The goal of this study is to use a cluster-randomized design (1:1 ratio) among 8 primary care clinics affiliated with New York-Presbyterian Hospital to test the effectiveness of a theory-informed multifaceted implementation strategy designed to increase the uptake of the 2015 United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) hypertension screening guidelines. The primary outcome is the ordering of out-of-office blood pressure testing, either ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) or home blood pressure monitoring (HBPM), by primary care clinicians for patients with newly elevated office blood pressure (BP), as recommended by the 2015 guidelines.

The goal of this study is to assess the effect of a multifaceted implementation strategy aimed at increasing adherence to the 2015 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendations for hypertension screening, with a focus on implementation in primary care clinics that reach medically underserved patients. The accurate diagnosis of hypertension is essential for targeting appropriate therapy at the patients who can most benefit from hypertension treatment. On the other hand, inappropriate diagnosis of hypertension can lead to unnecessary treatment with blood pressure (BP) medications, wasteful healthcare utilization, and adverse psychological consequences from being mislabeled as having a chronic disease.

There are challenges to measuring BP in clinical settings that make inappropriate diagnosis common. A systematic review conducted by the USPSTF in 2014 found that 5%-65% of patients with elevated office BP do not have high out-of-office BP readings according to ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) or home BP monitoring (HBPM). This is commonly referred to as white-coat hypertension. In contrast to patients with sustained hypertension (elevated BP in office and out-of-office settings), patients with white-coat hypertension do not appear to be at increased cardiovascular risk nor to benefit from antihypertensive treatment. Based primarily on these observations, in 2015, the USPSTF updated their hypertension screening guidelines to recommend that patients with elevated office BP undergo out-of-office BP testing (ABPM or HBPM) to rule-out white-coat hypertension prior to a new diagnosis of hypertension. While ABPM is recommended as the first-line out-of-office screening test, HBPM is cited as a reasonable alternative if ABPM is unavailable.

Despite the USPSTF guideline recommendation, ABPM and HBPM are currently infrequently utilized in the US, particularly as part of hypertension diagnosis. Accordingly, the investigators conducted focus groups with primary care providers, patients, and other key stakeholders (medical directors, nurse supervisors, medical assistants, nurse practitioners, front desk staff) to identify the major barriers to implementation of the new hypertension screening guidelines. The investigators then applied the Behavior Change Wheel, a trans-theoretical intervention development framework, to categorize barriers and select theory-informed intervention components that would address these barriers. The investigators arrived at a theory-informed implementation strategy for improving out-of-office BP testing, which included educational activities for providers (i.e., presentations at grand rounds or other venues at which physicians are present); training registered nurses to be capable of assisting with teaching patients to conduct HBPM; disseminating information on how to order ABPM and HBPM to clinicians, nurses, and front desk staff via huddles, emails, and other electronic communications; creating a computerized electronic health record (EHR)-embedded clinical decision support tool that prompts recall of the USPSTF hypertension guidelines and facilitates ordering of HBPM and ABPM for eligible patients; creating and disseminating patient information materials on ABPM and HBPM; providing periodic feedback about clinic-level success with adhering to the guideline, and developing an easily accessible, culturally-adapted and locally tailored ABPM service.

The investigators now aim to test this multifaceted implementation strategy to increase the uptake of the USPSTF hypertension recommendations in the ambulatory care network (ACN) of New York-Presbyterian Hospital (NYP), a network of primary care clinics serving 120,000 patients from underserved communities in New York City. Specifically, the investigators are conducting a 2-year cluster randomized trial (Phase II of the project) following a 6-month implementation phase in which we randomize matched pairs of 8 ACN clinics (1:1) to either receive the multicomponent guideline implementation strategy (N = 4 clinics) or a wait-list control (N = 4 clinics). The investigators aim to assess the effectiveness of this intervention on the completion of out-of-office BP testing (ABPM or HBPM) prior to hypertension diagnosis (primary outcome) as well as the effect on out-of-office test ordering, irrespective of test completion (secondary outcome).

Patient Inclusion Criteria (as per electronic medical records):

• Elevated blood pressure (BP) (systolic BP>=140 mmHg or diastolic BP >=90 mmHg) at a scheduled clinic visit with a primary care provider from a clinic that is participating in the study; if multiple BP readings were taken from a visit, then the average of the readings will be used

Patient Exclusion Criteria (as per electronic medical records):

• Prior diagnosis of hypertension
• Prior diagnosis of white-coat hypertension
• Prior evaluation for white-coat hypertension by 24-hr ABPM or HBPM
• Prescribed antihypertensive medication
• Manual office BP <140/90 mmHg
• Severely elevated BP (systolic BP>=180 mmHg or diastolic BP>=110 mmHg)
• Evidence of target-organ damage (chronic kidney disease, cardiovascular disease)

Clinic Inclusion Criteria:

• Primary care clinics that are part of the New York-Presbyterian Hospital Ambulatory Care Network and were not part of implementation development

Clinic Exclusion Criteria:

• Medical director of clinic declines to participate in cluster randomized trial

A de-identified data archive that contains raw study data will be posted on an open science platform.

Within 1 year of completion of study activities

Access to the data archive will be provided upon request.

The clinics are either implementing the intervention (4 out of 8) or providing usual care (4 out of 8) after the implementation period begins. The baseline analysis for the participants that visited these clinics are calculated separately - those who visited the Intervention Clinics before and after the implementation (456+401=857 total) and those who visited the Control Clinics before and after the implementation (139+190=329 total).

Adverse event data were recorded up to 6 months after the 12-month pre-implementation and 12-month post-implementation periods.

Adverse events related to ABPM testing were reported in the Columbia ABPM testing service clinical database. Other adverse events were collected if reported in the electronic health record.

The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic led to the closure of the ABPM testing service during the maintenance period which precluded an evaluation of the implementation strategy during the maintenance period. Additionally, a new electronic health record was adopted in 2020 which also precluded an evaluation of the use of HBPM during the maintenance period.

Outcomes assessors will be blinded to group assignment when coding medical records to determine whether providers ordered out-of-office BP testing for eligible patients.