Continual Versus Occasional Blood Pressure (COOL-BP) in Remote Hypertension Management

Figures

• 

  Figure 1.. Consort diagram. Consort diagram of cohorts for primary and secondary endpoints. At the bottom of the figure, leftmost box indicates the cohort for the primary endpoint, and middle and rightmost boxes indicate the cohorts for the secondary endpoints.

• 

  Figure 2.. Correlation of HBPM and cuffless wrist monitor measurements. Scatter plots (upper) and Bland-Altman plots (lower) comparing weekly averages of SBP and DBP measured with HBPM and the cuffless wrist monitor. HBPM SBP and DBP (mean ± SD) were 127.6 ± 9.6 mmHg and 82.8 ± 7.3 mmHg; cuffless wrist monitor SBP and DBP (mean ± SD) were 132.5 ± 13.5 mmHg and 78.6 ± 9.2 mmHg 127.6 ± 9.6 mmHg and 82.8 ± 7.3 mmHg.

• 

  Figure 3.. Detection of BP changes with Aktiia vs HBPM. (a) Visual illustration of time series of SBPs measured using HBPM and cuffless wrist monitor. A minimum 7-day drug stabilization period was required following each drug titration, during which no recalibration of the cuffless device occurred. (b) Concordance plot for systolic BP changes seen by HBPM and cuffless wrist monitor over the eight events for the five patients. All patients are represented by a single dot, except for Subjects A and D who are represented by three and two dots, respectively, one for each medication titration. A 4 mmHg no change zone was considered in the calculation of concordance rate, reflecting less than half the tolerable error of the cuff. Points were deemed concordant if within the middle, right-upper, or left-lower area and discordant if within left-upper or right-lower area. Numbered dots correspond to the respective medication titrations presented in panel a (for Subject A).

• 

  Figure 4.. Patient preferences. Multiple answers were possible. Where participants were provided different reasons for preferring each device, they are listed in separate lines.