Browse
Submit Data
Databases
API
Help

Dataset Information

17 Views

0 Connections

0 Citations

0 Reanalyses

0 Downloads

Omics score: 0

The effect of numeracy level on completeness of home blood pressure monitoring.

ABSTRACT: Home blood pressure monitoring (HBPM) readings predict the increased risks of cardiovascular events and end-organ damage independent of office blood pressure (BP). Numeracy (the ability to handle numbers) may limit the feasibility of patients' performing HBPM. The authors analyzed data from 409 adults recruited from 12 North Carolina primary care clinics who completed a three-item numeracy assessment, the Rapid Estimate of Adult Literacy in Medicine-Short Form health literacy assessment, and HBPM over 2 weeks. Among the 409 participants, 73% were college graduates and 69% had adequate numeracy. Completion of HBPM was greater among those with adequate numeracy (96.2% vs 93.7%; P=.009) and did not correlate with health literacy scores. More participants with adequate numeracy reported completion of ≥85% of readings than those with low numeracy (95% vs 88%; P=.018). Adequate numeracy, but not high literacy, is associated with more complete HBPM reporting. Whether higher numeracy is associated with more accurate self-reported readings is an area of future research.

SUBMITTER: Rao VN

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4642178 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Json Xml

Similar Datasets

Home monitoring of blood pressure.

Project description:Home blood pressure monitoring is the self-measurement of blood pressure by patients. In the diagnosis and management of high blood pressure it is complementary to 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring and clinic blood pressure measurements. Home monitoring can also help to identify white-coat and masked hypertension. Home monitoring has good reproducibility, is well tolerated and relatively inexpensive. It is superior to blood pressure taken in the clinic in predicting cardiovascular events and mortality. Twice-daily measurements are recommended, usually in the morning and evening for a minimum of five days. The threshold for defining hypertension is an average home blood pressure of 135/85 mmHg or above. Patients are engaged with their management when they monitor their own blood pressure. This results in increased adherence to therapy and lower blood pressure.

| S-EPMC4654038 | biostudies-literature

Diagnosing Masked Hypertension Using Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring, Home Blood Pressure Monitoring, or Both?

Project description:Guidelines recommend measuring out-of-clinic blood pressure (BP) to identify masked hypertension (MHT) defined by out-of-clinic BP in the hypertensive range among individuals with clinic-measured BP not in the hypertensive range. The aim of this study was to determine the overlap between ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) and home BP monitoring (HBPM) for the detection of MHT. We analyzed data from 333 community-dwelling adults not taking antihypertensive medication with clinic BP <140/90 mm Hg in the IDH study (Improving the Detection of Hypertension). Any MHT was defined by the presence of daytime MHT (mean daytime BP ?135/85 mm Hg), 24-hour MHT (mean 24-hour BP ?130/80 mm Hg), or nighttime MHT (mean nighttime BP ?120/70 mm Hg). Home MHT was defined as mean BP ?135/85 mm Hg on HBPM. The prevalence of MHT was 25.8% for any MHT and 11.1% for home MHT. Among participants with MHT on either ABPM or HBPM, 29.5% had MHT on both ABPM and HBPM; 61.1% had MHT only on ABPM; and 9.4% of participants had MHT only on HBPM. After multivariable adjustment and compared with participants without MHT on ABPM and HBPM, those with MHT on both ABPM and HBPM and only on ABPM had a higher left ventricular mass index (mean difference [SE], 12.7 [2.9] g/m2, P<0.001; and 4.9 [2.1] g/m2, P=0.022, respectively), whereas participants with MHT only on HBPM did not have an increased left ventricular mass index (mean difference [SE], -1.9 [4.8] g/m2, P=0.693). These data suggest that conducting ABPM will detect many individuals with MHT who have an increased cardiovascular disease risk.

| S-EPMC6207212 | biostudies-literature

Reproducibility of nighttime home blood pressure measured by a wrist-type nocturnal home blood pressure monitoring device.

Project description:The authors investigated the reproducibility of nighttime home blood pressure (BP) measured by a wrist-type BP monitoring device. Forty-six hypertensive patients (mean 69.0±11.6 years, 56.5% male) self-measured their nighttime BP hourly using simultaneously worn wrist-type and upper arm-type nocturnal home BP monitoring devices at home on two consecutive nights. Using the average 7.4±1.3 measurements on the first night and the average 7.0 ± 1.8 measurements on the second night, the authors assessed the reliability and the reproducibility of nighttime BP measured on the two nights. The difference between nights in systolic BP (SBP) measured by the wrist-device was not significant (1.6±7.0 mmHg, p = .124), while the difference in diastolic BP (DBP) was marginally significant (1.4±4.9 mmHg, p = .050). The intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) for agreement between nights were high both in SBP and DBP average (SBP: 0.835, DBP: 0.804). Averaging only three points of SBP resulted in lower ICC values, but still indicated good correlations (ICC > 0.6). On the other hand, the correlations of the standard deviation and average real variability of SBP between nights were low, with ICCs of 0.220 and 0.436, respectively. In conclusion, the average SBP values measured on the first night were reliable even when averaging only three readings. The reproducibility of nighttime BP variability seemed inferior to that of BP average; it might be better to measure nighttime BP over multiple nights to assess BP variability. However, this hypothesis needs verification in other study population. In addition, our study population had well-controlled BP, which limits the generalizability of this findings to all hypertensive patients.

| S-EPMC8678720 | biostudies-literature

Effect of home blood pressure monitoring for blood pressure control in hypertensive patients taking multiple antihypertensive medications including fimasartan (the FORTE study).

Project description:BackgroundAlthough recent hypertension guidelines recommend home blood pressure (HBP) monitoring, its effect in clinical practice is not well known. This study aimed to identify current HBP measurement status and obstacles and their efficacy on blood pressure (BP) control.MethodsSixty-three intervention and 61 control centers with 2483 (mean age: 58.0 years, 56.0% male) drug-naïve stage 2 hypertensive patients or patients requiring second anti-hypertensive medications were included. The intervention group was instructed to measure HBP twice a day for 7 days from the scheduled visit at 4, 8, and 12 weeks.ResultsAt the end of 12 weeks, 842 (68.7%) and 807 (64.15%) patients of the control and intervention groups, respectively, achieved a target BP. The odds ratio (OR) for improving BP control of HBP was 0.836 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.694-1.007). Among intervention group, clinic BP of the subgroup those measured their HBP at least once well controlled compared to subgroup those not measured their HBP at all (OR 1.602, 95% CI: 1.182-2.172). Only 19.17% (n = 476) had a home sphygmomanometer, and among those, 26.89% measured their BP at least once a week and 34.87% did not measure the BP at all. The obstacles of HBP measurement were lack of awareness of its importance (40.83%), lack of confidence on how to measure BP and maintain the measurement (37.04%), and difficulty in selecting an appropriate device (14.41%).ConclusionsHBP measurement alone did not improve BP control, but better compliance with the HBP measurement resulted in improved BP control.Trial registrationClinicalTrials, NCT03254914 , Registered 21 August 2017.

| S-EPMC7737356 | biostudies-literature

Relative effectiveness of clinic and home blood pressure monitoring compared with ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in diagnosis of hypertension: systematic review.

Project description:To determine the relative accuracy of clinic measurements and home blood pressure monitoring compared with ambulatory blood pressure monitoring as a reference standard for the diagnosis of hypertension.Systematic review with meta-analysis with hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic models. Methodological quality was appraised, including evidence of validation of blood pressure measurement equipment.Medline (from 1966), Embase (from 1980), Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, DARE, Medion, ARIF, and TRIP up to May 2010. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies Eligible studies examined diagnosis of hypertension in adults of all ages using home and/or clinic blood pressure measurement compared with those made using ambulatory monitoring that clearly defined thresholds to diagnose hypertension.The 20 eligible studies used various thresholds for the diagnosis of hypertension, and only seven studies (clinic) and three studies (home) could be directly compared with ambulatory monitoring. Compared with ambulatory monitoring thresholds of 135/85 mm Hg, clinic measurements over 140/90 mm Hg had mean sensitivity and specificity of 74.6% (95% confidence interval 60.7% to 84.8%) and 74.6% (47.9% to 90.4%), respectively, whereas home measurements over 135/85 mm Hg had mean sensitivity and specificity of 85.7% (78.0% to 91.0%) and 62.4% (48.0% to 75.0%).Neither clinic nor home measurement had sufficient sensitivity or specificity to be recommended as a single diagnostic test. If ambulatory monitoring is taken as the reference standard, then treatment decisions based on clinic or home blood pressure alone might result in substantial overdiagnosis. Ambulatory monitoring before the start of lifelong drug treatment might lead to more appropriate targeting of treatment, particularly around the diagnostic threshold.

| S-EPMC3122300 | biostudies-literature

Ambulatory and Home Blood Pressure Monitoring in Hemodialysis Patients: A Mixed-Methods Study Evaluating Comparability and Tolerability of Blood Pressure Monitoring.

Project description: Not available

| S-EPMC8178468 | biostudies-literature

Blood pressure control by home monitoring: meta-analysis of randomised trials.

Project description:ObjectiveTo determine the effect of home blood pressure monitoring on blood pressure levels and proportion of people with essential hypertension achieving targets.DesignMeta-analysis of 18 randomised controlled trials.Participants1359 people with essential hypertension allocated to home blood pressure monitoring and 1355 allocated to the "control" group seen in the healthcare system for 2-36 months.Main outcome measuresDifferences in systolic (13 studies), diastolic (16 studies), or mean (3 studies) blood pressures, and proportion of patients achieving targets (6 studies), between intervention and control groups.ResultsSystolic blood pressure was lower in people with hypertension who had home blood pressure monitoring than in those who had standard blood pressure monitoring in the healthcare system (standardised mean difference 4.2 (95% confidence interval 1.5 to 6.9) mm Hg), diastolic blood pressure was lower by 2.4 (1.2 to 3.5) mm Hg, and mean blood pressure was lower by 4.4 (2.0 to 6.8) mm Hg. The relative risk of blood pressure above predetermined targets was lower in people with home blood pressure monitoring (risk ratio 0.90, 0.80 to 1.00). When publication bias was allowed for, the differences were attenuated: 2.2 (-0.9 to 5.3) mm Hg for systolic blood pressure and 1.9 (0.6 to 3.2) mm Hg for diastolic blood pressure.ConclusionsBlood pressure control in people with hypertension (assessed in the clinic) and the proportion achieving targets are increased when home blood pressure monitoring is used rather than standard blood pressure monitoring in the healthcare system. The reasons for this are not clear. The difference in blood pressure control between the two methods is small but likely to contribute to an important reduction in vascular complications in the hypertensive population.

| S-EPMC478224 | biostudies-literature

Reproducibility of masked uncontrolled hypertension detected through home blood pressure monitoring.

Project description:Masked uncontrolled hypertension (MUCH) is an entity described in treated hypertensive subjects, where office blood pressure (BP) is well controlled and out-of-office BP is elevated. It has been related to a higher cardiovascular risk. However, the reproducibility of MUCH has been scarcely studied. In this study, we aimed to determine the reproducibility of MUCH detected through home blood pressure monitoring (HBPM). Two sets of measurements were performed in hypertensive adults under stable treatment with a 1-week interval. Each set of measurements included three office BP readings and a 4-day HBPM with duplicate readings in the morning, afternoon, and evening (the same validated oscillometric device was employed in both settings). We determined the percentage of agreement regarding the presence of MUCH in the two sets of measurements and quantified such agreement through the Cohen's kappa coefficient (κ), its 95% confidence interval, and P value. We included 105 patients (median age 58.6 [IQR 45.6-67.2] years old, 53.4% men). MUCH prevalence on at least one occasion was 22.3% (95% CI: 15.2-31.5). The reproducibility of MUCH was scant: κ = 0.19 (95% CI: 0.0002-0.38), P = 0.02, due to the poor reproducibility of the office BP component of MUCH in comparison with the home BP component: κ = 0.21 (95% CI: 0.03-0.39), P = 0.01 vs κ = 0.48 (95% CI 0.29-0.67), P < 0.001, respectively. In conclusion, the reproducibility of MUCH detected through HBPM is minimal, mainly due to the poor reproducibility of office BP measurements. An HBPM-based strategy for the management of patients with MUCH may be more adequate in terms of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality.

| S-EPMC8030615 | biostudies-literature

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on blood pressure control: a nationwide home blood pressure monitoring study.

Project description:There are concerns that hypertension control may decrease during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study evaluated the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on office blood pressure (OBP) and home blood pressure monitoring (HBPM) control in a large Brazilian nationwide sample. The results of an adjusted spline analysis evaluating the trajectory of OBP and HBPM control from 01/Jan/2019 to 31/Dec/2020 among independent participants who were untreated (n = 24,227) or treated (n = 27,699) with antihypertensive medications showed a modest and transient improvement in OBP control among treated individuals, which was restricted to the early months following the COVID-19 pandemic outbreak. Furthermore, slight reductions in OBP and HBPM values were detected in the early months following the COVID-19 pandemic outbreak among treated (n = 987) participants for whom blood pressure measurements before and during the pandemic were available, but not among untreated (n = 495) participants. In conclusion, we found no major adverse influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on OBP and HBPM control in a large nationwide sample.

| S-EPMC8636576 | biostudies-literature

Factors Associated With Physician Recommendation of Home Blood Pressure Monitoring and Blood Pressure in the US Population.

Project description:BackgroundHypertension guidelines recommend home blood pressure monitoring (HBPM) to help achieve blood pressure (BP) control. We hypothesized that HBPM use with a physician recommendation would be associated with lower BP and greater medication adherence.MethodsWe used data from 6,320 adults with hypertension in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2009-2014 to characterize the association of (i) provider recommendation for HBPM and (ii) HBPM use on 2 outcomes: measured BP (linear regression) and medication adherence (logistic regression). Provider recommendation, HBPM use, and medication use were self-reported.ResultsAmong adults with hypertension, 30.1% reported a physician recommendation for HBPM, among whom 82.0% reported using HBPM. Among those who did not report a physician recommendation for HBPM, 28.3% used HBPM. Factors associated with a physician recommendation were having health insurance, higher education attainment, hypertension awareness, and having a prescription for antihypertensive medication. Among those who reported receiving a physician recommendation, those who used HBPM had a mean BP that was 3.1/4.5 mm Hg lower than those who did not. Those who reported having a physician recommendation and using HBPM were more likely to report hypertension medication adherence (odds ratio 2.9; 95% confidence interval: 2.0, 4.4).ConclusionsHBPM use was associated with lower BP and higher medication adherence. Use of HBPM was higher among those with a physician recommendation. These results support a role for physicians in counseling and partnering with patients on HBPM use for BP management.

| S-EPMC7481989 | biostudies-literature

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

OmicsDI is an Elixir interoperability service. Learn more ›

OmicsDI Databases

PRIDE
PeptideAtlas
MassIVE
JPOST Repository
Physiome Model Repository

EGA
EVA
ENA
LINCS
PAXDB
Cell Collective

MetaboLights
Metabolomics Workbench
MetabolomeExpress
GNPS
BioModels
FAIRDOMHub

ArrayExpress
dbGaP
ExpressionAtlas
GEO
NODE

Information

Databases
Help
API
Contact us
Code on GitHub
Terms of use
Submit Data