journal of General Practice
22 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
21.8%
2
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 19%
9.8%
3
Pilot and Feasibility Studies
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
8.1%
4
BJGP Open
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.1%
5
Open Heart
19 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
6.1%
50% of probability mass above
6
Journal of Clinical Medicine
91 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.5%
7
JMIR Public Health and Surveillance
45 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
3.5%
8
Wellcome Open Research
57 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
3.5%
9
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 6%
3.0%
10
F1000Research
79 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
2.6%
11
JMIR Research Protocols
18 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
2.3%
12
BMC Health Services Research
42 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.8%
13
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.6%
14
JMIRx Med
31 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.4%
15
Public Health Nutrition
14 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.2%
16
Frontiers in Public Health
140 papers in training set
Top 6%
1.2%
17
PLOS Global Public Health
293 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.2%
18
PLOS Medicine
98 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.2%
19
Journal of Medical Internet Research
85 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.1%
20
Journal of Personalized Medicine
28 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.9%
21
The Lancet Digital Health
25 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.9%
22
British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology
21 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.9%
23
Trials
25 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
24
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
61 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
25
JAMIA Open
37 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
26
BMJ Health & Care Informatics
13 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
0.7%
27
Communications Medicine
85 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
28
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 76%
0.7%
29
Journal of General Internal Medicine
20 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
30
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
124 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.7%