Skip to main content
Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute
Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute
  • Blog
  • Newsroom
  • Find It Fast
  • Help Center
  • Subscribe
  • Careers
  • Contact Us

PCORI

Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute

Search form

  • About Us
    Close mega-menu

    About Us

    • Our Programs
    • Governance
    • Financials and Reports
    • Procurement Opportunities
    • Our Staff
    • Our Vision & Mission
    • Contact Us

    Fact Sheets: Learn More About PCORI

    Download fact sheets about out work, the research we fund, and our programs and initiatives.

    Find It Fast

    Browse through an alphabetical list of frequently accessed and searched terms for information and resources.

    Subscribe to PCORI Email Alerts

    Sign up for weekly emails to stay current on the latest results of our funded projects, and more.

  • Research & Results
    Close mega-menu

    Research & Results

    • Explore Our Portfolio
    • Research Fundamentals
    • Research Results Highlights
    • Putting Evidence to Work
    • Peer Review
    • Evidence Synthesis
    • About Our Research

    Evidence Updates from PCORI-Funded Studies

    These updates capture highlights of findings from systematic reviews and our funded research studies.

    Journal Articles About Our Funded Research

    Browse through a collection of journal publications that provides insights into PCORI-funded work.

    Explore Our Portfolio of Funded Projects

    Find out about projects based on the health conditions they focus on, the state they are in, and if they have results.

  • Topics
    Close mega-menu

    Topics

    • Addressing Disparities
    • Arthritis
    • Asthma
    • Cancer
    • Cardiovascular Disease
    • Children's Health
    • Community Health Workers
    • COVID-19
    • Dementia and Cognitive Impairment
    • Diabetes
    • Kidney Disease
    • Medicaid
    • Men's Health
    • Mental and Behavioral Health
    • Minority Mental Health
    • Multiple Chronic Conditions
    • Multiple Sclerosis
    • Obesity
    • Older Adults' Health
    • Pain Care and Opioids
    • Rare Diseases
    • Rural Health
    • Shared Decision Making
    • Telehealth
    • Transitional Care
    • Veterans Health
    • Women's Health

    Featured Topic: Women's Health

    Learn more about the projects we support on conditions that specifically or more often affect women.

  • Engagement
    Close mega-menu

    Engagement

    • The Value of Engagement
    • Engagement in Health Research Literature Explorer
    • Influencing the Culture of Research
    • Engagement Awards
    • Engagement Resources
    • Engage with Us

    Engagement Tools and Resources for Research

    This searchable peer-to-peer repository includes resources that can inform future work in patient-centered outcomes research.

    Explore Engagement in Health Literature

    This tool enables searching for published articles about engagement in health research.

    Research Fundamentals: A New On-Demand Training

    It enables those new to health research or patient-centered research to learn more about the research process.

  • Funding Opportunities
    Close mega-menu

    Funding Opportunities

    • What & Who We Fund
    • What You Need to Know to Apply
    • Applicant Training
    • Merit Review
    • Awardee Resources
    • Help Center

    PCORI Funding Opportunities

    View and learn about the newly opened funding announcements and the upcoming PFAs in 2021.

    Tips for Submitting a Responsive LOI

    Find out what PCORI looks for in a letter of intent (LOI) along with other helpful tips.

    PCORI Awardee Resources

    These resources can help awardees in complying with the terms and conditions of their contract.

  • Meetings & Events
    Close mega-menu

    Meetings & Events

    • Upcoming
    • Past Events

    January 2021 Board of Governors Meeting

    The Board approved funding for a new research study relating to kidney health and a new funding allocation for PCORnet. Learn more

    Confronting COVID-19: A Webinar Series

    Learn more about the series and access recordings and summary reports of all six sessions.

    2020 PCORI Annual Meeting

    Watch recordings of all sessions, and view titles and descriptions of the posters presented at the virtual meeting.

You are here

  • Research & Results
  • Explore Our Portfolio
  • Does a Program that Focuses on Lifest...

This project has results

Does a Program that Focuses on Lifestyle Changes Reduce Heart Disease Risk Factors in a Rural Community in Appalachian Kentucky?

Sign Up for Updates to This Study  

Results Summary and Professional Abstract

Results Summary

Results Summary

Download Summary Español (pdf) Audio Recording (mp3)

What was the research about?

The risk of heart disease in rural Appalachian Kentucky is among the highest in the country. Risk factors for heart disease include having high blood pressure, eating unhealthy foods, being overweight, not exercising, smoking, and feeling depressed. Many people here have more than one risk factor. The chance of developing heart disease is higher in this part of the country, in part because many people don’t know much about these risks. They also have limited access to health care.

This study compared two ways to help people reduce their risk of heart disease. All people in the study got referrals to doctors they could see regularly. Half of the people also went to small-group classes taught by trained health workers from the community. The classes focused on healthy choices that people can make to reduce their risk for heart disease. The research team wanted to learn whether providing these classes was better at helping people reduce their risk for heart disease than only referring people to a doctor.

What were the results?

People who went to classes and got a referral to a doctor reduced their risk for heart disease more than people who got only a referral to a doctor. Those who went to classes had greater reductions in

  • Blood pressure
  • Cholesterol
  • Weight
  • Smoking
  • Feelings of depression
  • Overall risk of heart disease

Attending group classes didn’t change people’s reports on their quality of life.

In both groups, satisfaction with health care increased from the start to the end of the year-long study.

Who was in the study?

The study included 352 men and women who were at least 21 years old. The people in the study lived in rural Appalachian Kentucky. They didn’t see a doctor regularly before the study. They had more than one of the following risk factors for heart disease: high blood pressure, high cholesterol, type 2 diabetes, overweight or obesity, depression, and not enough exercise.

What did the research team do?

The team assigned people to one of two groups by chance. The team referred people in both groups to doctors to get advice for reducing their chances of developing heart disease. One group also attended six classes taught by trained health workers from their community. Health workers talked about eating a healthy diet, getting more exercise, reducing stress, quitting smoking, and managing other health problems.

At the start of the study and again 4 and 12 months later, people filled out surveys. The surveys asked about people’s quality of life, their overall risk for developing heart disease, and their satisfaction with their health care. The team also looked at peoples’ health records for blood pressure levels, cholesterol levels, weight, reports of depression, amount of exercise, and smoking status. The team compared the results from the two groups.

Community members, business owners, church leaders, and healthcare providers from Appalachian Kentucky helped plan the study. This group also helped find people to join the study.

What were the limits of the study?

The research team followed people in the study for only one year. People may have returned to unhealthy lifestyles after the study was over. The study included only people who were at risk for heart disease in rural Appalachian Kentucky. Results may vary in other areas.

Future research could follow people for more than one year. Studies could also look at offering classes taught by trained health workers in other rural and low-income communities.

How can people use the results?

Communities in rural areas may consider having trained health workers from the community provide health classes like those used in this study to help people reduce their risk of heart disease.

Professional Abstract

Professional Abstract

Objective

To compare the effect of a self-care cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk-reduction intervention with usual care for management of CVD risk factors among rural Appalachian community members

Study Design

Design Elements Description
Design Randomized controlled trial
Population 352 individuals living in rural Appalachian Kentucky who had ≥2 CVD risk factors
Interventions/
Comparators
  • HeartHealth intervention and referral to primary care provider
  • Usual care involving referral to primary care provider
Outcomes

Primary: CVD risk factors, including blood pressure, lipid profile, body mass index, tobacco use, overall risk, depressive symptoms, and physical activity levels; quality of life

Secondary: patient satisfaction

Timeframe 12-month follow-up for primary outcomes

In this randomized controlled trial, researchers examined whether HeartHealth, a self-care intervention, in combination with referral to a primary care provider, was more effective at reducing CVD risk factors than usual care involving only referral to a primary care provider. Researchers designed HeartHealth with input from the community, including members of the target population, business owners, local government officials, church leaders, and healthcare providers. HeartHealth provided intervention participants with information and support for lifestyle changes that reduce CVD risk. Intervention participants also attended six biweekly small-group classes. These classes, led by community health workers, focused on healthy eating, exercise, reducing stress, smoking cessation, and managing other health problems.

The study included 352 participants from rural eastern Appalachian Kentucky. Participants were at least 21 years old, had no primary care provider, and had more than one modifiable CVD risk factor, such as hypertension, hyperlipidemia, type 2 diabetes, body mass index ≥25, depressive symptoms, or a sedentary lifestyle.

Researchers randomized 184 participants to receive the HeartHealth intervention and 168 to receive only usual care. At baseline and again 4 and 12 months postintervention, researchers assessed CVD risk factors, quality of life, and patient satisfaction via patient surveys and medical record review. They also recorded gender, depression, and health literacy. Health literacy describes a person’s ability to obtain and understand basic health information for informed health decision making. For a year, researchers compared the effects of the HeartHealth intervention to the effects of usual care.

Results

After 12 months, the study found improvement in the following CVD risk factors in the HeartHealth group compared with the usual care group:

  • Systolic blood pressure (p=0.002)
  • Diastolic blood pressure (p=0.001)
  • Total cholesterol (p=0.026)
  • High-density lipoprotein (p=0.022)
  • Body mass index (p=0.017)
  • Smoking cessation (p<0.01)
  • Framingham risk score (p=0.001)
  • Depressive symptoms (p=0.01)

The two groups did not differ significantly after 12 months with respect to low-density lipoprotein or triglyceride levels or in the mental or physical health components of the quality-of-life measures.

The effectiveness of HeartHealth on overall risk did not differ with respect to gender, presence or absence of depression, and adequate or inadequate health literacy.

Patient satisfaction in both groups improved significantly from baseline to 12 months (p<0.001); there was no difference between the groups at 12 months.

Limitations

The study followed participants for only 12 months after enrollment. Findings do not indicate whether the observed risk-factor reductions can be maintained beyond 12 months or whether the reductions result in a delay or prevention of CVD. This study took place in rural Appalachian Kentucky; results may not be generalizable to other communities.

Conclusions and Relevance

This study demonstrated that a community-based intervention developed collaboratively with the community of interest and focused on self-care was better than usual care for reducing CVD risk factors in a rural Appalachian Kentucky population. HeartHealth was effective for individuals of both genders, with and without depressive symptoms and with and without adequate health literacy. With appropriate education and support, people with multiple CVD risk factors can reduce their risk of CVD.

Future Research Needs

Future studies involving a longer follow-up period could examine the long-term benefits of this type of intervention.

Final Research Report

View this project's final research report.

More on this Project  

PCORI Stories

Kentucky Community Fights Back against Cardiovascular Disease
This PCORI Story looks at how classes helmed by community health workers helped residents significantly reduce their risk for cardiovascular disease risk. The improvements in cardiovascular health held steady one year after the intervention concluded, which led local officials to fund efforts to help residents improve their health.

Between Clinicians and Patients, Trained Community Members May Provide a Key Link
A PCORI Story highlights this and other PCORI-funded studies that are testing whether lay people on clinical teams make a measurable difference to lower barriers patients may face in receiving care and following treatment plans.

Videos

Reducing Cardiovascular Disease Risk Factors in Appalachian Kentucky (right)
This PCORI-funded project compared usual care to involving community health workers in an effort to reduce cardiovascular disease risks factors in people living in rural Appalachian Kentucky, which has among the worst cardiovascular health profiles in the country.

Addressing Health Disparities in Heart Disease
Buy-in from the community is a key part of addressing health disparities through research, says Debra Moser of the University of Kentucky.

Peer-Review Summary

Peer review of PCORI-funded research helps make sure the report presents complete, balanced, and useful information about the research. It also assesses how the project addressed PCORI’s Methodology Standards. During peer review, experts read a draft report of the research and provide comments about the report. These experts may include a scientist focused on the research topic, a specialist in research methods, a patient or caregiver, and a healthcare professional. These reviewers cannot have conflicts of interest with the study.

The peer reviewers point out where the draft report may need revision. For example, they may suggest ways to improve descriptions of the conduct of the study or to clarify the connection between results and conclusions. Sometimes, awardees revise their draft reports twice or more to address all of the reviewers’ comments. 

The awardee made the following revisions in response to peer review:

  • The awardee added information about patient and stakeholder engagement and details about the intervention. The awardee also elaborated on usual-care conditions.
  • The awardee noted the lack of information about the content of usual care as a study limitation. Further, the awardee revised the report’s conclusion to indicate that the intervention condition was superior to a referral to a primary care physician.
  • The awardee provided the rationale for subgroup analyses based on gender, depressive symptoms, and health literacy. The investigator explained that the addition of these analyses came after completion of primary analyses. The awardee therefore described the analyses as exploratory.
  • The awardee explained that recruitment focused on patients who lacked a regular primary care physician because such a lack is typical in the rural Appalachian region where the study took place. Also, the awardee explained that including participants who did have a regular physician would have introduced too much heterogeneity to test for treatment differences.

Conflict of Interest Disclosures

View the COI disclosure form.

Project Details

Principal Investigator
Debra K. Moser, PhD, RN, FAAN
Project Status
Completed; PCORI Public and Professional Abstracts, and Final Research Report Posted
Project Title
Reducing Health Disparities in Appalachians with Multiple Cardiovascular Disease Risk Factors
Board Approval Date
December 2012
Project End Date
May 2018
Organization
University of Kentucky
Year Awarded
2012
State
Kentucky
Year Completed
2018
Project Type
Research Project
Health Conditions  
Cardiovascular Diseases
Stroke
Hypertension
Coronary or Ischemic Heart Disease
Mental/Behavioral Health
Tobacco Cessation
Depression
Nutritional and Metabolic Disorders
Obesity
Diabetes
Multiple/Comorbid Chronic Conditions
Intervention Strategies
Behavioral Interventions
Other Clinical Interventions
Other Health Services Interventions
Training and Education Interventions
Populations
Low Income
Older Adults
Rural
Women
Individuals with Multiple Chronic/co-morbid Conditions
Funding Announcement
Addressing Disparities
Project Budget
$2,182,924
DOI - Digital Object Identifier
10.25302/4.2019.CER.850
Study Registration Information
HSRP20142277
NCT01884246
Page Last Updated: 
February 20, 2020

About Us

  • Our Programs
  • Governance
  • Financials and Reports
  • Procurement Opportunities
  • Our Staff
  • Our Vision & Mission
  • Contact Us

Research & Results

  • Explore Our Portfolio
  • Research Fundamentals
  • Research Results Highlights
  • Putting Evidence to Work
  • Peer Review
  • Evidence Synthesis
  • About Our Research

Engagement

  • The Value of Engagement
  • Engagement in Health Research Literature Explorer
  • Influencing the Culture of Research
  • Engagement Awards
  • Engagement Resources
  • Engage with Us

Funding Opportunities

  • What & Who We Fund
  • What You Need to Know to Apply
  • Applicant Training
  • Merit Review
  • Awardee Resources
  • Help Center

Meetings & Events

January 21
Cycle 1 2021 Broad PFA Applicant Town Hall
February 2
PCORI 2021 and Beyond: Opportunities for Funding and Involvement in Patient-Centered Research
February 9
Board of Governors Meeting: February 9, 2021

PCORI

Footer contact address

Patient-Centered Outcomes
Research Institute

1828 L Street, NW, Suite 900
Washington, DC 20036
Phone: (202) 827-7700 | Fax: (202) 355-9558
[email protected]

Subscribe to Newsletter

Twitter Facebook LinkedIn Vimeo

© 2011-2021 Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute. All Rights Reserved.

Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Trademark Usage Guidelines | Credits | Help Center