Key result
Home BP monitoring cuts labor induction ~19% and postpartum readmissions vs office monitoring in hypertensive pregnancies.
Why the study?
Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy require frequent blood pressure measurements, and home blood pressure monitoring has been suggested as an alternative to frequent office visits.
Does home blood pressure monitoring improve clinical outcomes compared to office monitoring in patients with hypertensive disorders of pregnancy?
Meta-Analysis (n=5,335)
Does home blood pressure monitoring improve clinical outcomes compared to office monitoring in patients with hypertensive disorders of pregnancy?
Effect estimate: RR 0.81 (95% CI 0.69-0.96)
p-value: p=0.02
Home blood pressure monitoring is a safe and effective alternative to office monitoring for hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, reducing induction of labor and postpartum readmissions.
Supports home blood pressure monitoring to reduce inductions and readmissions in hypertensive pregnancy; confirms benefits in Level 1 meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND: Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDP) can significantly impact maternal, neonatal, and fetal health. For controlling these disorders, frequent blood pressure measurements are required. Home blood pressure monitoring (HBPM) is a suggested alternative to conventional office monitoring that requires frequent visits. This systematic review was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of HBPM in the control of HDP. METHODS: We systematically conducted databases search for relevant studies in June 2022. The relevant studies were identified, and qualitative synthesis was performed. An inverse variance quantitative synthesis was conducted using RevMan software. Continuous outcome data were pooled as means differences, whereas dichotomous ones were summarized as risk ratios. The 95% confidence interval was the measure of variance. RESULTS: Fifteen studies were included in our review (n = 5335). Our analysis revealed a superiority of HBPM in reducing the risk of induction of labor, and postpartum readmission (P = 0.02, and 0.01 respectively). Moreover, the comparison of birth weights showed a significant variation in favor of HBPM (P = 0.02). In the analysis of other outcomes, HBPM was equally effective as office monitoring. Furthermore, HBPM did not result in an elevated risk of maternal, neonatal, and fetal adverse outcomes. CONCLUSION: Home monitoring of blood pressure showed superiority over office monitoring in some outcomes and equal efficacy in other outcomes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Albadrani et al. (2023) conducted a meta-analysis in Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (n=5,335). Home blood pressure monitoring vs. Conventional office monitoring was evaluated on Induction of labor (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.69-0.96, p=0.02). Home blood pressure monitoring significantly reduced the risk of induction of labor (RR 0.81) and postpartum readmission compared to conventional office monitoring in women with hypertensive disorders of pregnancy.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: