Key result
Home BP monitoring reveals ~66% of patients with elevated clinic readings actually have controlled BP.
Why the study?
Conventional clinic BP measurements guide hypertension management, but whether physician non-intensification after elevated clinic BP reflects therapeutic inertia versus appropriate inaction remained unclear.
Does home BP monitoring differentiate appropriate inaction from therapeutic inertia in patients with elevated clinic BP without treatment intensification?
Observational (n=90)
Yes
Does home BP monitoring differentiate appropriate inaction from therapeutic inertia in patients with elevated clinic BP without treatment intensification?
Home BP monitoring in patients with elevated clinic BP but no treatment intensification revealed that nearly two-thirds had controlled BP at home, helping to differentiate appropriate inaction from therapeutic inertia.
Home BP monitoring may distinguish appropriate inaction from inertia; leaves open effects on outcomes in prospective trials.
PURPOSE: Conventional clinic blood pressure (BP) measurements are routinely used for hypertension management and physician performance measures. We aimed to check home BP measurements after elevated conventional clinic BP measurements for which physicians did not intensify treatment, to differentiate therapeutic inertia from appropriate inaction. METHODS: We conducted a pre and post study of home BP monitoring for patients with uncontrolled hypertension as determined by conventional clinic BP measurements for which physicians did not intensify hypertension management. Physicians were notified of average home BP 2-4 weeks after the initial clinic visit. Outcome measures were the proportion of patients with controlled hypertension using average home BP measurements, changes in hypertension management by physicians, changes in physicians' hypertension metrics, and factors associated with home-clinic BP differences. RESULTS: Of 90 recruited patients who had elevated conventional clinic BP recordings, 65.6% had average home BP measurements that were <140/90 mm Hg. Physicians changed treatment plans for 61% of patients with average home BP readings of ≥140/90 mm Hg, whereas decisions to not change treatment for the remaining patients were based on contextual factors. Substituting average home BP for conventional clinic BP for 4% of patients from 2 physicians' hypertension registries improved the physicians' hypertension control rates by 3% to 5%. Greater body mass index and increased number of BP medications were associated with home BP measurement ≥140/90 mm Hg. Clinic BP levels did not estimate normal home BP levels. CONCLUSIONS: Documented home BP in cases of clinical uncertainty helped differentiate therapeutic inertia from appropriate inaction and improved physicians' hypertension metrics.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Patil et al. (2020) conducted an observational in Uncontrolled hypertension (n=90). Home blood pressure monitoring vs. Conventional clinic blood pressure was evaluated on Proportion of patients with controlled hypertension (average home blood pressure <140/90 mm Hg). Home blood pressure monitoring revealed that 65.6% of patients with elevated clinic blood pressure and no treatment intensification actually had controlled blood pressure (<140/90 mm Hg).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: