Nurse-coordinated multidisciplinary, family-based cardiovascular disease prevention programme (EUROACTION) for patients with coronary heart disease and asymptomatic individuals at high risk of cardiovascular disease: A paired, cluster-randomised controlled trial
Our aim was to investigate whether a nurse-coordinated multidisciplinary, family-based preventive cardiology programme could improve standards of preventive care in routine clinical practice.
In a matched, cluster-randomised, controlled trial in eight European countries, six pairs of hospitals and six pairs of general practices were assigned to an intervention programme (INT) or usual care (UC) for patients with coronary heart disease or those at high risk of developing cardiovascular disease. The primary endpoints-measured at 1 year-were family-based lifestyle change; management of blood pressure, lipids, and blood glucose to target concentrations; and prescription of cardioprotective drugs. Analysis was by intention to treat. The trial is registered as ISRCTN 71715857.
1589 and 1499 patients with coronary heart disease in hospitals and 1189 and 1128 at high risk were assigned to INT and UC, respectively. In patients with coronary heart disease who smoked in the month before the event, 136 (58%) in the INT and 154 (47%) in the UC groups did not smoke 1 year afterwards (difference in change 10.4%, 95% CI -0.3 to 21.2, p=0.06). Reduced consumption of saturated fat (196 [55%] vs 168 [40%]; 17.3%, 6.4 to 28.2, p=0.009), and increased consumption of fruit and vegetables (680 [72%] vs 349 [35%]; 37.3%, 18.1 to 56.5, p=0.004), and oily fish (156 [17%] vs 81 [8%]; 8.9%, 0.3 to 17.5, p=0.04) at 1 year were greatest in the INT group. High-risk individuals and partners showed changes only for fruit and vegetables (p=0.005). Blood-pressure target of less than 140/90 mm Hg was attained by both coronary (615 [65%] vs 547 [55%]; 10.4%, 0.6 to 20.2, p=0.04) and high-risk (586 [58%] vs 407 [41%]; 16.9%, 2.0 to 31.8, p=0.03) patients in the INT groups. Achievement of total cholesterol of less than 5 mmol/L did not differ between groups, but in high-risk patients the difference in change from baseline to 1 year was 12.7% (2.4 to 23.0, p=0.02) in favour of INT. In the hospital group, prescriptions for statins were higher in the INT group (810 [86%] vs 794 [80%]; 6.0%, -0.5 to 11.5, p=0.04). In general practices in the intervention groups, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (297 [29%] INT vs 196 [20%] UC; 8.5%, 1.8 to 15.2, p=0.02) and statins (381 [37%] INT vs 232 [22%] UC; 14.6%, 2.5 to 26.7, p=0.03) were more frequently prescribed.
To achieve the potential for cardiovascular prevention, we need local preventive cardiology programmes adapted to individual countries, which are accessible by all hospitals and general practices caring for coronary and high-risk patients.
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Coronary heart disease (CHD) is one of the leading causes of death worldwide. Scientific literature shows that prevention of CHD is inadequate. The clinical pharmacist's role in patient-centred care has been shown favourable in a large amount of studies, also in relation to reduction of risk factors related to CHD. We developed and piloted a pharmacist-led follow-up program for patients with established CHD after hospital discharge from a hospital in North Norway. The aim of the present study was to explore how participants in the follow-up program experienced the program with regard to four main topics; medication knowledge, feeling of safety and comfort with medications, the functionality of the program and the clinical pharmacist's role in the interdisciplinary team.
We performed semi-structured thematic interviews with four patients included in the program. After verbatim transcribing, we analysed the interviews using "qualitative content analyses" by Graneheim and Lundman. Trial registration www.clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01131715.
All participants appreciated the follow-up program because their medication knowledge had increased, participation had made them feel safe, they were reassured about the appropriateness of their medications, and they had become more involved in their own medication. The participants reported that the program was well structured and the clinical pharmacist was said to be an important caretaker in the health-care system. The importance of collaboration between pharmacists and physicians, both in hospital and primary care, was emphasized.
Our results indicate that the follow-up program was highly appreciated among the four participants included in this study. The results must be interpreted in the context of the health care system in Norway today. Here, few pharmacists are working in hospitals or in close relation to the general practitioners. In addition, physicians are short of time in order to supply appropriate medication information, both in hospital and primary care. Involving pharmacists in follow-up of patients with CHD seems to be highly appreciated among patients and may be a step towards improving patient care. The study is limited by the low number of participants.
BMC Research Notes 03/2014; 7(1):197. DOI:10.1186/1756-0500-7-197
"The MyAction model of care evolved from the EuroAction study , which demonstrated that a nurse-managed, multidisciplinary, and family-based programme could achieve healthier lifestyle changes and better risk factor control than usual care at one year. Subsequently, Croí MyAction was established as a partnership between Croí (an Irish heart and stroke charity) and Imperial College London, the co-ordinating centre for the EuroAction study . The Croí MyAction programme has demonstrated striking results so far in terms of improving adherence to a healthy diet, reducing both obesity and central obesity and also significantly improving physical activity levels  – all interventions which have been shown to reduce risk of progression to type 2 diabetes. "
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is a risk factor for the development of type 2 diabetes. Lifestyle intervention can prevent progression to type 2 diabetes in high risk populations. We designed a randomised controlled trial (RCT) to evaluate the effectiveness of an established lifestyle intervention compared to standard care for delaying diabetes onset in European women with recent GDM. Recruitment into the RCT was more challenging than anticipated with only 89 of 410 (22%) women agreeing to participate. This paper identifies factors that could enhance participation of the target population in future interventions.
We hypothesised that women who agreed to participate would have higher diabetes risk profiles than those who declined, and secondly that it would be possible to predict participation on the bases of those risk factors. To test our hypothesis, we identified the subset of women for whom we had comprehensive data on diabetes risks factors 3-5 years following GDM, reducing the sample to 43 participants and 73 decliners. We considered established diabetes risk factors: smoking, daily fruit and vegetable intake, participation in exercise, family history of diabetes, glucose values and BMI scores on post-partum re-screens, use of insulin during pregnancy, and age at delivery. We also analysed narrative data from 156 decliners to further understand barriers to and facilitators of participation.
Two factors differentiated participants and decliners: age at delivery (with women older than 34 years being more likely to participate) and insulin use during pregnancy (with women requiring the use of insulin in pregnancy less likely to participate). Binary logistic regression confirmed that insulin use negatively affected the odds of participation. The most significant barriers to participation included the accessibility, affordability and practicality of the intervention.
Women with recent GDM face multiple barriers to lifestyle change. Intervention designers should consider: (i) the practicalities of participation for this population, (ii) research designs that capitalise on motivational differences between participants, (iii) alleviating concerns about long-term diabetes management. We hope this work will support future researchers in developing interventions that are more relevant, effective and successful in recruiting the desired population.Trial registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN41202110.
BMC Medical Research Methodology 01/2014; 14(1):13. DOI:10.1186/1471-2288-14-13 · 2.27 Impact Factor
"What makes ESCAPE original is that the intervention was targeted exclusively at GPs, and that it involved only hypertensive patients at high cardiovascular risk in primary prevention. EUROACTION  assessed an intervention delivered by nurses to patients at high cardiovascular risk and their families in primary care. The results showed a significant increase in the proportion of patients with a BP below 140/90 mmHg in the intervention group. "
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Several observational studies on hypertensive patients have shown a gap between therapeutic targets recommended in guidelines and those achieved in daily practice. The ESCAPE trial aimed to determine whether a multifaceted intervention focused on general practitioners (GPs), could increase significantly the proportion of hypertensive patients at high risk in primary prevention who achieved all their recommended therapeutic targets.
A pragmatic, cluster randomized trial involving 257 GPs randomized by region. The GPs in the intervention group had a one-day training session and were given an electronic blood pressure measurement device and a short recommendation leaflet. Along with usual follow-up, they focused one consultation on hypertension and other cardiovascular risk factors every six months for two years. They also received feedback at baseline and at one year on their patients' clinical and biological parameters. Main outcome measures were change in the proportion of patients achieving all their therapeutic targets and each individual therapeutic target at two years, and quality of life.
1,832 high-risk hypertensive patients were included. After two years, the proportion of patients achieving all their therapeutic targets increased significantly in both groups, but significantly more in the intervention group: OR (odds-ratio) 1.89, (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.09 to 3.27, P = 0.02). Significantly more patients achieved their blood pressure targets in the intervention group than in the usual care group: OR 2.03 (95% CI 1.44 to 2.88, P < 0.0001). Systolic and diastolic blood pressures decreased significantly more in the intervention group than in the usual care group, by 4.8 mmHg and 1.9 mmHg, respectively (P < 0.0001 for both). There were no significant difference changes in physical and mental quality of life between groups.
An easy-to-perform, multifaceted intervention targeting only GPs increased significantly the proportion of high-risk hypertensive patients in primary prevention achieving their recommended therapeutic targets.Trial registration: This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00348855.
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.