Data for liver transplant recipients (LTRs) regarding the benefit of care concordant with clinical practice guidelines for management of blood pressure (BP) are sparse. This paper reports on clinician adherence with BP clinical practice guideline recommendations and whether BP control is associated with mortality and cardiovascular events (CVEs) among LTRs. We conducted a longitudinal cohort study of adult LTRs who survived to hospital discharge at a large tertiary care network between 2010 and 2016. The primary exposure was a BP of <140/<90 mm Hg within year 1 of LT. Among 602 LTRs (mean age 56.7 years, 64% men), 92% had hypertension and 38% had new onset hypertension. Less than 30% of LTRs achieved a BP of <140/<90 mm Hg over a mean of 43.2 months. In multivariable models, adjusted for key confounders, BP control post‐LT compared with lack of control was associated with a significantly lower hazard of mortality (hazard ratio [HR] 0.48, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.39, 0.87) and of CVEs (HR 0.65, 95% CI 0.43, 0.97). The association between BP control of <140/<90 mm Hg with improved survival and decreased CVEs in LTRs suggests that efforts to improve clinician adherence to BP clinical practice recommendations should be intensified.

Liver transplant recipients (LTRs) are at high risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD). We sought to characterize LTR, informal caregiver, and health care provider perceptions about CVD care after liver transplantation (LT) to inform the design of solutions to improve care. Participants included adult LTRs, their caregivers, and multispecialty health care providers recruited from an urban tertiary care network who participated in 90-minute focus groups and completed a brief survey. Focus group transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis, and survey data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. A total of 17 LTRs, 9 caregivers, and 22 providers participated in 7 separate focus groups. Most (93.3%) LTRs and caregivers were unaware of the risk of CVD after LT. Although 54.5% of providers were confident discussing CVD risk factors with LTRs, only 36.3% were confident managing CVD risk factors in LTRs, and only 13.6% felt that CVD risk factors in their LTR patients were well controlled. Barriers to CVD care for LTRs included (1) lack of awareness of CVD risk after LT, (2) lack of confidence in an ability to provide proper CVD care to LTRs, (3) reluctance to provide CVD care without transplant provider review, and (4) complexity of communication with the multidisciplinary LTR care team about CVD care. Participant recommendations included improved education for LTRs and caregivers about CVD risk factors, electronic health record alerts for providers, clearly defined CVD care provider roles, increased use of the transplant pharmacist, and multidisciplinary provider meetings to discuss care plans for LTRs. Multiple barriers to CVD care after LT were identified, and targeted recommendations were proposed by participants. Transplant centers should integrate participants' recommendations when designing interventions to optimize CVD care for LTRs.

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

C.H. did data analysis/interpretation and drafting, critical revision, and approval of the article, M.K. and P.C. did concept/design, data analysis/interpretation, and data collection. D.G. did data analysis/interpretation and statistics. A.D., J.L., J.H., and D.L.-J. did concept/design, data analysis/interpretation, and critical revision of the article. L.V. did concept/design, data analysis/ interpretation, and critical revision and approval of the article and secured funding.

Background Most interventions for conditions with a small cohort size, such as transplantation, are unlikely to be part of a clinical trial. When condition-specific evidence is lacking, expert consensus can offer more precise guidance to improve care. Management of cardiovascular risk in liver-transplant recipients is one example for which clinicians have, to date, adapted evidence-based guidelines from studies in the general population. However, even when consensus is achieved, implementation of practice guidance is often inadequate and protracted. We report on a novel mixed-methods approach, the Northwestern Method©, for the development of clinical-practice guidance when condition-specific evidence is lacking. We illustrate the method through the development of practice guidance for managing cardiovascular risk in liver-transplant recipients. Methods The Northwestern Method© consists of (i) adaptation of relevant, existing, evidence-based clinical-practice guidelines for the target population; (ii) consensus by experts of the proposed practice guidance; (iii) identification of barriers to guidance adherence in current practice; and (iv) recommendation for implementation and dissemination of the practice guidance. The method is based on an iterative, user-centered approach in which the needs, wants, and limitations of all end users, including patients, are attended to at each stage of the design and development process. Conclusions The Northwestern Method© for clinical-practice-guidance development uses a mixed-methods approach to bring together broad representation from multiple disciplines and practice settings to develop consensus considering the unique needs and preferences of patients, caregivers, and practitioners who are directly impacted by clinical-practice-guidance recommendations. We hypothesize that a priori involvement of end users in the guidance-development process will lead to sustainable implementation of guidance statements into clinical practice.