Setting and techniques for monitoring blood pressure during pregnancy

Perinatal Remote Blood Pressure Monitoring

Perinatal mortality and severe maternal morbidity among individuals with hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDP) are often driven by persistent, uncontrolled hypertension. Whereas traditional perinatal blood pressure (BP) ascertainment occurs through in-person clinic appointments, self-measured blood pressure (SMBP) programs allow individuals to measure their BP remotely and receive remote management by a medical team. Though data remain limited on clinically important outcomes such as maternal morbidity, these programs have shown promise in improving BP ascertainment rates in the immediate postpartum period and enhancing racial and ethnic equity in BP ascertainment after hospital discharge. In this narrative review, we provide an overview of perinatal SMBP programs that have been described in the literature and the data that support their efficacy. Furthermore, we offer suggestions for practitioners, institutions, and health systems that may be considering implementing SMBP programs, including important health equity concerns to be considered. Last, we discuss opportunities for ongoing and future research regarding SMBP programs' effects on maternal morbidity, long-term health outcomes, inequities that are known to exist in HDP and HDP-related outcomes, and the cost effectiveness of these programs.

Exploring perceptions and operational considerations for use of a smartphone application to self-monitor blood pressure in pregnancy in Lombok, Indonesia: protocol for a qualitative study

INTRODUCTION

Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDP) are a leading cause of maternal deaths globally and require close monitoring of blood pressure (BP) to mitigate potential adverse effects. Despite the recognised need for research on self-monitoring of blood pressure (SMBP) among pregnant populations, there are very few studies focused on low and middle income contexts, which carry the greatest burden of HDPs. The study aims to understand the perceptions, barriers, and operational considerations for using a smartphone software application to perform SMBP by pregnant women in Lombok, Indonesia.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This study includes a combination of focus group discussions, in-depth interviews and workshop observations. Pregnant women will also be provided with a research version of the smartphone BP application to use in their home and subsequently provide feedback on their experiences. The study will include pregnant women with current or past HDP, their partners and the healthcare workers involved in the provision of antenatal care services within the catchment area of six primary healthcare centres. Data obtained from the interviews and observations will undergo thematic analyses using a combination of both inductive and deductive approaches.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study was approved by the World Health Organization (WHO) and Human Reproduction Programme (HRP) Research Project Review Panel and WHO Ethical Review Committee (A65932) as well as the Health Research Ethics Committee, Faculty of Medicine, Universitas Mataram in Indonesia (004/UN18/F7/ETIK/2023).Findings will be disseminated through research publications and communicated to the Lombok district health offices. The analyses from this study will also inform the design of a subsequent impact evaluation.

Self-monitoring of blood pressure among women with hypertensive disorders of pregnancy: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends self-monitoring of blood pressure (SMBP) for hypertension management. In addition, during the COVID-19 response, WHO guidance also recommends SMBP supported by health workers although more evidence is needed on whether SMBP of pregnant individuals with hypertension (gestational hypertension, chronic hypertension, or pre-eclampsia) may assist in early detection of pre-eclampsia, increase end-user autonomy and empowerment, and reduce health system burden. To expand the evidence base for WHO guideline on self-care interventions, we conducted a systematic review of SMBP during pregnancy on maternal and neonatal outcomes.

METHODS

We searched for publications that compared SMBP with clinic-based monitoring during antenatal care. We included studies measuring any of the following outcomes: maternal mortality, pre-eclampsia, long-term risk and complications, autonomy, HELLP syndrome, C-section, antenatal hospital admission, adverse pregnancy outcomes, device-related issues, follow-up care with appropriate management, mental health and well-being, social harms, stillbirth or perinatal death, birthweight/size for gestational age, and Apgar score. After abstract screening and full-text review, we extracted data using standardized forms and summarized findings. We also reviewed studies assessing values and preferences as well as costs of SMBP.

RESULTS

We identified 6 studies meeting inclusion criteria for the effectiveness of SMBP, 6 studies on values and preferences, and 1 study on costs. All were from high-income countries. Overall, when comparing SMBP with clinic-monitoring, there was no difference in the risks for most of the outcomes for which data were available, though there was some evidence of increased risk of C-section among pregnant women with chronic hypertension. Most end-users and providers supported SMBP, motivated by ease of use, convenience, self-empowerment and reduced anxiety. One study found SMBP would lower health sector costs.

CONCLUSION

Limited evidence suggests that SMBP during pregnancy is feasible and acceptable, and generally associated with maternal and neonatal health outcomes similar to clinic-based monitoring. However, more research is needed in resource-limited settings.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42021233839 .

Effect of Self-monitoring of Blood Pressure on Blood Pressure Control in Pregnant Individuals With Chronic or Gestational Hypertension: The BUMP 2 Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Inadequate management of elevated blood pressure is a significant contributing factor to maternal deaths. The role of blood pressure self-monitoring in pregnancy in improving clinical outcomes for the pregnant individual and infant is unclear.

Objective

To evaluate the effect of blood pressure self-monitoring, compared with usual care alone, on blood pressure control and other related maternal and infant outcomes, in individuals with pregnancy hypertension.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Unblinded, randomized clinical trial that recruited between November 2018 and September 2019 in 15 hospital maternity units in England. Individuals with chronic hypertension (enrolled up to 37 weeks' gestation) or with gestational hypertension (enrolled between 20 and 37 weeks' gestation). Final follow-up was in May 2020.

Interventions

Participants were randomized to either blood pressure self-monitoring using a validated monitor and a secure telemonitoring system in addition to usual care (n = 430) or to usual care alone (n = 420). Usual care comprised blood pressure measured by health care professionals at regular antenatal clinics.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary maternal outcome was the difference in mean systolic blood pressure recorded by health care professionals between randomization and birth.

Results

Among 454 participants with chronic hypertension (mean age, 36 years; mean gestation at entry, 20 weeks) and 396 with gestational hypertension (mean age, 34 years; mean gestation at entry, 33 weeks) who were randomized, primary outcome data were available from 444 (97.8%) and 377 (95.2%), respectively. In the chronic hypertension cohort, there was no statistically significant difference in mean systolic blood pressure for the self-monitoring groups vs the usual care group (133.8 mm Hg vs 133.6 mm Hg, respectively; adjusted mean difference, 0.03 mm Hg [95% CI, -1.73 to 1.79]). In the gestational hypertension cohort, there was also no significant difference in mean systolic blood pressure (137.6 mm Hg compared with 137.2 mm Hg; adjusted mean difference, -0.03 mm Hg [95% CI, -2.29 to 2.24]). There were 8 serious adverse events in the self-monitoring group (4 in each cohort) and 3 in the usual care group (2 in the chronic hypertension cohort and 1 in the gestational hypertension cohort).

Conclusions and Relevance

Among pregnant individuals with chronic or gestational hypertension, blood pressure self-monitoring with telemonitoring, compared with usual care, did not lead to significantly improved clinic-based blood pressure control.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03334149.

Expression and clinical significance of lncRNA TCL6 in serum of patients with preeclampsia

Preeclampsia is a common syndrome in pregnancy and a leading cause of mortality of pregnant females and their infants. To investigate the diagnostic and prognostic utility of lncRNA T-cell leukemia/lymphoma 6 (TCL6) in patients with preeclampsia, 120 singleton pregnant females with preeclampsia and another 100 healthy pregnant control subjects were analyzed in the present study. The expression of lncRNA TCL6 in the serum of the included patients was detected. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was applied to evaluate the efficiency of lncRNA TCL6 in terms of preeclampsia diagnosis and grading. Kaplan-Meier analysis was adopted to assess the effect of lncRNA TCL6 expression on the rate of adverse pregnancy. Multivariate logistic regression was used to determine high-risk factors of adverse pregnancy. The results indicated that lncRNA TCL6 was significantly increased in the serum of patients with preeclampsia. Furthermore, TCL6 was elevated in subgroups of patients with early-onset or severe preeclampsia and with Haemolysis, Elevated Liver enzymes and Low Platelet count syndrome in comparison with other patients with preeclampsia. High expression of TCL6 in pregnant females corresponded to a higher rate of adverse pregnancy outcomes. Severe preeclampsia, early-onset preeclampsia and high TCL6 expression were identified as independent risk factors for adverse pregnancy outcomes. For each unit increase in TCL6 expression, a 9.5-fold increase of the risk of adverse maternal and fetal outcomes was determined. Collectively, high expression of lncRNA TCL6 may assist the diagnosis and grading of preeclampsia and may be adopted as an independent risk factor for adverse pregnancy outcomes.

Setting and techniques for monitoring blood pressure during pregnancy

BACKGROUND

Regular blood pressure (BP) measurement is crucial for the diagnosis and management of hypertensive disorders in pregnancy, such as pre-eclampsia. BP can be measured in various settings, such as conventional clinics or self-measurement at home, and with different techniques, such as using auscultatory or automated BP devices. It is important to understand the impact of different settings and techniques of BP measurement on important outcomes for pregnant women.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of setting and technique of BP measurement for diagnosing hypertensive disorders in pregnancy on subsequent maternal and perinatal outcomes, women's quality of life, or use of health service resources.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) on 22 April 2020, and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) involving pregnant women, using validated BP devices in different settings or using different techniques.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently extracted data, assessed risk of bias, and used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

Of the 21 identified studies, we included three, and excluded 11; seven were ongoing. Of the three included RCTs (536,607 women), one was a cluster-RCT, with a substantially higher number of participants (536,233 deliveries) than the other two trials, but did not provide data for most of our outcomes. We generally judged the included studies at low risk of bias, however, the certainty of the evidence was low, due to indirectness and imprecision. Meta-analysis was not possible because each study investigated a different comparison. None of the included studies reported our primary outcome of systolic BP greater than or equal to 150 mmHg. None of the studies reported any of these important secondary outcomes: antenatal hospital admissions, neonatal unit length of stay, or neonatal endotracheal intubation and use of mechanical ventilation. Setting of BP measurement: self-measurement versus conventional clinic measurement (one study, 154 women) There were no maternal deaths in either the self-monitoring group or the usual care group. The study did not report perinatal mortality. Self-monitoring may lead to slightly more diagnoses of pre-eclampsia compared with usual care (risk ratio (RR) 1.49, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.87 to 2.54; 154 women; 1 study; low-certainty evidence) but the wide 95% CI is consistent with possible benefit and possible harm. Self-monitoring may have little to no effect on the likelihood of induction of labour compared with usual care (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.45; 154 women; 1 study; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain if self-monitoring BP has any effect on maternal admission to intensive care (RR 1.54, 95% CI 0.06 to 37.25; 154 women; 1 study; low-certainty evidence), stillbirth (RR 2.57, 95% CI 0.13 to 52.63; 154 women; 1 study; low-certainty evidence), neonatal death (RR 1.54, 95% CI 0.06 to 37.25; 154 women; 1 study; low-certainty evidence) or preterm birth (RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.37 to 3.55; 154 women; 1 study; low-certainty evidence), compared with usual care because the certainty of evidence is low and the 95% CI is consistent with appreciable harms and appreciable benefits. Self-monitoring may lead to slightly more neonatal unit admissions compared with usual care (RR 1.53, 95% CI 0.65 to 3.62; 154 women; 1 study; low-certainty evidence) but the wide 95% CI includes the possibility of slightly fewer admissions with self-monitoring. Technique of BP measurement: Korotkoff phase IV (K4, muffling sound) versus Korotkoff phase V (K5, disappearance of sound) to represent diastolic BP (one study, 220 women) There were no maternal deaths in either the K4 or K5 group. There may be little to no difference in the diagnosis of pre-eclampsia between using K4 or K5 for diastolic BP (RR 1.16; 95% CI 0.89 to 1.49; 1 study; 220 women; low-certainty evidence), since the wide 95% CI includes the possibility of more diagnoses with K4. We are uncertain if there is a difference in perinatal mortality between the groups because the quality of evidence is low and the 95% CI is consistent with appreciable harm and appreciable benefit (RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.16 to 7.92; 1 study, 220 women; low-certainty evidence). The trial did not report data on maternal admission to intensive care, induction of labour, stillbirth, neonatal death, preterm birth, or neonatal unit admissions. Technique of BP measurement: CRADLE intervention (CRADLE device, a semi-automated BP monitor with additional features, and an education package) versus usual care (one study, 536,233 deliveries) There may be little to no difference between the use of the CRADLE device and usual care in the number of maternal deaths (adjusted RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.30 to 2.11; 536,233 women; 1 study; low-certainty evidence), but the 95% CI is consistent with appreciable harm and appreciable benefit. The trial did not report pre-eclampsia, induction of labour, perinatal mortality, preterm birth, or neonatal unit admissions. Maternal admission to intensive care and perinatal outcomes (stillbirths and neonatal deaths) were only collected for a small proportion of the women, identified by an outcome not by baseline characteristics, thereby breaking the random allocation. Therefore, any differences between the groups could not be attributed to the intervention, and we did not extract data for these outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The benefit, if any, of self-monitoring BP in hypertensive pregnancies remains uncertain, as the evidence is limited to one feasibility study. Current practice of using K5 to measure diastolic BP is supported for women with pregnancy hypertension. The benefit, if any, of using the CRADLE device to measure BP in pregnancy remains uncertain, due to the limitations and instability of the trial study design.