Key result
Automated office blood pressure measurement yielded a lower prevalence of masked hypertension on single visits (11-15%) compared to manual office measurement (19-20%).
Why the study?
Does automated office blood pressure measurement alter the prevalence of masked hypertension compared to conventional manual office blood pressure measurement in patients with systolic hypertension?
Population
252 patients with systolic hypertension in routine primary care practice
Comparison
Automated office blood pressure measurement… vs Continued conventional manual office blood…
Design
RCT, randomized
Follow-up
median 6 months
Authors
Loading...
Supports automated over manual office BP to reduce masked hypertension misclassification in practice; extends RCT evidence for standardized measurement protocols.
RCT (n=252)
randomized
Does automated office blood pressure measurement alter the prevalence of masked hypertension compared to conventional manual office blood pressure measurement in patients with systolic hypertension?
Automated office blood pressure measurement yields a lower prevalence of masked hypertension compared to conventional manual measurement, and requiring multiple visits further reduces this prevalence.
Myers et al. (2012) conducted an RCT in Systolic hypertension (n=252). Automated office blood pressure (AOBP) measurement vs. Conventional manual office blood pressure (MOBP) measurement was evaluated on Prevalence of masked hypertension. Automated office blood pressure measurement yielded a lower prevalence of masked hypertension on single visits (11-15%) compared to manual office measurement (19-20%).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: