Determining which automatic digital blood pressure device performs adequately: a systematic review.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Wan Y
PROVIDER: S-EPMC2897978 | biostudies-other | 2010 Jul
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
Similar Datasets
Project description:This study aims to systematically review the diagnostic accuracy of a digital blood pressure measurement device compared to the gold standard mercury sphygmomanometer in published studies. Searches were conducted in PubMed, Cochrane, EBSCO, EMBASE and Google Scholar host databases using the specific search strategy and filters from 1st January 2000 to 3rd April 2021. We included studies reporting data on the sensitivity or specificity of blood pressure measured by digital devices and mercury sphygmomanometer used as the reference standard. Studies conducted among children, special populations, and specific disease groups were excluded. We considered published manuscripts in the English language only. The risk of bias and applicability concerns were assessed based on the author's judgment using the QUADAS2 manual measurement evaluation tool. Based on the screening, four studies were included in the final analysis. Sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and 95% confidence interval were estimated. The digital blood pressure monitoring has a moderate level of accuracy and the device can correctly distinguish hypertension with a pooled estimate sensitivity of 65.7% and specificity of 95.9%. After removing one study, which had very low sensitivity and very high specificity, the pooled sensitivity estimate was 79%, and the specificity was 91%. The meta-analysis of DOR suggests that the digital blood pressure monitor had moderate accuracy with a mercury sphygmomanometer. This will provide the clinician and patients with accurate information on blood pressure with which diagnostic and treatment decisions could be made.
| S-EPMC8888622 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimsHome blood pressure telemonitoring (HBPT) is a useful way to manage BP. Recent advances in digital technology to automatically transmit BP data without the patient input may change the approach to long-term BP treatment and follow-up. The purpose of this review is to summarize the latest data on the HBPT with automatic data transmission.Methods and resultsArticles in English from 1980 to 2021 were searched by electronic databases. Randomized controlled trials comparing HBPT with automatic data transmission with usual BP management and including systolic BP (SBP) and/or diastolic BP (DBP) as outcomes in hypertension patients were included in the systematic review. A meta-analysis was conducted. After removing duplicates, 474 papers were included and 23 papers were identified. The HBPT with automatic data transmission had a significant beneficial impact on BP reduction (mean difference for office SBP -6.0 mm Hg; P < 0.001). Subgroup analyses showed that the studies using smartphone applications reduced BP significantly more in the intervention group than in the control group (standardized mean difference for office and home SBP -0.25; P = 0.01) as did the studies using HBPT other than the applications. Longer observation periods showed a sustained effect, and multidisciplinary cooperation was effective.ConclusionThis review suggests that a care path based on HBPT with automatic data transmission can be more effective than classical management of hypertension. In particular, the studies using smartphone applications have shown beneficial effects. The results support the deployment of digital cardiology in the field of hypertension management.
| S-EPMC9779889 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Backgroud and aimsHypertension (HTN) is a multifactorial chronic disease. Considering the high prevalence rates of this disease, treatment of HTN is necessary, not only to reduce blood pressure (BP) levels but also to prevent the development of cardiovascular, cerebrovascular, and kidney diseases. This treatment can be through medication, which will be determined according to the BP values, obtained either in medical consultations or at home; presence of cardiovascular risk factors, and the presence of target organ damage identified during anamnesis. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to summarize the effects of device-guided slow breathing (DGSB) and nondevice-guided slow breathing (NDGSB) on BP levels of patients with HTN.MethodsThis study is a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials, pertaining to hypertensive patients, with or without comorbidity, over 18 years old, of both sexes, and with or without hypertensive medication. The selected studies showed comparisons between groups that performed DGSB and/or NDGSB with control conditions. The primary outcome was the value of systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) after the interventions.ResultsTwenty-two studies involving 17,214 participants were included in the quantitative analysis. Considerable heterogeneity was revealed between studies. Using random effect model, it was found that DGSB did not significantly reduce SBP and DBP compared to usual care, both in terms BP values and in relation to their variations (SBP, mean difference [MD]: -2.13 mmHg, (95% confidence interval [CI]: -12.71 to 8.44), 288 individuals; I 2 = 93%, high heterogenity: DBP, MD: -0.90, 95% CI: -3.97 to 2.11, 288 individuals; I 2 = 63%, substantial heterogenity. SBP variations MD: -2.42, 95% CI: -7.24 to 2.40, 443 individuals; I 2 = 85% high heterogenity/DBP variations MD: -1.67, 95% CI: -4.57 to 1.24, 443 individuals; I 2 = 80%, high heterogenity).ConclusionBased on these results it appears that DGSB did not reduce BP in hypertensive patients and NDGSB is a new path for the future.
| S-EPMC9110782 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Mobile health (mHealth) technologies improve hypertension outcomes, but it is unknown if this benefit applies to all populations. This review aimed to describe the impact of mHealth interventions on blood pressure outcomes in populations with disparities in digital health use. We conducted a systematic search to identify studies with systolic blood pressure (SBP) outcomes located in urban settings in high-income countries that included a digital health disparity population, defined as mean age ≥65 years; lower educational attainment (≥60% ≤high school education); and/or racial/ethnic minority (<50% non-Hispanic White for US studies). Interventions were categorized using an established self-management taxonomy. We conducted a narrative synthesis; among randomized clinical trials (RCTs) with a six-month SBP outcome, we conducted random-effects meta-analyses. Twenty-nine articles (representing 25 studies) were included, of which 15 were RCTs. Fifteen studies used text messaging; twelve used mobile applications. Studies were included based on race/ethnicity (14), education (10), and/or age (6). Common intervention components were: lifestyle advice (20); provision of self-monitoring equipment (17); and training on digital device use (15). In the meta-analyses of seven RCTs, SBP reduction at 6-months in the intervention group (mean SBP difference = -4.10, 95% CI: [-6.38, -1.83]) was significant, but there was no significant difference in SBP change between the intervention and control groups (p = 0.48). The use of mHealth tools has shown promise for chronic disease management but few studies have included older, limited educational attainment, or minority populations. Additional robust studies with these populations are needed to determine what interventions work best for diverse hypertensive patients.
| S-EPMC8298448 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSelf-monitoring of blood pressure better predicts prognosis than clinic measurement, is popular with patients, and endorsed in hypertension guidelines. However, there is uncertainty over the optimal self-monitoring schedule. We therefore aimed to determine the optimum schedule to predict future cardiovascular events and determine "true" underlying blood pressure.MethodsSix electronic databases were searched from November 2009 (updating a National Institute for Health and Care Excellence [NICE] systematic review) to April 2017. Studies that compared aspects of self-monitoring schedules to either prognosis or reliability/reproducibility in hypertensive adults were included. Data on study and population characteristics, self-monitoring regime, and outcomes were extracted by 2 reviewers independently.ResultsFrom 5,164 unique articles identified, 25 met the inclusion criteria. Twelve studies were included from the original NICE review, making a total of 37 studies. Increasing the number of days of measurement improved prognostic power: 72%-91% of the theoretical maximum predictive value (asymptotic maximum hazard ratio) was reached by 3 days and 86%-96% by 7 days. Increasing beyond 3 days of measurement did not result in better correlation with ambulatory monitoring. There was no convincing evidence that the timing or number of readings per day had an effect, or that ignoring the first day's measurement was necessary.ConclusionsHome blood pressure should be measured for 3 days, increased to 7 only when mean blood pressure is close to a diagnostic or treatment threshold. Other aspects of a monitoring schedule can be flexible to facilitate patient uptake of and adherence with self-monitoring.
| S-EPMC6420684 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Backgrounds and objectivesThis study aimed to evaluate the applicability and precision of a ring-type cuffless blood pressure (BP) measurement device, CART-I Plus, compared to conventional 24-hour ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM).MethodsForty patients were recruited, and 33 participants were included in the final analysis. Each participant wore both CART-I Plus and ABPM devices on the same arm for approximately 24 hours. BP estimation from CART-I Plus, derived from photoplethysmography (PPG) signals, were compared with the corresponding ABPM measurements.ResultsThe CART-I Plus recorded systolic blood pressure (SBP)/diastolic blood pressure (DBP) values of 131.4±14.1/81.1±12.0, 132.7±13.9/81.9±11.9, and 128.7±14.6/79.3±12.2 mmHg for 24-hour, daytime, and nighttime periods respectively, compared to ABPM values of 129.7±11.7/84.4±11.2, 131.9±11.6/86.3±11.1, and 124.5±13.6/80.0±12.2 mmHg. Mean differences in SBP/DBP between the two devices were 1.74±6.69/-3.24±6.51 mmHg, 0.75±7.44/-4.41±7.42 mmHg, and 4.15±6.15/-0.67±5.23 mmHg for 24-hour, daytime, and nighttime periods respectively. Strong correlations were also observed between the devices, with r=0.725 and r=0.750 for transitions in SBP and DBP from daytime to nighttime, respectively (both p<0.001).ConclusionsThe CART-I Plus device, with its unique ring-type design, shows promising accuracy in BP estimation and offers a potential avenue for continuous BP monitoring in clinical practice.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT06084065.
| S-EPMC10864248 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) is more commonly recommended for assessing out-of-clinic blood pressure (BP) than home blood pressure monitoring (HBPM). We conducted a systematic review to examine whether ABPM or HBPM is more strongly associated with cardiovascular disease events and/or mortality. Of 1007 abstracts published through July 20, 2015, nine articles, reporting results from seven cohorts, were identified. After adjustment for BP on HBPM, BP on ABPM was associated with an increased risk of outcomes in two of four cohorts for systolic blood pressure and two of three cohorts for diastolic blood pressure. After adjustment for BP on ABPM, systolic blood pressure on HBPM was associated with outcomes in zero of three cohorts; an association was present in one of two cohorts for diastolic blood pressure on HBPM. There is a lack of strong empiric evidence supporting ABPM or HBPM over the other approach for predicting cardiovascular events or mortality.
| S-EPMC4788568 | biostudies-literature
Project description:It remains unclear into which level the systolic blood pressure (SBP) should be lowered in order to provide the best cardiovascular protection among older people. Hypertension guidelines recommendation on attaining SBP levels <150 mmHg in this population is currently based on experts' opinion. To clarify this issue, we systematically reviewed and quantified available evidence on the impact of achieving different SBP levels <150 mmHg on various adverse outcomes in subjects aged ?60 years old receiving antihypertensive drug treatment.We searched 8 databases to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and post-hoc analyses or subanalyses of RCTs reporting the effects of attaining different SBP levels <150 mmHg on the risk of stroke, acute myocardial infarction, heart failure, cardiovascular mortality and all-cause mortality in participants aged ?60 years. We performed random-effects meta-analyses stratified by study design.Eleven studies (> 33,600 participants) were included. Compared with attaining SBP levels ?140 mmHg, levels of 130 to <140 mmHg were not associated with lower risk of outcomes in the meta-analysis of RCTs, whereas there was an associated reduction of cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.59-0.88) and all-cause mortality (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.75-0.99) in the meta-analysis of post-hoc analyses or subanalyses of RCTs. Limited and conflicting data were available for the SBP levels of <130 mmHg and 140 to <150 mmHg.Among older people, there is suggestive evidence that achieving SBP levels of 130 to <140 mmHg is associated with lower risks of cardiovascular and all-cause mortality. Future trials are required to confirm these findings and to provide additional evidence regarding the <130 and 140 to <150 mmHg SBP levels.
| S-EPMC5717809 | biostudies-other
Project description:Objective To systematically review studies quantifying the associations of long term (clinic), mid-term (home), and short term (ambulatory) variability in blood pressure, independent of mean blood pressure, with cardiovascular disease events and mortality.Data sources Medline, Embase, Cinahl, and Web of Science, searched to 15 February 2016 for full text articles in English.Eligibility criteria for study selection Prospective cohort studies or clinical trials in adults, except those in patients receiving haemodialysis, where the condition may directly impact blood pressure variability. Standardised hazard ratios were extracted and, if there was little risk of confounding, combined using random effects meta-analysis in main analyses. Outcomes included all cause and cardiovascular disease mortality and cardiovascular disease events. Measures of variability included standard deviation, coefficient of variation, variation independent of mean, and average real variability, but not night dipping or day-night variation.Results 41 papers representing 19 observational cohort studies and 17 clinical trial cohorts, comprising 46 separate analyses were identified. Long term variability in blood pressure was studied in 24 papers, mid-term in four, and short-term in 15 (two studied both long term and short term variability). Results from 23 analyses were excluded from main analyses owing to high risks of confounding. Increased long term variability in systolic blood pressure was associated with risk of all cause mortality (hazard ratio 1.15, 95% confidence interval 1.09 to 1.22), cardiovascular disease mortality (1.18, 1.09 to 1.28), cardiovascular disease events (1.18, 1.07 to 1.30), coronary heart disease (1.10, 1.04 to 1.16), and stroke (1.15, 1.04 to 1.27). Increased mid-term and short term variability in daytime systolic blood pressure were also associated with all cause mortality (1.15, 1.06 to 1.26 and 1.10, 1.04 to 1.16, respectively).Conclusions Long term variability in blood pressure is associated with cardiovascular and mortality outcomes, over and above the effect of mean blood pressure. Associations are similar in magnitude to those of cholesterol measures with cardiovascular disease. Limited data for mid-term and short term variability showed similar associations. Future work should focus on the clinical implications of assessment of variability in blood pressure and avoid the common confounding pitfalls observed to date.Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42014015695.
| S-EPMC4979357 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Emerging evidence suggests that maternal prepregnancy body mass index or weight (MPBW) may be associated with offspring's blood pressure (BP). Therefore, we conducted a systematic review-following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses statement-to assess and judge the evidence for an association between MPBW with offspring's later BP. Five data bases were searched without limits. Risk of bias was assessed using the "Tool to Assess Risk of Bias in Cohort Studies," and an evidence grade was allocated following the World Cancer Research Fund criteria. Of 2,011 publications retrieved, 16 studies (all cohort studies) were included in the systematic review; thereof, 5 studies (31%) were rated as good-quality studies. Overall, data from 63,959 participants were enclosed. Systolic BP was analysed in 15 (5 good quality), diastolic BP in 12 (3 good quality), and mean arterial pressure in 3 (no good quality) studies. Five good-quality studies of MPBW with offspring's systolic BP as the outcome and 1 good-quality study with offspring's diastolic BP as the outcome observed a significant association. However, after adding offspring's anthropometry variables to the statistical model, the effect attenuated in 4 studies with systolic BP to nonsignificance, the study with diastolic BP remained significant. No good-quality studies were found with respect to offspring's later mean arterial pressure. In conclusion, this systematic review found suggestive, but still limited, evidence for an association between MPBW with offspring's later BP. The available data suggest that the effect might be mainly mediated via offspring's anthropometry.
| S-EPMC6865974 | biostudies-literature