An interventional study of Experimental: Pharmacist-Bidirectional Texting Group and Active Comparator: Control Group in Hypertension, sponsored by Linnea Polgreen. Completed at 1 site in United States. Open to participants aged 21 Years to 100 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2025-01-22.
Sponsored by Linnea Polgreen · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment
Bidirectional texting is an effective way to collect home blood pressure (BP) measurements from subjects, but collecting BP measurements and sending them to physicians does not necessarily lead to decreased BP. Pharmacist interventions have been successful in decreasing subject BP. However, pharmacists are expensive, and in successful interventions, spent a substantial amount of time collecting home BP measurements. In this study, a proven pharmacist intervention will be added to a bidirectional texting program to determine if a combined pharmacist-bidirectional texting intervention is successful at decreasing subject BP and increasing subject BP treatment intensification in a cost-effective manner. This study will be a cluster-randomized, controlled trial of a new intervention.
HTN is associated with the greatest attributable risk for mortality among all modifiable risk factors for cardiovascular disease.[1] In 2014, there were approximately 72 million adults (29%) with HTN in the US.[2] Several clinical trials have demonstrated that antihypertensive medications reduce cardiovascular events.[3] For example, even a 5 mm Hg difference in systolic BP (SBP) over 3-5 years can reduce the risk of cardiovascular complications and strokes by 25-30%.[4] Yet, approximately 20% of U.S. adults are unaware of their HTN,[5] and among patients diagnosed with HTN, 47% are uncontrolled.[2] Thus, there is a critical need to effectively treat patients with HTN.
Clinical inertia has been identified as the primary cause for delays in achieving BP control for over 20 years.[6-8] Providers often discount office BP readings that may be falsely elevated due to observer or measurement error and/or the clinical surroundings (e.g., white coat HTN).[9-11] Patients are often seen only once or twice a year which further delays BP control. Furthermore,[8, 12] BP goals are achieved in only 49% of the patients who take anti-hypertensive medications.[5] New approaches for acquiring more BP readings are also needed to better monitor and titrate treatment because a significant proportion of patients on therapy are not adequately controlled despite frequent physician visits.
Home BP measurements, (i.e., having patients take their BP at home), can facilitate the more timely diagnosis of HTN by reducing diagnostic uncertainty. In fact, home measurements are better prognostic indicators of stroke and cardiovascular mortality than clinic measurements,[13-15] are more closely correlated with end-organ damage from HTN than clinic measurements,[16, 17] are cost effective and well-tolerated by patients,[18] and generate BP readings that are at least as reproducible as clinic readings.[19] Home BP measurements, if available, may help physicians overcome barriers related to clinical inertia.[20] However, the data must be followed by action. The researchers have pioneered physician-pharmacist collaborative management (PPCM) that has been shown to decrease clinical inertia and improve BP control.[21, 22] Pharmacists have been embedded within the medical office to perform BP management. The pharmacists are able to assess patients' needs and provide recommendations to physicians regarding treatment changes, providing patients with timely therapy adjustments.[23] However, many medical office leaders are unable to hire clinical pharmacists due to limited resources. Therefore, a "virtual", remote clinical pharmacy service has been developed.[24] Pharmacists were able to obtain electronic medical record (EMR) access at all intervention offices for private physician offices throughout Iowa. While the physicians accepted 95% of the pharmacists' recommendations, the effect on improving BP was modest (manuscript under review). Adding the proposed texting platform with home BP monitoring should markedly improve the potency of our remote, telepharmacy intervention.
This trial exhibits clinical equipoise because, although it is known that texting is an efficient method for obtaining home BP measurements, and that pharmacist interventions to improve BP are cost-effective, it is not known if combining these two interventions will also be cost effective. There are four reasons why this study might not be successful. First, while meta-analyses have found significantly improved BP with pharmacist interventions some studies were not successful.[25] Second, more data does not necessarily mean better data: patients could report false values, BP could be abnormally low or high during the measurement period, or the data could be ignored. Third, even better data might not lead to better outcomes: data could be ignored by pharmacists, physicians or patients; pharmacists' recommendations could be ignored by physicians or patients. Fourth, even if the study is effective at improving subject outcomes, it might not be cost effective. Texting might not save as much time as hypothesized. Thus, further research is needed to address these gaps in knowledge.
There is a critical need for an easy-to-use, cost-effective, mobile health (m-health) approach to assist patients and healthcare providers with screening, diagnosis, and monitoring of HTN. Small medical offices and those located in poor or rural areas are unable to operationalize team-based care with pharmacists. The researchers have overcome this barrier with the use of a remote clinical pharmacy services. Coronary heart disease deaths could be reduced by 15-20% and stroke deaths by 20-30% if this intervention effectively improves BP and is implemented more widely in primary care offices.
The goal of this proposal is to evaluate whether a scalable, short messaging service (SMS) approach combined with a pharmacist-based intervention improves BP management cost effectively. To achieve this objective, the following specific aims are proposed:
Exclusion Criteria:
Patients enrolled in the Pharmacist-Bidirectional Texting Group will return 7 morning and 7 evening blood pressure measurements via text message. The report will be shared with a pharmacist who will monitor them for 12 months. The pharmacist will have access to their entire medical record and will provide support and education via text messaging, email, or phone calls, whichever is preferred by the patient. The pharmacist will develop a care plan and make recommendations to the physician through the electronic medical record to quickly adjust therapy to improve control. They will also recommend laboratory testing if indicated. They will have contact with the patient every 2-3 weeks while blood pressure is uncontrolled, and at least every 2 months when it is controlled. The pharmacist will track all recommendations made to physicians and whether or not they were implemented, modified, or rejected.
Other: Experimental: Pharmacist-Bidirectional Texting Group
Patients randomized to the control group will also return 7 morning and 7 evening blood pressure measurements. The report will be shared with a pharmacist who will call the patient to discuss the measurements and possibly recommend follow up with a physician, but no other pharmacist intervention or monitoring will occur during the 12 months.
Other: Active Comparator: Control Group
The goal of this intervention is to determine if bidirectional texting and pharmacist monitoring will improve blood pressure control.
This group will receive bidirectional texting, but no pharmacist monitoring.
Difference in Change in Systolic Blood Pressure- 12 Months
The difference between the groups in the change from baseline to 12 months in systolic blood pressure in mm Hg.
Time frame: 12 months
Difference in Change in Diastolic Blood Pressure- 12 Months
The difference between the groups in the change from baseline to 12 months in diastolic blood pressure in mmHg.
Time frame: 12 months
Number of Medication Changes From 6 to 12 Months
Total number of medication changes (i.e., dose, discontinuation, initiation, etc.) from 6 months to 12 months as documented in the medical record.
Time frame: 12 months
Dollars Spent Per Patient for 12 Month Bidirectional Texting/Pharmacist Intervention
Total cost of medications, time spent by research staff, and clinics visits per patient from baseline.
Time frame: 12 months
| Milestone | Pharmacist-Bidirectional Texting Group | Control Group |
|---|---|---|
| Started | 209 | 211 |
| Completed | 209 | 211 |
| Not completed | 0 | 0 |
The difference between the groups in the change from baseline to 12 months in systolic blood pressure in mm Hg.
| mmHg | Pharmacist-Bidirectional Texting Group | Control Group |
|---|---|---|
| Difference in Change in Systolic Blood Pressure- 12 Months | -23.8 ± 19.4 | -19.6 ± 19.4 |
The difference between the groups in the change from baseline to 12 months in diastolic blood pressure in mmHg.
| mmHg | Pharmacist-Bidirectional Texting Group | Control Group |
|---|---|---|
| Difference in Change in Diastolic Blood Pressure- 12 Months | -9.1 ± 13.4 | -9.6 ± 11.4 |
Total number of medication changes (i.e., dose, discontinuation, initiation, etc.) from 6 months to 12 months as documented in the medical record.
| Medication Changes | Pharmacist-Bidirectional Texting Group | Control Group |
|---|---|---|
| Number of Medication Changes From 6 to 12 Months | 0.59 ± 0.98 | 0.44 ± 0.84 |
Total cost of medications, time spent by research staff, and clinics visits per patient from baseline.
| Dollars | Pharmacist-Bidirectional Texting Group | Control Group |
|---|---|---|
| Dollars Spent Per Patient for 12 Month Bidirectional Texting/Pharmacist Intervention | 980.17 ± 1127.91 | 838.95 ± 713.45 |
Collected over 12 months. Non-serious events are listed at a 0% frequency threshold.
| Group | Deaths | Serious | Other |
|---|---|---|---|
| Pharmacist-Bidirectional Texting Group | 7/209 (3.3%) | 0/209 (0%) | 0/209 (0%) |
| Control Group | 4/211 (1.9%) | 0/211 (0%) | 0/211 (0%) |
| Age, Continuous(Years) | Pharmacist-Bidirectional Texting Group | Control Group | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | 58.7 ± 13.7 | 58.4 ± 13.6 | 58.6 ± 13.6 |
| Sex: Female, Male(Participants) | Pharmacist-Bidirectional Texting Group | Control Group | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| Female | 96 | 113 | 209 |
| Male | 113 | 98 | 211 |
| Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)(Participants) | Pharmacist-Bidirectional Texting Group | Control Group | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hispanic or Latino | 49 | 48 | 97 |
| Not Hispanic or Latino | 160 | 162 | 322 |
| Unknown or Not Reported | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Race (NIH/OMB)(Participants) | Pharmacist-Bidirectional Texting Group | Control Group | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| American Indian or Alaska Native | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| Asian | 3 | 0 | 3 |
| Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Black or African American | 11 | 5 | 16 |
| White | 184 | 196 | 380 |
| More than one race | 3 | 0 | 3 |
| Unknown or Not Reported | 7 | 9 | 16 |
| Body Mass Index(kg/m^2) | Pharmacist-Bidirectional Texting Group | Control Group | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | 32.6 ± 7.4 | 33.7 ± 7.8 | 33.1 ± 7.7 |
| Level of Education(Participants) | Pharmacist-Bidirectional Texting Group | Control Group | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| < High School | 32 | 46 | 78 |
| High School | 66 | 56 | 122 |
| Some College | 37 | 46 | 83 |
| Associate's Degree | 27 | 20 | 47 |
| Bachelor's Degree | 30 | 24 | 54 |
| Master's Degree | 10 | 10 | 20 |
| Doctoral Degree | 5 | 6 | 11 |
| Trade School | 2 | 3 | 5 |
| Smoking History(Participants) | Pharmacist-Bidirectional Texting Group | Control Group | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| Never Smoked | 117 | 120 | 237 |
| Current Smoker | 37 | 34 | 71 |
| Former Smoker | 55 | 57 | 112 |
| Baseline Systolic Blood Pressure(mmHg) | Pharmacist-Bidirectional Texting Group | Control Group | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | 156.0 ± 13.7 | 153.4 ± 14.0 | 154.3 ± 14.0 |
5 further baseline measures are reported on the registry.
Documents are hosted by the registry — open the source record to download them.
Plan to share: No
This study is completed, as verified in Dec 2024. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.
Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.
Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.
Linnea Polgreen