[82,84] One found a reduction in DBP similar to the SR by Parappilly et al. (2018) (i.e., favoring the nurse-led intervention).[82] Three additional RCTs reported more frequent hypertension control or achieving a blood pressure goal of <140/90 mm Hg in the nurse-led intervention group when compared to the usual care control group.[83,85,87] No significant harms were found with nurse-led interventions in studies that reported on the outcome. Medication adherence is a critical component in chronic disease management for HTN. The SR by Parappilly et al. (2018) reported a statistically significant difference between nurse-led intervention and usual care in the change in medication adherence at follow-up.[88] Our evidence review found one RCT reporting a statistically significant difference in medication adherence in favor of nurse-led intervention.[87] Another RCT, by Zhu et al. (2018), found no statistically significant difference between nurse-led intervention and usual care in the change in medication adherence at follow-up.[82] Two additional RCTs found no statistically significant difference between nurse-led intervention and usual care when coupled with co-interventions such as electronic health record (EHR) tools and mobile health technologies.[83,85] These two RCTs had small sample sizes and may have been underpowered to detect the true intervention effect. Two RCTs found a statistically significant change in quality of life metrics favoring the nurse-led intervention group versus usual care.[82,87] However, a third RCT, by Persell et al. (2018), found no quality of life impact when using EHR tools alone or EHR tools plus nurse-led education with usual care or when interventions were compared with one another.[83] Despite general consistency in the evidence supporting the notion that nurse-led interventions inform the management of HTN, there is some variability in provider and patient preferences. 