An interventional study of Enhanced COACH CDS Tool and Usual Care COACH CDS Tool in Hypertension and Multiple Chronic Conditions, sponsored by Oregon Health and Science University. Active, not recruiting at 3 sites in United States. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 100 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-04-09.
Sponsored by Oregon Health and Science University · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment
Hypertension is a significant contributor to poor cardiovascular outcomes. Self-management support tools can increase patient behaviors to improve blood pressure. The investigators created a clinical decision support app, called COACH, to integrate home blood pressure data and goals into EHR reporting and workflow with communications informed by behavioral economics principles to support shared decision-making. The study aims to measure the effectiveness of the COACH intervention in a pragmatic multi-site randomized trial in a primary care setting.
This protocol addresses the challenge of implementing scalable, interoperable clinical decision support (CDS) and the patient-centered outcome of avoiding heart attacks and strokes through high blood pressure control in the setting of multiple chronic illnesses. It leverages substantial extant work to build patient-centered CDS for high blood pressure, electronic care planning and health coaching at scale, implementing and testing these tools in new primary care settings. This protocol implements a new patient-facing CDS across multiple clinic sites spanning three major health systems and in the nation's two leading EHR vendor platforms. Controlling blood pressure is a singularly important goal; nearly 50% of adults in health care have high blood pressure, which increases their risk of heart attack and stroke. However, managing blood pressure requires navigation within a narrow therapeutic index, where overtreatment leads to substantial complications, including kidney damage, low blood pressure, falls, and mood disorders. Balancing treatment to reduce risk while avoiding harm requires engaging patients directly in intensive goal setting, shared care planning around nonpharmacologic and pharmacologic treatments, and self-monitoring for effectiveness and adverse events.
Hypertension rarely occurs alone; providing clinical decision support, care planning, and self-management support in the context of multiple chronic illnesses is required.
The study team will address patient-centered needs by scaling our implemented, patient-facing CDS for eCare Planning, Collaboration Oriented Approach to Controlling High blood pressure (COACH) to 3 sites and testing whether it reduces blood pressure and risk of heart attack and stroke. To do so, we embed a diverse patient perspective into a robust, feasible, and effective CDS implementation and evaluation process by 1) capturing patient input throughout the CDS lifecycle; 2) adapting the COACH CDS to patient preferences, values, and goals; and 3) disseminating the tested FHIR-based (Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources) patient-facing application into organizations that combines blood pressure control with relevant risk scores into an eCare Plan application and framework and implementing these patient-centered approaches in feasible, context-responsive, and effective ways. The investigators address scalability by helping organizations advance their use of patient-generated health data and patient-reported outcomes using standard implementation frameworks while producing CDS artifacts and implementation guides that can be leveraged to increase adoption beyond the work of this proposal. For interoperability, we use a standard-based, structured process that re-uses concept and value sets whenever possible while using robust techniques to develop new sets and make them available for future innovators.
To complete these goals, the study investigators leverage previous work in building standardized HBP value sets, logic, and a patient-facing FHIR tool. In this work, we have engaged in several collaborations, most notably with the CDS Connect Community, where we will upload all artifacts, but also with other AHRQ digital health efforts and with other large collaboratives, including the ACC/AHA and JNC8 guideline developers, the HL7 CPG-on-FHIR, and the eCare Planning project from NIDDK and AHRQ. The study investigators will use two frameworks to evaluate the implementation. First, adaptation in implementation science is both common and may be required for success; we explore the ways in which the 5 rights-the right information to the right person in the right intervention format through the right channel at the right time in workflow-can be adapted for key organizational needs while retaining fidelity to the goals. In addition, we consider a framework that combines usability with effectiveness for complex conditions by exploring concepts related to appropriate simplicity, prioritization, summarization, adjudication, and actionability to enhance CDS effectiveness for patient needs.
Thus, the study's specific aims are:
6,114 studies on the registry are indexed under Hypertension; 912 are open to participants now.
This study's planned enrollment of 550 is above the median of 100 across 4,575 interventional studies indexed under Hypertension.
Browse Hypertension studies →Oregon Health and Science University is the lead sponsor of 696 studies on the registry; 131 are open to participants now.
Of its 52 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 39 (75%) have results posted.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.
Exclusion Criteria:
Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
The study doctor’s estimate of how long someone is likely to live. Criteria use it so that people can stay in the study long enough for it to answer its question.
Life expectancy
The study doctor’s estimate of how long someone is likely to live. Criteria use it so that people can stay in the study long enough for it to answer its question.
Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
Enhanced blood pressure management recommendations that use cognitive and behavioral science to increase the likelihood of self-management goal setting to lower blood pressure. The CDS tool allows participant access to BP visualizations, reminders, and affectively tailored messaging about blood pressure management.
Other: Enhanced COACH CDS Tool
Equivalent of usual care delivered through the CDS tool: Blood pressure management with basic information, reduced reminders, and no affective alerts.
Other: Usual Care COACH CDS Tool
CDS tool with features to promote high blood pressure management
CDS tool with limited features to promote high blood pressure management
Blood Pressure Control
Percent of participants at or below 140/90 (office BP) or 135/85 (home BP) average.
Time frame: Up to 6 months
Reduction in Systolic and/or Diastolic Blood Pressure
Percent of participants displaying a decrease in systolic and/or diastolic blood pressure readings over the 6-month course of measurement
Time frame: Up to 6 months
Demographic factors contributing to blood pressure control
Age- and socioeconomic status-reported participant data
Time frame: Up to 6 months
COACH Application System Usability Evaluation
Participant assessment of application using the System Usability Scale questions using 4-point scale for 10 agreement questions where low scores indicate less agreement and high scores are higher agreement of usability of the application
Time frame: Up to 6 months
Participant report of health behaviors including Self Efficacy, Social Support, Outcome Expectations and Self-regulation
Participant self-report of factors related to health beliefs using 10-point sliding scale for 25 agreement questions where low scores indicate less agreement and high scores are higher agreement of aspects of health beliefs
Time frame: 2 months, 6 months
Plan to share: Yes — We will make all materials available as open source documents and CDS artifacts on our GitHub site, on the content implementation guide, on AHRQ's CDS Connect Community, and elsewhere as directed. We will publish the application on the GitHub site as open source. We will share all resources and work with all committees to find conferences, journals, and other opportunities to discuss dissemination.
Supporting information: Study protocol, Statistical analysis plan, Informed consent form, Analytic code
This study is active, not recruiting, as verified in Apr 2026. 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.
Oregon Health and Science University →