Key result
Self-measured BP monitoring is linked to a ~6 mm Hg systolic reduction vs automated office BP.
Why the study?
Few studies compare self-measured blood pressure with automated office blood pressure measurements over time, and little is known about reimbursement for these services.
Does a self-measured blood pressure monitoring program reduce blood pressure compared to automated office blood pressure measurements?
Observational (n=140)
No
Does a self-measured blood pressure monitoring program reduce blood pressure compared to automated office blood pressure measurements?
Absolute Event Rate: -5.8% vs 0.1%
A self-measured blood pressure pilot program demonstrated reductions in home blood pressure readings over 6 months, but these improvements were not reflected in automated office blood pressure measurements.
Home-office BP discordance after monitoring cautions against practice change; leaves open program value in prospective trials.
Background Self-measured blood pressure (SMBP) monitoring is a proposed strategy to improve hypertension control, but few studies compare SMBP with automated office blood pressure (AOBP) measurements over time. Moreover, little is known about reimbursement for these services. Methods We describe a quality improvement initiative in our academic internal medicine practice. Patients received validated home blood pressure (BP) devices and were instructed to check their BP twice daily for 7 days each month. Devices transmitted readings seamlessly via a smartphone application that averaged weekly readings. Clinicians reviewed the data and adjusted therapy if indicated. We tracked changes in SMBP, AOBP, antihypertensive medications, and reimbursement. Results Among 140 patients referred (mean age 57.6 years, 57.1% women, 25.7% Black), 59 completed the program. Over 6 months, the mean self-measured systolic BP decreased by 5.8 mm Hg (95% CI: −8.2 to −3.5) and the mean diastolic BP decreased by 2.8 mm Hg (95% CI: −4.2 to −1.4) and the number with BP <130/<80 mm Hg increased by 22 percentage points (P = 0.007). However, unattended AOBP showed no change in either systolic (change: 0.1 mm Hg; P = 0.98) or diastolic (change: −0.6 mm Hg; P = 0.64) readings. Reimbursement was variable and ranged from no payment to a maximum payment of $51; when paid, the average payment was $13.81. Conclusions In this program, SMBP decreased over time while AOBP remained similar. Reimbursement, when received, was modest. Future work should evaluate whether using SMBP as a therapeutic target reduces cardiovascular events.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cluett et al. (2025) conducted an observational in Hypertension (n=140). Self-measured blood pressure (SMBP) monitoring vs. Automated office blood pressure (AOBP) was evaluated on Change in mean systolic blood pressure (95% CI -8.2 to -3.5). A self-measured blood pressure monitoring program decreased mean systolic BP by 5.8 mm Hg (95% CI: -8.2 to -3.5) over 6 months, whereas automated office blood pressure showed no significant change.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: