In a remote hypertension management program, 32.7% of patients had no engagement with home blood pressure monitoring despite receiving free devices and ongoing support.
Patient engagement with home blood pressure monitoring remains suboptimal, with nearly a third of patients showing no engagement despite receiving free devices, education, and personalized navigator support.
Absolute Event Rate: 0% vs 0%
Importance Home blood pressure monitoring (HBPM) is essential and universally recommended for hypertension management, but patterns of real-world patient engagement with HBPM have not been studied and remain largely unknown. Objective To evaluate patient engagement with HBPM in a remote hypertension management program. Design, Setting, and Participants This retrospective cohort study analyzing prospectively collected program data was conducted within a remote hypertension management program at a large academic health care system, Mass General Brigham, in Boston, Massachusetts. Data were collected from from September 2018 to June 2022. Adults with uncontrolled hypertension enrolled in the program were eligible for inclusion. Data analyses were conducted from February to April 2025. Interventions Patients received free automated HBPM devices, education, and ongoing personalized support from health care navigators via telephone and messaging, with algorithm-guided medication titration. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was engagement at baseline. Weekly HBPM frequency was categorized as no engagement (0 measurements), low engagement (1-11 measurements/week), intermediate engagement (12-23 measurements/week), and high engagement (24-28 measurements/week). Results A total of 3390 patients were enrolled in the remote hypertension program; median (IQR) patient age was 61 (52-69) years, with 1958 (57.8%) female patients. Mean (SD) systolic BP at baseline was 143 (13) mm Hg, and most patients had comorbidities, including 1369 patients (40.4%) with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and 996 (29.4%) with diabetes. At baseline, 1107 patients (32.7%) had no engagement, 484 (14.3%) had low engagement, 618 (18.2%) had intermediate engagement, and 1181 (34.8%) had high engagement. Conclusions and Relevance In this cohort study of a remote hypertension management program, patient engagement with HBPM was suboptimal despite free devices, education, and personalized support with a navigator. To support optimal HBPM, innovative methods of BP monitoring that are more convenient and less burdensome for patients may enhance engagement and improve hypertension management outcomes.
Ünlü et al. (Wed,) reported a other. In a remote hypertension management program, 32.7% of patients had no engagement with home blood pressure monitoring despite receiving free devices and ongoing support.