Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on blood pressure control: a nationwide home blood pressure monitoring study.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Feitosa FGAM
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8636576 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:The global coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to a health crisis. It remains unclear how anxiety affects blood pressure (BP) and cardiovascular risk among older patients with hypertension. In this study, we extracted longitudinal data on home BP monitored via a smartphone-based application in 3724 elderly patients with hypertension from a clinical trial (60-80 years; 240 in Wuhan and 3484 in non-Wuhan areas) to examine changes in morning BP during the COVID-19 outbreak in China. Anxiety was evaluated using Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 item scores. Changes in morning systolic BP (SBP) were analyzed for five 30-day periods during the pandemic (October 21, 2019 to March 21, 2020), including the pre-epidemic, incubation, developing, outbreak, and plateau periods. Data on cardiovascular events were prospectively collected for one year. A total of 262 individuals (7.0%) reported an increased level of anxiety, and 3462 individuals (93.0%) did not. Patients with anxiety showed higher morning SBP than patients without anxiety, and the between-group differences in SBP change were +1.2 mmHg and +1.7 mmHg during the outbreak and plateau periods (P < 0.05), respectively. The seasonal BP variation in winter among patients with anxiety was suppressed during the pandemic. Anxious patients had higher rates of uncontrolled BP. During the 1-year follow-up period, patients with anxiety had an increased risk of cardiovascular events with a hazard ratio of 2.47 (95% confidence interval, 1.10-5.58; P = 0.03). In summary, COVID-19-related anxiety was associated with a short-term increase in morning SBP among older patients and led to a greater risk of cardiovascular events. (ClinicalTrials. gov number, NCT03015311).
| S-EPMC8778505 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC9363073 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSeveral interventions have been proposed to improve hypertension control with various outcomes. The home blood pressure (HBP) measurement is widely accepted for assessing the response to medications. However, the enhancement of blood pressure (BP) control with HBP telemonitoring technology has yet to be studied in Thailand.ObjectiveTo evaluate the attainment of HBP control and drug prescription patterns in Thai hypertensives at one year after initiating the TeleHealth Assisted Instrument in Home Blood Pressure Monitoring (THAI HBPM) nationwide pilot project.MethodsA multicenter, prospective study enrolled treated hypertensive adults without prior regular HBPM to obtain monthly self-measured HBP using the same validated, oscillometric telemonitoring devices. The HBP reading was transferred to the clinic via a cloud-based system, so the physicians can adjust the medications at each follow-up visit on a real-life basis. Controlled HBP is defined as having HBP data at one year of follow-up within the defined target range (<135/85 mmHg).ResultsA total of 1,177 patients (mean age 58 ± 12.3 years, 59.4% women, 13.1% with diabetes) from 46 hospitals (81.5% primary care centers) were enrolled in the study. The mean clinic BP was 143.9 ± 18.1/84.3 ± 11.9 mmHg while the mean HBP was 134.4 ± 15.3/80.1 ± 9.4 mmHg with 609 (51.8%) patients having HBP reading <135/85 mmHg at enrollment. At one year of follow-up after implementing the HBP telemonitoring, 671 patients (57.0%) achieved HBP control. Patients with uncontrolled HBP had a higher prevalence of dyslipidemia and greater waist circumference than the controlled group. The majority of uncontrolled patients were still prescribed only one (36.0%) or two drugs (34.4%) at the end of the study. The antihypertensive drugs were not uptitrated in 136 (24%) patients with uncontrolled HBP at baseline. Calcium channel blocker was the most prescribed drug class (63.0%) followed by angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (44.8%) while the thiazide-type diuretic was used in 18.9% of patients with controlled HBP and 16.4% in uncontrolled patients.ConclusionWith the implementation of HBP telemonitoring, the BP control rate based on HBP analysis was still low. This is possibly attributed to the therapeutic inertia of healthcare physicians. Calcium channel blocker was the most frequently used agent while the diuretic was underutilized. The long-term clinical benefit of overcoming therapeutic inertia alongside HBP telemonitoring needs to be validated in a future study.
| S-EPMC8060083 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Objective In this study, we investigated whether and how the COVID-19 pandemic affected glycemic control and blood pressure (BP) control in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM). Methods DM patients whose HbA1c level was measured regularly before and after the declaration of a state of emergency were included in this study. Some patients were given questionnaires about changes in their lifestyle to determine the factors affecting glycemic control and BP control. Results The median HbA1c level of the 804 patients increased significantly from 6.8% before the state of emergency to 7.1% and 7.0% during and after the state of emergency, respectively. This was in contrast to the decrease one year earlier due to seasonal variations. In the 176 patients who responded to the questionnaire, the HbA1c level also increased significantly during and after the state of emergency. The worsening of glycemic control was more pronounced in the group that had achieved HbA1c of <7% before the state of emergency than in those with higher values. Unlike the rise in HbA1c, the BP did not rise during the state of emergency but did rise significantly afterwards. There was no marked decrease in HbA1c or BP after the state of emergency, even in patients who responded that they were much more careful with their diet, ate less, or exercised more. Conclusions The COVID-19 pandemic worsened glycemic control and BP control, even in patients who perceived no marked change in their diet or exercise, suggesting that more active lifestyle guidance is necessary for good treatment of DM patients.
| S-EPMC8810256 | biostudies-literature
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
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
Project description:OBJECTIVES:Our aim was to assess seasonal variation in home blood pressure (BP) among free-living nationwide participants using home BP values accumulated from a web-based healthcare platform established in Japan. SETTINGS:An observational study. OMRON Healthcare Co., Ltd. has been developing web-based personal healthcare record systems in Japan since November 2010; over two million voluntary participants had joined this platform in September 2015. Nationwide home BP measurements made by oscillometric-type electronic sphygmomanometers from over 110 000 voluntary participants have been transmitted to the system from devices. PARTICIPANTS:Seasonal variation in home BP was evaluated among 64 536 (51 335 men, 13 201 women; mean age 52.9 years) free-living nationwide users for whom data were automatically and simultaneously transmitted to the system from devices. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES:Mean monthly and weekly home BP. RESULTS:In multiple regression analysis, the relationship between BP and temperature was a significant inverse association, independent of age, gender and geological locations. Highest and lowest BP was observed in December and July, respectively. Substantial seasonal differences in the mean values of morning and evening home systolic BP between summer and winter were 6.2 mmHg and 5.5 mmHg in men, and 7.3 mmHg and 6.5 mmHg in women. Seasonal variation was a little greater in older (7.3 mmHg in men, 8.7 mmHg in women) than in younger individuals (5.8 mmHg in men, 6.5 mmHg in women). BP from February to July was approximately 1.5 mmHg lower than the value from August to December. CONCLUSIONS:A web-based healthcare platform has enabled easier monitoring of population-wide BP. Tighter BP control is necessary in winter than in summer, and especially in a colder climate toward winter than toward summer. New technologies using web-based self-monitoring systems for health-related indexes are expected to initiate a new phase of cardiovascular disease prevention and public health promotion.
| S-EPMC5780696 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted traditional health care; one fallout was a drastic decrease in blood pressure (BP) assessment. We analyzed the pandemic's impact on our existing remote hypertension management program's effectiveness and adaptability. Methods and Results This retrospective observational analysis evaluated BP control in an entirely remote management program before and during the pandemic. A team of pharmacists, nurse practitioners, physicians, and nonlicensed navigators used an evidence-based clinical algorithm to optimize hypertensive treatment. The algorithm was adapted during the pandemic to simplify BP control. Overall, 1256 patients (605 enrolled in the 6 months before the pandemic shutdown in March 2020 and 651 in the 6 months after) were a median age of 63 years old, 57% female, and 38.2% non-White. Among enrolled patients with sustained hypertension, 51.1% reached BP goals. Within this group, rates of achieving goal BP improved to 94.6% during the pandemic from 75.8% prepandemic (P<0.0001). Mean baseline home BP was 141.7/81.9 mm Hg during the pandemic and 139.8/82.2 prepandemic, and fell ≈16/9 mm Hg in both periods (P<0.0001). Maintenance during the pandemic was achieved earlier (median 11.8 versus 19.6 weeks, P<0.0001), with more frequent monthly calls (8.2 versus 3.1, P<0.0001) and more monthly home BP recordings per patient (32.4 versus 18.9, P<0.0001), compared with the prepandemic period. Conclusions A remote clinical management program was successfully adapted and delivered significant improvements in BP control and increased home BP monitoring despite a nationally observed disruption of traditional hypertension care. Such programs have the potential to transform hypertension management and care delivery.
| S-EPMC10111523 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceCOVID-19 altered lifestyles and disrupted routine health care. Whether blood pressure (BP) control worsened during COVID-19 is unknown.ObjectiveTo understand whether home BP control worsened during COVID-19 across the United States (US) .Design, setting, and participantsA population-based analysis of home BP data from 72,706 participants enrolled in a digital health hypertension control program. Data was compared before (January 2019 to March 2020) and during (April 2020 to August 2020) COVID-19.Main outcomes and measuresMonthly mean home BP readings, systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), and mean arterial pressure (MAP) were quantified before and during the pandemic. Multivariable adjustments were made for age, sex, race, region, and months enrolled. Home BP readings were also classified based on monthly averages and highest home BP readings into risk groups: Stage 2 HTN: BP> = 135 or DBP> = 85; Uncontrolled HTN: SBP> = 145 or DBP> = 95; or Severely uncontrolled HTN: SBP> = 160 or DBP> = 100).ResultsOverall, 72,706 participants were enrolled in a digital health hypertension program between 1/1/2019 and 8/31/2020. Compared with participants pre-COVID-19 (n = 33,440), those during COVID-19 (n = 39,266) were of similar age (mean 53.0 ± 10.7 years vs 53.3 ± 10.8 years); sex (46% vs 50.6% female) and race (29.1% vs 34.2% non-white). Relative to pre-Covid (Apr-Aug 2019) the mean monthly number of home BP readings rose during COVID-19 (Apr-Aug, 2020), from 7.3 to 9.3 per month (P < .001). During COVID-19, participants had higher monthly adjusted mean SBP (131.6 mmHg vs. 127.5 mmHg, P < .001); DBP (80.2 mmHg vs. 79.2 mmHg, P < .001); and MAP (97.4 mmHg vs. 95.3 mmHg; P < .001). Relative to the pre-pandemic period, during COVID-19 the proportion of participants with a mean monthly BP classified as uncontrolled or severely uncontrolled hypertension also rose, 15% vs 19% and 4% vs 5%, respectively CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Based on home BP readings, mean monthly BP rose modestly after COVID-19, despite increased utilization of home monitoring. Further studies are needed to examine the longitudinal effects of the pandemic on cardiovascular disease risk factors, the impact of these on long-term population health.
| S-EPMC8662834 | biostudies-literature
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