FreshRSS

🔒
☐ ☆ ✇ BMJ Open

Scaling India Hypertension Control Initiative strategies to 15 states--treatment outcomes and risk factors for uncontrolled blood pressure, India: a cohort study, 2018-2021

Por: Kaur · P. · Kriina · M. · Ganeshkumar · P. · Kunwar · A. · Sharma · M. · Shivashankar · R. · India Hypertension Control Initiative Collaboration · Bhargava · B. · Kadia · Devanga · Sharma · Wankhede · Pathni · Ao · Vashishtha · Gupta · Azarudeen · Das · Joshi · Prasadini · Samband — Noviembre 28th 2025 at 18:14
Objectives

To estimate the treatment outcomes among individuals treated for hypertension in the public sector in 89 districts across 15 states in India and to identify the risk factors for uncontrolled blood pressure (BP).

Design

An analysis of a cohort of people with hypertension from 2018 to 2022 from public sector health facilities.

Setting

All India Hypertension Control Initiative (IHCI) implementing districts using digital information systems across 15 states of India, namely Andhra Pradesh, Bihar, Goa, Gujarat, Jharkhand, Karnataka, Maharashtra, Nagaland, Puducherry, Punjab, Rajasthan, Sikkim, Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal.

Participants

Individuals aged 30 years or older, who were diagnosed with hypertension or on medication at the time of registration between 1 January 2018 and 31 December 2021 were included in the study.

Outcome measures

Treatment outcomes were controlled BP, uncontrolled BP and missed visits in the reporting quarter (1 January 2022–31 March 2022). We analysed the risk factors for uncontrolled BP.

Results

Out of 1, 235, 453 hypertensive individuals enrolled in the IHCI project across 15 states, 1, 046, 512 remained under care, with 44% BP control. The control varied from 26% to 57% in various types of facilities. The states of Maharashtra, Punjab and Rajasthan had above 50% control, while Nagaland, Jharkhand and Bihar had below 25%. BP control declined from 68% when defined using a single recent reading to 52% when defined using the two-visit readings. Younger individuals (

Conclusions

We documented the implementation of IHCI strategies at scale and measured treatment outcomes in a large cohort. Overall, BP control improved with variations across states. We need focused strategies to improve control in higher-level facilities, among males and people with diabetes. Using two BP readings may support consistent treatment adherence.

☐ ☆ ✇ BMJ Open

Effectiveness of primary care-led low-carbohydrate diet and self-management advice on glycaemic control in individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus: protocol of a cluster randomised controlled trial

Por: Chadwick · J. · Ganeshkumar · P. · Jeyashree · K. · Shewade · H. D. · Kalyanasundaram · M. · Shanmugasundaram · D. · Shanmugam · L. — Octubre 15th 2025 at 09:50
Introduction

Dietary modification, particularly low-carbohydrate diet, and diabetes self-management education (DSME) have shown promise in improving glycaemic control among persons with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). However, real-world evidence from India is limited. This protocol describes the methods of a cluster randomised trial to determine the effectiveness and feasibility of adopting a low-carbohydrate diet among persons with T2DM.

Methods and analysis

Our cluster-randomised trial with a mixed-method process evaluation will use computer-generated block randomisation sequence to randomise Urban Primary Health Centres (UPHCs) (n=16) to either continue delivering the usual guideline-based care under the National Programme for Prevention and Control of Non-Communicable Diseases (NPNCD) or our study intervention. The study intervention will comprise a personalised nutrition counselling focusing on (i) low-carbohydrate diet (

We will include persons with T2DM, over the age of 30 years and above, irrespective of comorbidities, registered in the selected UPHC under care for diabetes for at least a month and with an glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) level ≥6.5% during the screening test. We will collect data electronically using semistructured questionnaires and measure HbA1c, blood pressure, lipid profile, serum creatinine and body weight at baseline, 3, 6, 9 and 12 months after enrolment. We will use a difference in difference analysis, adjusted for clustering, to compare the change in HbA1c at the follow-up visits compared with baseline across the two study arms. We will conduct both intention-to-treat and per-protocol analysis, exploring reasons for differences in effect size.

Ethics and dissemination

The study protocol was reviewed and approved by the Scientific Advisory Committee/Institutional Human Ethics Committee of the research institution (NIE/IHEC/202302-03). The findings of this study will be disseminated through publication in peer-reviewed journals.

Trial registration number

Clinical Trials Registry-India (CTRI/2024/02/062202).

❌