Key result
A telephone survey with motivational education increased the use of a central home blood pressure reporting system to 24.4% compared to 7.5% in non-surveyed patients.
Why the study?
What are the barriers to adherence and communication in a home blood pressure monitoring program among non-participants?
Population
320 non-participants in a home blood pressure monitoring (HBPM) program
Design
Cross-sectional
Authors
Loading...
May boost HBPM reporting via telephone outreach; leaves open strategies to address language and clinic barriers in non-participants.
Observational (n=316)
Yes
What are the barriers to adherence and communication in a home blood pressure monitoring program among non-participants?
Absolute Event Rate: 24.4% vs 7.5%
p-value: p=<0.0001
Despite non-participation in a formal HBPM program, most patients still use cuffs and communicate readings, though language barriers and personal/clinic factors hinder full engagement.
Huff et al. (2011) conducted an observational in Hypertension (n=316). Telephone survey and motivational education vs. Non-surveyed non-reporters was evaluated on Initiation of central reporting system use (p=<0.0001). A telephone survey with motivational education increased the use of a central home blood pressure reporting system to 24.4% compared to 7.5% in non-surveyed patients.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: