Shapiro Martin F, Shu Suzanne B, Goldstein Noah J, Victor Ronald G, Fox Craig R, Tseng Chi-Hong, Vangala Sitaram, Mogler Braden K, Reed Stewart B, Villa Estivali, Escarce José J
Department of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Department of Health Care Policy & Management, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
J Gen Intern Med. 2020 Jan;35(1):70-78. doi: 10.1007/s11606-019-05269-z. Epub 2019 Sep 12.
Uncontrolled hypertension contributes to disparities in cardiovascular outcomes. Patient intervention strategies informed by behavioral economics and social psychology could improve blood pressure (BP) control in disadvantaged minority populations.
To assess the impact on BP control of an intervention combining short-term financial incentives with promotion of intrinsic motivation among highly disadvantaged patients.
Randomized controlled trial.
Two hundred seven adults (98% African American or Latino) aged 18 or older with uncontrolled hypertension attending Federally Qualified Health Centers.
Six-month intervention, combining financial incentives for measuring home BP, recording medication use, BP improvement, and achieving target BP values with counseling linking hypertension control efforts to participants' personal reasons to stay healthy.
Primary outcomes: percentage achieving systolic BP (SBP) < 140 mmHg, percentage achieving diastolic BP (DBP) < 90 mmHg, and changes in SBP and DBP, all after 6 months. Priority secondary outcomes were SBP < 140 mmHg, DBP < 90 mmHg, and BP change at 12 months, 6 months after the intervention ended.
After 6 months, rates of achieving target BP values for intervention and control subjects respectively was 57.1% vs. 40.2% for SBP < 140 mmHg (adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 2.53 (1.13-5.70)), 79.8% vs 70.1% for DBP < 90 mmHg (AOR 2.50 (0.84-7.44)), and 53.6% vs 40.2% for achieving both targets (AOR 2.04 (0.92-4.52)). However, at 12 months, the groups did not differ significantly in these 3 measures: 39.5% vs 35.0% for SBP (AOR 1.20 (0.51-2.83)), 68.4% vs 75.0% for DBP (AOR 0.70 (0.24-2.09)), and 35.5% vs 33.8% for both (AOR 1.03 (0.44-2.42)). Change in absolute SBP and DBP did not differ significantly between the groups at 6 or 12 months. Exploratory post hoc analysis revealed intervention benefit only occurred among individuals whose providers intensified their regimens, but not among those with intensification but no intervention.
The intervention achieved short-term improvement in SBP control in a highly disadvantaged population. Despite attempts to enhance intrinsic motivation, the effect was not sustained after incentives were withdrawn. Future research should evaluate combined patient/provider strategies to enhance such interventions and sustain their benefit.
NCT01402453; http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT01402453.
未控制的高血压导致心血管疾病结局存在差异。基于行为经济学和社会心理学的患者干预策略可能会改善弱势少数群体的血压(BP)控制情况。
评估一项将短期经济激励与促进高度弱势患者内在动机相结合的干预措施对血压控制的影响。
随机对照试验。
207名年龄在18岁及以上、患有未控制高血压且在联邦合格健康中心就诊的成年人(98%为非裔美国人或拉丁裔)。
为期6个月的干预,包括对测量家庭血压、记录用药情况、血压改善以及达到目标血压值给予经济激励,同时提供咨询,将高血压控制努力与参与者保持健康的个人原因联系起来。
主要结局:6个月后收缩压(SBP)<140 mmHg的达标百分比、舒张压(DBP)<90 mmHg的达标百分比以及SBP和DBP的变化。优先次要结局为干预结束6个月后的12个月时SBP<140 mmHg、DBP<90 mmHg以及血压变化。
6个月后,干预组和对照组达到目标血压值的比例分别为:SBP<140 mmHg时为57.1%对40.2%(调整优势比(AOR)2.53(1.13 - 5.70)),DBP<90 mmHg时为79.8%对70.1%(AOR 2.50(0.84 - 7.44)),同时达到两个目标时为53.6%对40.2%(AOR 2.04(0.92 - 4.52))。然而,在12个月时,这三组在这三项指标上无显著差异:SBP方面为39.5%对35.0%(AOR 1.20(0.51 - 2.83)),DBP方面为68.4%对75.0%(AOR 0.70(0.24 - 2.09)),两项指标都达标的为35.5%对33.8%(AOR 1.03(0.44 - 2.42))。6个月和12个月时,两组之间SBP和DBP的绝对变化无显著差异。探索性事后分析显示,干预益处仅出现在其医疗服务提供者强化治疗方案的个体中,而在那些强化治疗但未接受干预的个体中未出现。
该干预措施在高度弱势人群中实现了SBP控制的短期改善。尽管试图增强内在动机,但在取消激励措施后效果未能持续。未来研究应评估联合患者/医疗服务提供者策略,以加强此类干预并维持其益处。
NCT01402453;http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT01402453