Key result
Home self blood pressure measurement (SBPM) was more feasible than ambulatory monitoring (87% vs 70% valid recordings; P<0.0001) and exhibited better hourly reproducibility.
Why the study?
How do home self blood pressure measurements (SBPM) compare to ambulatory (ABPM) and office blood pressure measurements in terms of feasibility, agreement, and reproducibility for evaluating antihypertensive drug response in hypertensive patients?
Population
229 hypertensive patients
Comparison
Home self blood pressure measurements and… vs Office blood pressure measurements
Design
RCT, randomized, double-blind
Follow-up
6 weeks
Authors
Loading...
Supports home SBPM for antihypertensive response assessment in practice; extends RCT evidence on feasibility to reproducibility versus ABPM.
RCT (n=229)
double-blind
parallel group
How do home self blood pressure measurements (SBPM) compare to ambulatory (ABPM) and office blood pressure measurements in terms of feasibility, agreement, and reproducibility for evaluating antihypertensive drug response in hypertensive patients?
Absolute Event Rate: 87% vs 70%
p-value: p=< .0001
Home self blood pressure measurement is more feasible and provides better reproducibility than ambulatory or office blood pressure measurements for evaluating residual antihypertensive effects.
Ragot et al. (2000) conducted an RCT in hypertension (n=229). Home self blood pressure measurements (SBPM) vs. Ambulatory blood pressure measurements (ABPM) was evaluated on Feasibility (proportion of patients performing valid measurements during both periods) (p=< .0001). Home self blood pressure measurement (SBPM) was more feasible than ambulatory monitoring (87% vs 70% valid recordings; P<0.0001) and exhibited better hourly reproducibility.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: