Key result
Home blood pressure monitoring did not significantly improve blood pressure control at 12 weeks compared to usual care in hypertensive patients taking multiple medications (OR 0.836).
Why the study?
Although recent guidelines recommend home blood pressure monitoring, its effect in clinical practice was not well known.
Does home blood pressure monitoring improve target blood pressure achievement at 12 weeks in hypertensive patients taking multiple antihypertensive medications including fimasartan?
RCT (n=2,483)
Open-label
Cluster-randomized
Yes
Does home blood pressure monitoring improve target blood pressure achievement at 12 weeks in hypertensive patients taking multiple antihypertensive medications including fimasartan?
Effect estimate: OR 0.836 (95% CI 0.694-1.007)
Absolute Event Rate: 64.15% vs 68.7%
p-value: p=0.0586
Home blood pressure monitoring alone did not significantly improve blood pressure control at 12 weeks, though better compliance with measurement was associated with improved control.
Home BP monitoring does not improve control in multidrug-treated hypertension; challenges assumptions and prioritizes adherence-focused strategies.
BACKGROUND: Although recent hypertension guidelines recommend home blood pressure (HBP) monitoring, its effect in clinical practice is not well known. This study aimed to identify current HBP measurement status and obstacles and their efficacy on blood pressure (BP) control. METHODS: Sixty-three intervention and 61 control centers with 2483 (mean age: 58.0 years, 56.0% male) drug-naïve stage 2 hypertensive patients or patients requiring second anti-hypertensive medications were included. The intervention group was instructed to measure HBP twice a day for 7 days from the scheduled visit at 4, 8, and 12 weeks. RESULTS: At the end of 12 weeks, 842 (68.7%) and 807 (64.15%) patients of the control and intervention groups, respectively, achieved a target BP. The odds ratio (OR) for improving BP control of HBP was 0.836 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.694-1.007). Among intervention group, clinic BP of the subgroup those measured their HBP at least once well controlled compared to subgroup those not measured their HBP at all (OR 1.602, 95% CI: 1.182-2.172). Only 19.17% (n = 476) had a home sphygmomanometer, and among those, 26.89% measured their BP at least once a week and 34.87% did not measure the BP at all. The obstacles of HBP measurement were lack of awareness of its importance (40.83%), lack of confidence on how to measure BP and maintain the measurement (37.04%), and difficulty in selecting an appropriate device (14.41%). CONCLUSIONS: HBP measurement alone did not improve BP control, but better compliance with the HBP measurement resulted in improved BP control. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials, NCT03254914 , Registered 21 August 2017.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Choi et al. (2020) conducted an RCT in Hypertension (n=2,483). Home blood pressure (HBP) monitoring vs. Usual care (HBP unmeasured) was evaluated on Achievement of target blood pressure at 12 weeks (OR 0.836, 95% CI 0.694-1.007, p=0.0586). Home blood pressure monitoring did not significantly improve blood pressure control at 12 weeks compared to usual care in hypertensive patients taking multiple medications (OR 0.836).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: