Table 2.
Summary of outcomes with significant results
| Outcome criteria | Intervention vs. control group | Difference in change between Intervention and Control group | P value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Carter B. (2009) [25] | Proportion of patients with BP control at 6 months (%) | 63.9 vs. 29.9 (OR 3.2, 95% CI 2.0-5.1) | - | p < 0.001 |
| Proportion of patients with BP control without diabetes mellitus at 6 months (%) | 68.8 vs. 32.4 (OR 3.9, 95% CI 3.1-5.0) | - | p < 0.001 | |
| Proportion of patients with BP control with diabetes mellitus at 6 months (%) | 45.5 vs. 26.1 (OR 4.7, 95% CI 1.7–13.1) | - | p = 0.003 | |
| SBP at 6 months (mmHg) | -20.7 vs. -6.8 | - | p < 0.05 | |
| Carter B. (2015) [26] | SBP at 9 months (mmHg) | 131.6 vs. 138.2 | -6.1 (95% CI-9.75 to -2.39) * | p = 0.002 |
| DBP at 9 months (mmHg) | 76.3 vs. 78.0 | -2.9 (95% CI -4.85 to -0.93) * | p = 0.005 | |
| SBP in minority ethnicity subjects at 9 months (mmHg) | 133.0 vs. 140.3 | -6.4 (95% CI -11.16 to -1.68) * | p = 0.009 | |
| DBP in minority ethnicity subjects at 9 months (mmHg) | 77.9 vs. 78.8 | -2.9 (95% CI -5.88 to -0.08) * | p = 0.044 | |
| Carter B. (2018) [27] | Proportion of patients with Body Mass Index screening and follow-up at 12 months (%) | 68.0 vs. 37.4 | - | p < 0.001 |
| Proportion of patients with alcohol use screening at 12 months (%) | 98.0 vs. 88.2 | - | p < 0.001 | |
| Chen Z. (2013) [28] | 24-hour SBP at 6 months (mmHg) | 120.4 vs. 131.8 | - | p < 0.001 |
| Proportion of patients with BP control at 6 months (%) | 75.6 vs. 50.0 | - | p < 0.001 | |
| Finley P. (2002) [39] | 6-months Medication Possession ratio (MPR) | 0.811 vs. 0.659 | - | p < 0.005 |
| Patient satisfaction survey results at 6 months | Patients in intervention group were more likely to have received an antidepressant previously: 25.0% vs. 19.0% | - | p = 0.044 | |
| Finley P. (2003) [40] | Patient satisfaction survey results at 6 months | Patients in the intervention group expressed greater satisfaction than did control group with the personal nature of care, availability of providers, ability of providers to listen, explanation of why antidepressants were prescribed, explanation of how to take the antidepressants and patient’s overall satisfaction with the health maintenance organization | - | p < 0.05 |
| Hogg W. (2009) [30] | Number of patients with influenza vaccination | - | 0.087 (95% CI 0.012–0.162) ** | p = 0.023 |
| Number of patients with screening for colorectal cancer | - | 0.167 (95% CI 0.046–0.288) ** | p = 0.0070 | |
| Number of patients with hearing examination | - | 0.273 (95% CI 0.106–0.44) ** | p = 0.0016 | |
| Number of patients with eye examination | - | 0.220 (95% CI 0.076–0.364) ** | p = 0.0029 | |
| Jameson J. (2010) [31] | HbA1c for male patients at 12 months (%) | -1.90 vs. -0.15 | - | p = 0.03 |
| Proportion of patients who achieved at least a 1.0% decrease in HbA1c at 12 months (%) | 67.3 vs. 41.2 | - | p = 0.02 | |
| Proportion of patients who achieved at least a 1.0% decrease in HbA1c for patients of nonwhite race/ethnicity at 12 months (%) | 56.3 vs. 22.7 | - | p = 0.03 | |
| Proportion of patients who achieved at least a 1.0% decrease in HbA1c for male patients at 12 months (%) | 72.0 vs. 28.0 | - | p = 0.002 | |
| Pape G. (2011) [33] | LDL-C at 24 months (mg/dl) | 83.0 vs. 95.0 | - | p < 0.001 |
| Proportion of patients with LDL-C at target goal at 24 months (%) | 78.0 vs. 50.0 | - | p = 0.003 | |
| Proportion of patients with LDL-C at target if they were not at goal baseline at 24 months (%) | 74.0 vs. 48.0 | - | p = 0.001 | |
| Proportion of patients with LDL-C test within the past 12 months at 24 months (%) | 95.0 vs. 82.0 | - | p = 0.04 | |
| Simpson S. (2011) [34] | Proportion of patients with diminution of 10.0% of SBP at 12 months (%) | 37.0 vs. 23.0 (OR 1.91, 95% CI 1.11–3.28) | - | p = 0.02 |
| Proportion of patients with elevated blood pressure at baseline with diminution of 10.0% of SBP at 12 months (%) | 50.0 vs. 28.0 (OR 2.55, 95% CI 1.30–5.01) | - | p = 0.007 | |
| SBP at 12 months (mmHg) | -7.4 vs. -2.5 | -4.9 (95% CI -8.7 to -1.0) * | p = 0.002 | |
| DBP at 12 months (mmHg) | -2.3 vs. 0.6 | -2.9 (95% CI -5.6 to -0.2) * | p < 0.05 | |
| SBP for patients with elevated blood pressure at 12 months (mmHg) | -13.9 vs. -6.7 | - | p = 0.002 | |
| Predicted 10-year risk of cardiovascular events at 12 months (%) | -2.7 vs. -1.2 | -1.5 (95% CI -0.2 to 3.3) * | p = 0.005 | |
| Smith S. (2016) [35] | SBP at 9 months (mmHg) | 132 ± 16 vs. 141 ± 20 | -6.62 (95% CI -12.8 to -0.44) * | p = 0.036 |
| Proportion of patients with an improvement from low to high medication adherence minority ethnicity subjects (antihypertensive use) at 9 months (%) | 8.1 vs. 0.0 | - | p = 0.016 | |
| Tahaineh L. (2011) [36] | Proportion of patients reached their LDL-C goal at 6 months (%) | 94.5 vs. 71.2 | - | p < 0.001 |
| Proportion of patients reached their total cholesterol goal at 6 months (%) | 87.7 vs. 73.1 | - | p = 0.038 | |
| Proportion of patients reached their HDL-C goal at 6 months (%) | 28.8 vs. 50.0 | - | p = 0.016 | |
| Tobari H. (2010) [37] | DBP at home at 6 months (mmHg) | -3.3 (-4.8 to -1.8) vs. -1.4 (-2.9 to 0.1) | -2.8 (95% CI -5.5 to -0.1) * | p = 0.04 |
| Body Mass Index at 6 months (kg/m²) | -0.4 (-0.7 to -0.2) vs. 0.0 (-0.2 to 0.2) | -0.4 (95% CI -0.7 to -0.1) * | p = 0.008 | |
| Sodium reduction score at 6 months | 1.3 (0.9 to 1.7) vs. 0.0 (-0.4 to 0.4) | 1.2 (95% CI 0.5-2.0) ** | p = 0.002 | |
| Number of smokers at 6 months | 9.0 [14.0] vs. 19.0 [30.0] | 0.4 (95% CI 0.2–0.9) ** | p = 0.04 | |
| Weber C. (2010) [38] | Change in 24-hour SBP at 9 months (mmHg) | 136.0 to 130.5 vs. 135.5 to 121.4 | - | p < 0.001 |
| Change in 24-hour DBP at 9 months (mmHg) | 76.6 to 73.7 vs. 76.0 to 69.2 | - | p < 0.001 |
Abbreviations: BP, blood pressure; DBP, diastolic blood pressure; HbA1c, glycosylated hemoglobin; HDL-C, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol; LDL-C, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol; SBP, systolic blood pressure
Legend: Bold text:primary outcomes of study;*Negative values indicate Intervention Group has larger change; **Positive values indicate Intervention Group has larger change