Quiz Ref ID High blood pressure is the leading cause of mortality and cardiovascular disease globally, and most of the disease burden occurs in low- and middle-income countries.¹ Multiple inexpensive blood pressure–lowering drugs prevent cardiovascular events²; however, large gaps remain in identifying and treating people with high blood pressure.³ In low- and middle-income settings, the availability and affordability of medications is a critical issue,⁴ and only about one-third of individuals with high blood pressure in these settings receive treatment.³ Only approximately half of patients treated in high-income countries and about one-quarter in low- and middle-income countries achieve blood pressure control.³ In most settings, inadequate blood pressure treatment can be principally attributed to persistent use of monotherapy, which has modest efficacy.⁵ Recent guidelines^6-8 recommend lower blood pressure targets among high-risk patients, increasing the need for more effective treatment strategies.

New methods are required to manage hypertension in resource-poor settings. We hypothesised that a community health worker (CHW)–led group-based education and monitoring intervention would improve control of blood pressure (BP). We conducted a baseline community-based survey followed by a cluster randomised controlled trial of people with hypertension in 3 rural regions of South India, each at differing stages of epidemiological transition. Participants with hypertension, defined as BP ≥ 140/90 mm Hg or taking antihypertensive medication, were advised to visit a doctor. In each region, villages were randomly assigned to intervention or usual care (UC) in a 1:2 ratio. In intervention clusters, trained CHWs delivered a group-based intervention to people with hypertension. The program, conducted fortnightly for 3 months, included monitoring of BP, education about hypertension, and support for healthy lifestyle change. Outcomes were assessed approximately 2 months after completion of the intervention. The primary outcome was control of BP (BP < 140/90 mm Hg), analysed using mixed effects regression, clustered by village within region and adjusted for baseline control of hypertension (using intention-to-treat principles). Of 2,382 potentially eligible people, 637 from 5 intervention clusters and 1,097 from 10 UC clusters were recruited between November 2015 and April 2016, with follow-up occurring in 459 in the intervention group and 1,012 in UC. Mean age was 56.9 years (SD 13.7). Baseline BP was similar between groups. Control of BP improved from baseline to follow-up more in the intervention group (from 227 [49.5%] to 320 [69.7%] individuals) than in the UC group (from 528 [52.2%] to 624 [61.7%] individuals) (odds ratio [OR] 1.6, 95% CI 1.2–2.1; P = 0.001). In secondary outcome analyses, there was a greater decline in systolic BP in the intervention than UC group (−5.0 mm Hg, 95% CI −7.1 to −3.0; P < 0.001) and a greater decline in diastolic BP (−2.1 mm Hg, 95% CI −3.6 to −0.6; P < 0.006), but no detectable difference in the use of BP-lowering medications between groups (OR 1.2, 95% CI 0.8–1.9; P = 0.34). Similar results were found when using imputation analyses that included those lost to follow-up. Limitations include a relatively short follow-up period and use of outcome assessors who were not blinded to the group allocation. While the durability of the effect is uncertain, this trial provides evidence that a low-cost program using CHWs to deliver an education and monitoring intervention is effective in controlling BP and is potentially scalable in resource-poor settings globally. The trial was registered with the Clinical Trials Registry-India (CTRI/2016/02/006678).

Hypertension is a major risk factor for cardiovascular disease, a leading cause of premature death and disability in India. Since access to health services is poor in rural India and Accredited Social Health Activists (ASHAs) are available throughout India for maternal and child health, a potential solution for improving hypertension control is by utilising this available workforce. We aimed to develop and implement a training package for ASHAs to identify and control hypertension in the community, and evaluate the effectiveness of the training program using the Kirkpatrick Evaluation Model. The training program was part of a cluster randomised feasibility trial of a 3-month intervention to improve hypertension outcomes in South India. Training materials incorporated details on managing hypertension, goal setting, facilitating group meetings, and how to measure blood pressure and weight. The 15 ASHAs attended a five-day training workshop that was delivered using interactive instructional strategies. ASHAs then led community-based education support groups for 3 months. Training was evaluated using Kirkpatrick’s evaluation model for measuring reactions, learning, behaviour and results using tests on knowledge at baseline, post-training and post-intervention, observation of performance during meetings and post-intervention interviews. The ASHAs’ knowledge of hypertension improved from a mean score of 64% at baseline to 76% post-training and 84% after the 3-month intervention. Research officers, who observed the community meetings, reported that ASHAs delivered the self-management content effectively without additional assistance. The ASHAs reported that the training materials were easy to understand and useful in educating community members. ASHAs can be trained to lead community-based group educational discussions and support individuals for the management of high blood pressure. The feasibility trial is registered with the Clinical Trials Registry - India (CTRI) CTRI/2016/02/006678 (25/02/2016).

An understanding of how public health research output from India is changing in relation to the disease burden and public health priorities is required in order to inform relevant research development. We therefore studied the trends in the public health research output from India during 2001-2008 that was readily available in the public domain.

Elevated blood pressure incurs a major health and economic burden, particularly in low-income and middle-income countries. The Triple Pill versus Usual Care Management for Patients with Mild-to-Moderate Hypertension (TRIUMPH) trial showed a greater reduction in blood pressure in patients using fixed-combination, low-dose, triple-pill antihypertensive therapy (consisting of amlodipine, telmisartan, and chlorthalidone) than in those receiving usual care in Sri Lanka. We aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of the triple-pill strategy. We did a within-trial (6-month) and modelled (10-year) economic evaluation of the TRIUMPH trial, using the health system perspective. Health-care costs, reported in 2017 US dollars, were determined from trial records and published literature. A discrete-time simulation model was developed, extrapolating trial findings of reduced systolic blood pressure to 10-year health-care costs, cardiovascular disease events, and mortality. The primary outcomes were the proportion of people reaching blood pressure targets (at 6 months from baseline) and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) averted (at 10 years from baseline). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated to estimate the cost per additional participant achieving target blood pressure at 6 months and cost per DALY averted over 10 years. The triple-pill strategy, compared with usual care, cost an additional US$9·63 (95% CI 5·29 to 13·97) per person in the within-trial analysis and $347·75 (285·55 to 412·54) per person in the modelled analysis. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were estimated at $7·93 (95% CI 6·59 to 11·84) per participant reaching blood pressure targets at 6 months and $2842·79 (-28·67 to 5714·24) per DALY averted over a 10-year period. Compared with usual care, the triple-pill strategy is cost-effective for patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension. Scaled up investment in the triple pill for hypertension management in Sri Lanka should be supported to address the high population burden of cardiovascular disease. Australian National Health and Medical Research Council.

Hypertension is the leading cause of cardiovascular disease and mortality globally and remains a major public health issue.¹ The prevalence of hypertension and deaths attributable to hypertension have increased between 1990 and 2015.² Achieving the guideline-recommended blood pressure (BP) targets usually requires multiple antihypertensive agents,³ which can lead to complex treatment regimens that can be difficult for physicians to optimize and can require frequent monitoring and dose titration, with current guidelines recommending monthly visits until BP is controlled.^4,5 Inaccessibility to health care (particularly in areas of low socioeconomic status), poor medication adherence, and failure to intensify treatment despite poor BP control, termed therapeutic inertia, are major barriers to BP control.^6,7