Browse
Submit Data
Databases
API
Help

Dataset Information

26 Views

0 Connections

0 Citations

0 Reanalyses

0 Downloads

Omics score: 0

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

ABSTRACT:

Background

Hypertension 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.

Methods

We 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.

Results

Among 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).

Conclusions

HBPM 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.

SUBMITTER: Tang O

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7481989 | 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

Home Blood Pressure Monitoring and Blood Pressure Control in Treated Hypertensives.

Project description: Not available

| S-EPMC9363073 | 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

Pediatric Home Blood Pressure Monitoring: Feasibility and Concordance With Clinic-Based Manual Blood Pressure Measurements.

Project description: Not available

| S-EPMC9531449 | biostudies-literature

Cost Effectiveness of Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring Compared with Home or Clinic Blood Pressure Monitoring for Diagnosing Hypertension in Australia.

Project description:ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to evaluate the cost effectiveness of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) compared with home blood pressure monitoring (HBPM) and clinic blood pressure monitoring (CBPM) in diagnosing hypertension in Australia.MethodsA cohort-based Markov model was built from the Payer's perspective (Australian government) comparing lifetime costs and effectiveness of ABPM, HBPM and CBPM in people aged ≥ 35 years with suspected hypertension who have a CBPM between ≥ 140/90 mmHg and ≤ 180/110 mmHg using a sphygmomanometer and have not yet commenced antihypertensive treatment. The main outcome measures were incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) assessing cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) and life-years (LYs) gained by ABPM versus HBPM and CBPM. Cost was measured in Australian dollars (A$).ResultsOver a lifetime model, ABPM had lower total costs (A$8,491) compared with HBPM (A$9,648) and CBPM (A$10,206) per person. ABPM was associated with a small but significant improvement in the quality and quantity of life for people with suspected hypertension with 12.872 QALYs and 17.449 LYs compared with 12.857 QALYs and 17.433 LYs with HBPM, and 12.850 QALYs and 17.425 LYs with CBPM. In the base-case analysis, ABPM dominated HBPM and CBPM. In scenario analyses, at 100% specificity of HBPM, ABPM no longer remained cost effective at a A$50,000/QALY threshold. However, in probabilistic sensitivity analysis, over 10,000 iterations, ABPM remained dominant.ConclusionABPM was the dominant strategy for confirming the diagnosis of hypertension among Australian adults aged ≥ 35 years old with suspected hypertension. The findings of this study are important for reimbursement decision makers to support policy change and for clinicians to make practice changes consistent with ABPM recommendations in primary care.

| S-EPMC9929017 | 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:ObjectiveTo 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.DesignSystematic review with meta-analysis with hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic models. Methodological quality was appraised, including evidence of validation of blood pressure measurement equipment.Data sourcesMedline (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.ResultsThe 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%).ConclusionsNeither 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

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

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

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

OmicsDI is an Elixir interoperability service. Learn more ›

Tweets

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