Accuracy of blood-pressure monitors owned by patients with hypertension (ACCU-RATE study): a cross-sectional, observational study in central England

Design and validation of dual-point time-differentiated photoplethysmogram (2PPG) wearable for cuffless blood pressure estimation

BACKGROUND & OBJECTIVES

Measurement of blood pressure (BP) in ambulatory patients is crucial for at high-risk cardiovascular patients. A non-obtrusive, non-occluding device that continuously measures BP via photoplethysmography will enable long-term ambulatory assessment of BP. The aim of this study is to validate the metasense 2PPG cuffless wearable design for continuous BP estimation without ECG.

METHODS

A customized high-speed electronic optical sensor architecture with laterally spaced reflectance pulse oximetry was designed into a simple unobtrusive low-power wearable in the form of a watch. 78 volunteers with a mean age of 32.72 ± 7.4 years (21 to 64), 51% male, 49% female were recruited with ECG-2PPG signals acquired. The fiducial features of the 2PPG morphologies were then attributed to the estimator. A 9-1 K-fold cross-validation was applied in the ML.

RESULTS

The correlation for PTT-SBP was 0.971 and for PTT-DBP was 0.954. The mean absolute error was 3.167±1.636 mmHg for SBP and 6.4 ± 3.9 mm Hg for DBP. The ambulatory estimate for SBP and DBP for an individual over 3 days with 8-hour recordings was 0.70-0.81 for SBP and 0.42-0.51 for DBP with a ± 2.65 mmHg for SBP and ±2.02 mmHg for DBP. For SBP, 98% of metasense measurements were within 15 mm Hg and for DBP, 91% of metasense measurements were within 10 mmHg CONCLUSIONS: The metasense device provides continuous, non-invasive BP estimations that are comparable to ambulatory BP meters. The portability and unobtrusiveness of this device, as well as the ability to continuously measure BP could one day enable long-term ambulatory BP measurement for precision cardiovascular therapeutic regimens.

Detection and Control of Pregnancy Hypertension Using Self-Monitoring of Blood Pressure With Automated Telemonitoring: Cost Analyses of the BUMP Randomized Trials

BACKGROUND

Pregnancy hypertension continues to cause maternal and perinatal morbidity. Two linked UK randomized trials showed adding self-monitoring of blood pressure (SMBP) with automated telemonitoring to usual antenatal care did not result in earlier detection or better control of pregnancy hypertension. This article reports the trials' integrated cost analyses.

METHODS

Two cost analyses. SMBP with usual care was compared with usual care alone in pregnant individuals at risk of hypertension (BUMP 1 trial [Blood Pressure Monitoring in High Risk Pregnancy to Improve the Detection and Monitoring of Hypertension], n=2441) and with hypertension (BUMP 2 trial, n=850). Clinical notes review identified participant-level antenatal, intrapartum, and postnatal care and these were costed. Comparisons between trial arms used means and 95% CIs. Within BUMP 2, chronic and gestational hypertension cohorts were analyzed separately. Telemonitoring system costs were reported separately.

RESULTS

In BUMP 1, mean (SE) total costs with SMBP and with usual care were £7200 (£323) and £7063 (£245), respectively, mean difference (95% CI), £151 (-£633 to £936). For the BUMP 2 chronic hypertension cohort, corresponding figures were £13 384 (£1230), £12 614 (£1081), mean difference £323 (-£2904 to £3549) and for the gestational hypertension cohort were £11 456 (£901), £11 145 (£959), mean difference £41 (-£2486 to £2567). The per-person cost of telemonitoring was £6 in BUMP 1 and £29 in BUMP 2.

CONCLUSIONS

SMBP was not associated with changes in the cost of health care contacts for individuals at risk of, or with, pregnancy hypertension. This is reassuring as SMBP in pregnancy is widely prevalent, particularly because of the COVID-19 pandemic.

REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03334149.

Self-monitoring blood pressure in Pregnancy: Evaluation of health professional experiences of the BUMP trials

BACKGROUND

The BUMP trials evaluated a self-monitoring of blood pressure intervention in addition to usual care, testing whether they improved detection or control of hypertension for women at risk of hypertension or with hypertension during pregnancy. This process evaluation aimed to understand healthcare professionals' perspectives and experiences of the BUMP trials of self-monitoring of blood pressure during pregnancy.

METHODS

Twenty-two in-depth qualitative interviews and an online survey with 328 healthcare professionals providing care for pregnant people in the BUMP trials were carried out across five maternity units in England.

RESULTS

Analysis used Normalisation Process Theory to identify factors required for successful implementation and integration into routine practice. Healthcare professionals felt self-monitoring of blood pressure did not over-medicalise pregnancy for women with, or at risk of, hypertension. Most said self-monitored readings positively affected their clinical encounters and professional roles, provided additive information on which to base decisions and enriched their relationships with pregnant people. Self-monitoring of blood pressure shifts responsibilities. Some healthcare professionals felt women having responsibility to decide on timing of monitoring and whether to act on self-monitored readings was unduly burdensome, and resulted in healthcare professionals taking additional responsibility for supporting them.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite healthcare professionals' early concerns that self-monitoring of blood pressure might over-medicalise pregnancy, our analysis shows the opposite was the case when used in the care of pregnant people with, or at higher risk of, hypertension. While professionals retained ultimate clinical responsibility, they viewed self-monitoring of blood pressure as a means of sharing responsibility and empowering women to understand their bodies, to make judgements and decisions, and to contribute to their care.

Personalized Antihypertensive Treatment Optimization With Smartphone-Enabled Remote Precision Dosing of Amlodipine During the COVID-19 Pandemic (PERSONAL-CovidBP Trial)

BACKGROUND

The objective of the PERSONAL-CovidBP (Personalised Electronic Record Supported Optimisation When Alone for Patients With Hypertension: Pilot Study for Remote Medical Management of Hypertension During the COVID-19 Pandemic) trial was to assess the efficacy and safety of smartphone-enabled remote precision dosing of amlodipine to control blood pressure (BP) in participants with primary hypertension during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This was an open-label, remote, dose titration trial using daily home self-monitoring of BP, drug dose, and side effects with linked smartphone app and telemonitoring. Participants aged ≥18 years with uncontrolled hypertension (5-7 day baseline mean ≥135 mm Hg systolic BP or ≥85 mm Hg diastolic BP) received personalized amlodipine dose titration using novel (1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9 mg) and standard (5 and 10 mg) doses daily over 14 weeks. The primary outcome of the trial was mean change in systolic BP from baseline to end of treatment. A total of 205 participants were enrolled and mean BP fell from 142/87 (systolic BP/diastolic BP) to 131/81 mm Hg (a reduction of 11 (95% CI, 10-12)/7 (95% CI, 6-7) mm Hg, P<0.001). The majority of participants achieved BP control on novel doses (84%); of those participants, 35% were controlled by 1 mg daily. The majority (88%) controlled on novel doses had no peripheral edema. Adherence to BP recording and reported adherence to medication was 84% and 94%, respectively. Patient retention was 96% (196/205). Treatment was well tolerated with no withdrawals from adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

Personalized dose titration with amlodipine was safe, well tolerated, and efficacious in treating primary hypertension. The majority of participants achieved BP control on novel doses, and with personalization of dose there were no trial discontinuations due to drug intolerance. App-assisted remote clinician dose titration may better balance BP control and adverse effects and help optimize long-term care.

REGISTRATION

URL: clinicaltrials.gov. Identifier: NCT04559074.

Improving the accuracy of blood pressure measuring devices in Australia: a modelled return on investment study

The VALID BP project was initiated to increase the availability of validated blood pressure measuring devices (BPMDs). The goal is to eliminate non validated BPMDs and minimise over- and underdiagnosis of hypertension caused by inaccurate readings. This study was undertaken to assess the potential return on investment in the VALID BP project. The Framework to Assess the Impact of Translational Health Research was applied to the VALID BP project. This paper focuses on the implementation of the cost benefit analysis aspect of this framework to monetise past research investment and model future research costs, implementation costs, and benefits. Analysis was based on reasoned assumptions about potential impacts from availability and use of validated BPMDs (assuming an end goal of 100% validated BPMDs available in Australia by 2028) and improved skills leading to more accurate BP measurement. After 5 years, with 20% attribution of benefits, there is a potential $1.14-$1.30 return for every dollar spent if the proportion of validated BPMDs and staff trained in proper BP measurement technique increased from 20% to 60%. After eight years (2020-2028) and assuming universal validation and training coverage, the returns would be between $2.70 and $3.20 per dollar spent (not including cost of side effects of unnecessary medication or downstream patient impacts from unmanaged hypertension). This modelled economic analysis indicates there will be positive downstream economic benefits if the availability of validated BPMDs is increased. The findings support ongoing efforts toward a universal regulatory framework for BPMDs and can be considered within more detailed future economic analyses.

Real-World Evidence of a Hospital-Linked Digital Health App for the Control of Hypertension and Diabetes Mellitus in South Korea: Nationwide Multicenter Study

BACKGROUND

Digital health care apps have been widely used for managing chronic conditions such as diabetes mellitus and hypertension, providing promising prospects for enhanced health care delivery, increased patient engagement, and improved self-management. However, the impact of integrating these apps within hospital systems for managing such conditions still lacks conclusive evidence.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to investigate the real-world effectiveness of using hospital-linked digital health care apps in lowering blood pressure (BP) and blood glucose levels in patients with hypertension and diabetes mellitus.

METHODS

Nationwide multicenter data on demographic characteristics and the use of a digital health care app from 233 hospitals were collected for participants aged 20 to 80 years in South Korea between August 2021 and June 2022. We divided the participants into 2 groups: 1 group consisted of individuals who exclusively used the digital health app (control) and the other group used the hospital-linked digital health app. All the patients participated in a 12-week digital health care intervention. We conducted a comparative analysis to assess the real-world effectiveness of the hospital-linked digital health app. The primary outcome was the differences in the systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), fasting blood glucose (FBG) level, and postprandial glucose (PPG) level between baseline and 12 weeks.

RESULTS

A total of 1029 participants were analyzed for the FBG level, 527 participants were analyzed for the PPG level, and 2029 participants for the SBP and DBP were enrolled. After 12 weeks, a hospital-linked digital health app was found to reduce SBP (-5.4 mm Hg, 95% CI -7.0 to -3.9) and DBP (-2.4 mm Hg, 95% CI -3.4 to -1.4) in participants without hypertension and FBG level in all participants (those without diabetes, -4.4 mg/dL, 95% CI -7.9 to -1.0 and those with diabetes, -3.2 mg/dL, 95% CI -5.4 to -1.0); however, there was no statistically significant difference compared to the control group (using only digital health app). Specifically, participants with diabetes using a hospital-linked digital health app demonstrated a significant decrease in PPG after 12 weeks (-10.9 mg/dL, 95% CI -31.1 to -5.3) compared to those using only a digital health app (P=.006).

CONCLUSIONS

Hospital-linked digital interventions have greatly improved glucose control for diabetes compared with using digital health technology only. These hospital-linked digital health apps have the potential to offer consumers and health care professionals cost-effective support in decreasing glucose levels when used in conjunction with self-monitoring.

An evaluation of the efficacy and the safety of home blood pressure monitoring in the control of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy in both pre and postpartum periods: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDP) can significantly impact maternal, neonatal, and fetal health. For controlling these disorders, frequent blood pressure measurements are required. Home blood pressure monitoring (HBPM) is a suggested alternative to conventional office monitoring that requires frequent visits. This systematic review was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of HBPM in the control of HDP.

METHODS

We systematically conducted databases search for relevant studies in June 2022. The relevant studies were identified, and qualitative synthesis was performed. An inverse variance quantitative synthesis was conducted using RevMan software. Continuous outcome data were pooled as means differences, whereas dichotomous ones were summarized as risk ratios. The 95% confidence interval was the measure of variance.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies were included in our review (n = 5335). Our analysis revealed a superiority of HBPM in reducing the risk of induction of labor, and postpartum readmission (P = 0.02, and 0.01 respectively). Moreover, the comparison of birth weights showed a significant variation in favor of HBPM (P = 0.02). In the analysis of other outcomes, HBPM was equally effective as office monitoring. Furthermore, HBPM did not result in an elevated risk of maternal, neonatal, and fetal adverse outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Home monitoring of blood pressure showed superiority over office monitoring in some outcomes and equal efficacy in other outcomes.

Validation testing of five home blood pressure monitoring devices for the upper arm according to the ISO 81060-2:2018/AMD 1:2020 protocol

The accuracy of Omron 10 Series BP7450 (HEM-7342T-Z), Omron Platinum BP5450 (HEM-7343T-Z), Walmart Equate Premium 8000 Series UA-8000WM, Walgreens Premium 15+ WGNBPA-960BT, and CVS Series 800 BP3MW1-4YCVS were assessed in an adult general population compared to a mercury sphygmomanometer standard according to the ISO 81060-2:2018/AMD 1:2020 validation procedure. Omron selected the monitors and included three non-Omron monitors because they were from large retail vendors in the United States and these monitors did not have accessible results from validation testing. The BP7450, N = 85, passed both criteria for the standard. Mean (SD) differences in paired SBP and DBP determinations between the test device and reference were 0.5 (7.7) and 2.5 (6.8) mm Hg. The BP5450, N = 86, passed both criteria. Mean (SD) differences in paired SBP and DBP determinations were 1.9 (7.0) and 3.6 (6.4) mm Hg. The UA-8000WM, N = 85, did not meet the first criterion for the standard. Mean (SD) differences in paired SBP and DBP determinations were 2.5 (8.0) and 5.1 (6.4) mm Hg. The WGNBPA-240BT, N = 85, did not meet the first criterion for the standard. Mean (SD) differences in paired SBP and DBP determinations were 7.9 (8.5) and 5.5 (6.7) mm Hg. The BP3MW1-4YCVS, N = 85, did not meet the first criterion for the standard. Mean (SD) differences in paired SBP and DBP determinations were 5.8 (8.7) and 3.1 (5.6) mm Hg. These findings emphasize the importance of verifying the validation status of home blood pressure monitors before use by consumers.

Cost-Effectiveness of Masked Hypertension Screening and Treatment in US Adults With Suspected Masked Hypertension: A Simulation Study

BACKGROUND

Recent US blood pressure (BP) guidelines recommend using ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) or home BP monitoring (HBPM) to screen adults for masked hypertension. However, limited evidence exists of the expected long-term effects of screening for and treating masked hypertension.

METHODS

We estimated the lifetime health and economic outcomes of screening for and treating masked hypertension using the Cardiovascular Disease (CVD) Policy Model, a validated microsimulation model. We simulated a cohort of 100,000 US adults aged ≥20 years with suspected masked hypertension (i.e., office BP 120-129/<80 mm Hg, not taking antihypertensive medications, without CVD history). We compared usual care only (i.e., no screening), usual care plus ABPM, and usual care plus HBPM. We projected total direct healthcare costs (2021 USD), quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. Future costs and QALYs were discounted 3% annually. Secondary outcomes included CVD events and serious adverse events.

RESULTS

Relative to usual care, adding masked hypertension screening and treatment with ABPM and HBPM was projected to prevent 14.3 and 20.5 CVD events per 100,000 person-years, increase the proportion experiencing any treatment-related serious adverse events by 2.7 and 5.1 percentage points, and increase mean total costs by $1,076 and $1,046, respectively. Compared with usual care, adding ABPM was estimated to cost $85,164/QALY gained. HBPM resulted in lower QALYs than usual care due to increased treatment-related adverse events and pill-taking disutility.

CONCLUSIONS

The results from our simulation study suggest screening with ABPM and treating masked hypertension is cost-effective in US adults with suspected masked hypertension.

Virtual management of hypertension: lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic-International Society of Hypertension position paper endorsed by World Hypertension League and European Society of Hypertension

The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic caused an unprecedented shift from in person care to delivering healthcare remotely. To limit infectious spread, patients and providers rapidly adopted distant evaluation with online or telephone-based diagnosis and management of hypertension. It is likely that virtual care of chronic diseases including hypertension will continue in some form into the future. The purpose of the International Society of Hypertension's (ISH) position paper is to provide practical guidance on the virtual management of hypertension to improve its diagnosis and blood pressure control based on the currently available evidence and international experts' opinion for nonpregnant adults. Virtual care represents the provision of healthcare services at a distance with communication conducted between healthcare providers, healthcare users and their circle of care. This statement provides consensus guidance on: selecting blood pressure monitoring devices, accurate home blood pressure assessments, delivering patient education virtually, health behavior modification, medication adjustment and long-term virtual monitoring. We further provide recommendations on modalities for the virtual assessment and management of hypertension across the spectrum of resource availability and patient ability.

Effect of Self-monitoring of Blood Pressure on Diagnosis of Hypertension During Higher-Risk Pregnancy: The BUMP 1 Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Inadequate management of elevated blood pressure (BP) is a significant contributing factor to maternal deaths. Self-monitoring of BP in the general population has been shown to improve the diagnosis and management of hypertension; however, little is known about its use in pregnancy.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether self-monitoring of BP in higher-risk pregnancies leads to earlier detection of pregnancy hypertension.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Unblinded, randomized clinical trial that included 2441 pregnant individuals at higher risk of preeclampsia and recruited at a mean of 20 weeks' gestation from 15 hospital maternity units in England between November 2018 and October 2019. Final follow-up was completed in April 2020.

INTERVENTIONS

Participating individuals were randomized to either BP self-monitoring with telemonitoring (n = 1223) plus usual care or usual antenatal care alone (n = 1218) without access to telemonitored BP.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was time to first recorded hypertension measured by a health care professional.

RESULTS

Among 2441 participants who were randomized (mean [SD] age, 33 [5.6] years; mean gestation, 20 [1.6] weeks), 2346 (96%) completed the trial. The time from randomization to clinic recording of hypertension was not significantly different between individuals in the self-monitoring group (mean [SD], 104.3 [32.6] days) vs in the usual care group (mean [SD], 106.2 [32.0] days) (mean difference, -1.6 days [95% CI, -8.1 to 4.9]; P = .64). Eighteen serious adverse events were reported during the trial with none judged as related to the intervention (12 [1%] in the self-monitoring group vs 6 [0.5%] in the usual care group).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Among pregnant individuals at higher risk of preeclampsia, blood pressure self-monitoring with telemonitoring, compared with usual care, did not lead to significantly earlier clinic-based detection of hypertension.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03334149.

Telemedicine in the COVID-19 Era: A Narrative Review Based on Current Evidence

During the recent COVID-19 pandemic, healthcare providers have been encouraged to increase their use of telemedicine and to adopt telemedicine platforms for the majority of their clients who have chronic illnesses. Due to the outbreak itself, almost all countries worldwide were placed under emergency lockdowns. In this paper, we reviewed the literature regarding the use of telemedicine during the COVID-19 pandemic. Consequentially, we identified the adoption of telemedicine in various countries worldwide and evaluated their future steps in order to increase the adoption of e-health technologies. As a result of COVID-19, the e-health agenda, especially telemedicine, has been accelerated in several countries. COVID-19 is affecting individuals' daily lives and has created major difficulties in the management of healthcare facilities for both infected and non-infected patients. A large portion of the rapid increase in the use of telemedicine can be attributed to evidence from previous pandemics as well as progress made by the field in response to COVID-19, especially in industrialized countries. A lack of effective treatment, large numbers of unvaccinated individuals, as well as social distancing and lockdown measures suggest telemedicine is the safest and most appropriate way of working with patients and doctors. In spite of this willingness, a large number of barriers need to be overcome in order for the telemedicine system to function properly and effectively throughout countries. In order for telemedicine to be sustainable and beneficial beyond the pandemic, several technical, educational, infrastructure, legal, and economic issues must be addressed and solved.

The worldwide impact of telemedicine during COVID-19: current evidence and recommendations for the future

During the COVID-19 pandemic, telemedicine has emerged worldwide as an indispensable resource to improve the surveillance of patients, curb the spread of disease, facilitate timely identification and management of ill people, but, most importantly, guarantee the continuity of care of frail patients with multiple chronic diseases. Although during COVID-19 telemedicine has thrived, and its adoption has moved forward in many countries, important gaps still remain. Major issues to be addressed to enable large scale implementation of telemedicine include: (1) establishing adequate policies to legislate telemedicine, license healthcare operators, protect patients' privacy, and implement reimbursement plans; (2) creating and disseminating practical guidelines for the routine clinical use of telemedicine in different contexts; (3) increasing in the level of integration of telemedicine with traditional healthcare services; (4) improving healthcare professionals' and patients' awareness of and willingness to use telemedicine; and (5) overcoming inequalities among countries and population subgroups due to technological, infrastructural, and economic barriers. If all these requirements are met in the near future, remote management of patients will become an indispensable resource for the healthcare systems worldwide and will ultimately improve the management of patients and the quality of care.

Home blood pressure monitors owned by participants in a large decentralised clinical trial in hypertension: the Treatment In Morning versus Evening (TIME) study

Various home blood pressure monitors (HBPMs) are available to the public for purchase but only some are validated against standardised protocols. This study aimed to assess whether HBPMs owned by participants taking part in a clinical trial were validated models. The TIME study is a decentralised randomised trial investigating the effect of antihypertensive medication dosing time on cardiovascular outcomes in adults with hypertension. No HBPMs were provided to participants in this trial but patients were asked to report if they already owned one. We identified the model of HBPM reported by participants, then cross-referenced this against lists of validated HBPMs produced by dabl Educational Trust and the British and Irish Hypertension Society (BIHS). Of 21,104 participants, 10,464 (49.6%) reported their model of HBPM. 7464 (71.3%) of these participants owned a monitor that could be identified from the participants' entry. Of these, 6066 (81.3%) participants owned a monitor listed as validated by either dabl (n = 5903) or BIHS (n = 5491). Some were listed as validated by both. 1398 (18.7%) participants owned an identifiable HBPM that lacked clear evidence of validation. 6963 (93.3%) participants owned an upper arm HBPM and 501 (6.7%) owned a wrist HBPM. Validated HBPMs had a higher median online retail price of £45.00 compared to £20.00 for HBPMs lacking clear evidence of validation. A significant number of participants own HBPMs lacking evidence of validation.

Smartphones and Video Cameras: Future Methods for Blood Pressure Measurement

Regular blood pressure (BP) monitoring enables earlier detection of hypertension and reduces cardiovascular disease. Cuff-based BP measurements require equipment that is inconvenient for some individuals and deters regular home-based monitoring. Since smartphones contain sensors such as video cameras that detect arterial pulsations, they could also be used to assess cardiovascular health. Researchers have developed a variety of image processing and machine learning techniques for predicting BP via smartphone or video camera. This review highlights research behind smartphone and video camera methods for measuring BP. These methods may in future be used at home or in clinics, but must be tested over a larger range of BP and lighting conditions. The review concludes with a discussion of the advantages of the various techniques, their potential clinical applications, and future directions and challenges. Video cameras may potentially measure multiple cardiovascular metrics including and beyond BP, reducing the risk of cardiovascular disease.

Accuracy of BP monitors used at home

Overview of: Hodgkinson JA, Lee MM, Milner S, et al Accuracy of blood-pressure monitors owned by patients with hypertension (ACCU-RATE study): a cross-sectional, observational study in central England. Br J Gen Pract 2020;70:e548-e554.

Home blood pressure monitoring: methodology, clinical relevance and practical application: a 2021 position paper by the Working Group on Blood Pressure Monitoring and Cardiovascular Variability of the European Society of Hypertension

The present paper provides an update of previous recommendations on Home Blood Pressure Monitoring from the European Society of Hypertension (ESH) Working Group on Blood Pressure Monitoring and Cardiovascular Variability sequentially published in years 2000, 2008 and 2010. This update has taken into account new evidence in this field, including a recent statement by the American Heart association, as well as technological developments, which have occurred over the past 20 years. The present document has been developed by the same ESH Working Group with inputs from an international team of experts, and has been endorsed by the ESH.

Home and Online Management and Evaluation of Blood Pressure (HOME BP) using a digital intervention in poorly controlled hypertension: randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

The HOME BP (Home and Online Management and Evaluation of Blood Pressure) trial aimed to test a digital intervention for hypertension management in primary care by combining self-monitoring of blood pressure with guided self-management.

DESIGN

Unmasked randomised controlled trial with automated ascertainment of primary endpoint.

SETTING

76 general practices in the United Kingdom.

PARTICIPANTS

622 people with treated but poorly controlled hypertension (>140/90 mm Hg) and access to the internet.

INTERVENTIONS

Participants were randomised by using a minimisation algorithm to self-monitoring of blood pressure with a digital intervention (305 participants) or usual care (routine hypertension care, with appointments and drug changes made at the discretion of the general practitioner; 317 participants). The digital intervention provided feedback of blood pressure results to patients and professionals with optional lifestyle advice and motivational support. Target blood pressure for hypertension, diabetes, and people aged 80 or older followed UK national guidelines.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was the difference in systolic blood pressure (mean of second and third readings) after one year, adjusted for baseline blood pressure, blood pressure target, age, and practice, with multiple imputation for missing values.

RESULTS

After one year, data were available from 552 participants (88.6%) with imputation for the remaining 70 participants (11.4%). Mean blood pressure dropped from 151.7/86.4 to 138.4/80.2 mm Hg in the intervention group and from 151.6/85.3 to 141.8/79.8 mm Hg in the usual care group, giving a mean difference in systolic blood pressure of -3.4 mm Hg (95% confidence interval -6.1 to -0.8 mm Hg) and a mean difference in diastolic blood pressure of -0.5 mm Hg (-1.9 to 0.9 mm Hg). Results were comparable in the complete case analysis and adverse effects were similar between groups. Within trial costs showed an incremental cost effectiveness ratio of £11 ($15, €12; 95% confidence interval £6 to £29) per mm Hg reduction.

CONCLUSIONS

The HOME BP digital intervention for the management of hypertension by using self-monitored blood pressure led to better control of systolic blood pressure after one year than usual care, with low incremental costs. Implementation in primary care will require integration into clinical workflows and consideration of people who are digitally excluded.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN13790648.

Current prevalence of self-monitoring of blood pressure during pregnancy: the BUMP Survey

OBJECTIVE

To understand the current prevalence of, and attitudes to, self-monitoring of blood pressure (BP) during pregnancy.

METHODS

Five thousand, five hundred and fifty-five pregnant women from antenatal clinics in 16 hospitals in England were invited to complete a survey.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was the proportion of women currently BP self-monitoring. Secondary outcomes included self-monitoring schedules and women's interactions with clinicians regarding self-monitoring. Population characteristics including risk factors for preeclampsia, ethnicity and deprivation level were considered.

RESULTS

Completed surveys were received and analysed from 5181 pregnant women (93% response rate). Comparison to hospital demographic data suggests that respondents were representative of the UK population. Nine hundred and eighty-three of 5181 (19%) women were currently self-monitoring their BP, constituting 189 of 389 (49%) hypertensive women and 794 of 4792 (17%) normotensive women. However, only 482 of 983 (49%) reported ever sharing this information with antenatal care teams. Of those who self-monitored, 68% (668/983) were able to provide a previous BP reading, compared with 1% (67/5181) of those who did not self-monitor.

CONCLUSION

Many women are now choosing to self-monitor their BP during pregnancy and clinicians should enquire about this proactively and consider providing better information on BP monitoring. Those who self-monitor appear to have better knowledge about their blood pressure. If these findings were replicated nationwide, around 125 000 pregnant women would be currently self-monitoring BP in the UK, yet only half of these women may communicate their readings to their antenatal care teams, suggesting a missed opportunity for enhanced care. Current trials will make the place of self-monitoring in pregnancy clearer.