Aldosterone Antagonists or Renin-Guided Therapy for Treatment-Resistant Hypertension: A Comparative Effectiveness Pilot Study in Primary Care.

BACKGROUND: Uncontrolled treatment-resistant hypertension (TRH), i.e., blood pressure (BP, mm Hg) ≥140/≥90mm Hg in and out of office on ≥3 different BP medications at optimal doses, is common and has a poor prognosis. Aldosterone antagonist (AA) and renin-guided therapy (RGT) are effective strategies for improving BP control in TRH but have not been compared. METHODS: A comparative effectiveness TRH pilot study of AA vs. RGT was conducted in 4 primary care clinics with 2 each randomized to AA or RGT. The primary outcome was change in clinic BP defined by means of 5 automated office BP values. Eighty-nine patients with apparent TRH were screened and 44 met criteria for true TRH. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics of 20 patients in the AA (70% Black, 45% female, mean age: 57.4 years) and 24 patients in RGT (79% Black, 50% female, 57.8 years) arms were similar with baseline BP 162±5/90±3 vs. 153±3/84±3, respectively, P = 0.11/0.20. BP declined to 144±5/86±4 in AA vs. 132±4/75±3 in RGT, P = 0.07/0.01; BP was controlled to JNC7 (Seventh Joint National Committee Report) goal in 25% vs. 62.5%, respectively, P < 0.01. Although BP changes from baseline, the primary outcome, were not different (-17.6±5.1/-4.0±3.0 AA vs. -20.4±3.8/-9.7±2.0 RGT, P = 0.65/0.10.), more BP medications were added with AA than RGT (+0.9±0.1 vs. +0.4±0.1 per patient, P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In this TRH pilot study, AA and RGT lowered BP similarly, although fewer additional medications were required with RGT. A larger comparative effectiveness study could establish the utility of these treatment strategies for lowering BP of uncontrolled TRH patients in primary care.

Education in quality improvement for practice in primary care during residency training and subsequent activities in practice.

BACKGROUND: Quality improvement (QI) is an integral aspect of graduate medical education and an important competence for physicians. OBJECTIVE: We examined the QI activities of recent family medicine residency graduates and whether a standardized curriculum in QI during residency resulted in greater self-reported participation in QI activities in practice after graduation. METHODS: The family medicine residency programs affiliated with the South Carolina Area Health Education Consortium (N  =  7) were invited to participate in this study. Following completion of introductory educational activities, each site implemented regularly occurring (at least monthly) educational and patient care activities using QI principles and tools. Semiannually, representatives from each participating site met to review project aims and to provide updates regarding the QI activities in their program. To examine the impact of this project on QI activities, we surveyed graduates from participating programs from the year prior to and 2 years after the implementation of the curriculum. RESULTS: Graduates in the preimplementation and postimplementation cohorts reported participating in periodic patient care data review, patient care registries, QI projects, and disease-specific activities (57%-71% and 54%-63%, respectively). There were no significant differences in QI activities between the 2 groups except in activities associated with status of their practice as a patient-centered medical home. CONCLUSIONS: Most but not all family medicine graduates reported they were actively involved in QI activities within their practices, independent of their exposure to a QI curriculum during training.