Clinic, Home, and Kiosk Blood Pressure Measurements for Diagnosing Hypertension: a Randomized Diagnostic Study

Relationship of Blood Pressure, Health Behaviors, and New Diagnosis and Control of Hypertension in the BP-CHECK Study

BACKGROUND

Undiagnosed hypertension and uncontrolled blood pressure (BP) are common and contribute to excess cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. We examined whether BP control, changes in BP, and patient behaviors and attitudes were associated with a new hypertension diagnosis.

METHODS

We performed a post hoc analysis of 323 participants from BP-CHECK (Blood Pressure Checks for Diagnosing Hypertension), a randomized diagnostic study of BP measuring methods in adults without diagnosed hypertension with elevated BP recruited from 12 primary care clinics of an integrated health care system in Washington State during 2017 to 2019. All 323 participants returned a positive diagnostic test for hypertension based on 24-hour ambulatory BP monitoring and were followed for 6 months. We used linear regression to examine the relationships between a new hypertension diagnosis (primary independent variable) and differences in the change in study outcomes from baseline to 6-month.

RESULTS

Mean age of study participants was 58.3 years (SD, 13.1), 147 (45%) were women, and 253 (80%) were of non-Hispanic White race. At 6 months, 154 of 323 (48%) participants had a new hypertension diagnosis of whom 88 achieved target BP control. Participants with a new hypertension diagnosis experienced significantly larger declines from baseline in BP (adjusted mean difference: systolic BP, -7.6 mm Hg [95% CI, -10.3 to -4.8]; diastolic BP, -3.8 mm Hg [95% CI, -5.6 to -2.0]) compared with undiagnosed peers. They were also significantly more likely to achieve BP control by 6 months compared with undiagnosed participants (adjusted relative risk, 1.5 [95% CI, 1.1 to 2.0]). At 6 months, 101 of 323 participants (31%) with a positive ambulatory BP monitoring diagnostic test remained with undiagnosed hypertension, uncontrolled BP, and no antihypertensive medications.

CONCLUSIONS

Approximately one-third of participants with high BP on screening and ambulatory BP monitoring diagnostic testing remained with undiagnosed hypertension, uncontrolled BP, and no antihypertensive medications after 6 months. New strategies are needed to enhance integration of BP diagnostic testing into clinical practice.

REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03130257.

A comparative trial of blood pressure monitoring in a self-care kiosk, in office, and with ambulatory blood pressure monitoring

BACKGROUND

Automated measurement of blood pressure (BP) in designated BP kiosks have in recent years been introduced in primary care. If kiosk blood pressure (BP) monitoring provides results equivalent to in-office BP or daytime ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM), follow-up of adult patients could be managed primarily by self-checks. We therefore designed a comparative trial and evaluated the diagnostic performance of kiosk- and office-based BP (nurse- versus physician-measured) compared with daytime ABPM.

METHODS

A trial of automated BP monitoring in three settings: a designated BP kiosk, by nurses and physicians in clinic, and by ABPM. The primary outcome was systolic and diastolic BP, with respective diagnostic thresholds of ≥135 mmHg and/or ≥ 85 mmHg for daytime ABPM and kiosk BP and ≥ 140 mmHg and/or ≥ 90 mmHg for office BP (nurse- and physician-measured).

RESULTS

Compared with daytime ABPM, mean systolic kiosk BP was higher by 6.2 mmHg (95% confidence interval [CI] 3.8-8.6) and diastolic by 7.9 mmHg (95% CI 6.2-9.6; p < 0.001). Mean systolic BP taken by nurses was similar to daytime ABPM values (+ 2.0 mmHg; 95% CI - 0.2-4.2; p = 0.071), but nurse-measured diastolic values were higher, by 7.2 mmHg (95% CI 5.9-9.6; p < 0.001). Mean systolic and diastolic physician-measured BPs were higher compared with daytime ABPM (systolic, by 7.6 mmHg [95% CI 4.5-10.2] and diastolic by 5.8 mmHg [95% CI 4.1-7.6]; p < 0.001). Receiver operating characteristic curves of BP monitoring across pairs of systolic/diastolic cut-off levels among the three settings, with daytime ABPM as reference, demonstrated overall similar diagnostic performance between kiosk and nurse-measured values and over the curve performance for physician-measured BP. Accuracy with nurse-measured BP was 69.2% (95% CI 60.0-77.4%), compared with 65.8% (95% CI 56.5-74.3%) for kiosk BP.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study kiosk BP monitoring was not comparable to daytime ABPM but could be an alternative to in-office BP monitoring by trained nurses. The diagnostic performance of kiosk and nurse-measured BP monitoring was similar and better than that of physician-measured BP.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04488289) 27/07/2020.

Is Hypertension Diagnostic Testing and Diagnosis Associated With Psychological Distress?

BACKGROUND

Psychological impacts of hypertension diagnostic testing and new hypertension diagnoses are unclear.

METHODS

BP-CHECK was a randomized diagnostic study conducted in 2017-2019 in an integrated healthcare system. Participants with no hypertension diagnosis or medications and elevated blood pressure (BP) were randomized to one of three diagnostic regimens: (i) Clinic, (ii) Home, or (iii) Kiosk. Participants completed questionnaires at baseline, after completion of the diagnostic regimens, and at 6 months. Outcomes included changes from baseline in health-related quality of life (HRQOL), BP-related worry, and thoughts about having a stroke or heart attack.

RESULTS

Participants (n = 482) were mostly over age 50 (77.0%), and White race (80.3%). HRQOL did not significantly change from baseline to 3 weeks or 6 months. Among all participants, BP-related worry and concerns about having a heart attack or stroke increased significantly from baseline to 3 weeks, with heart attack and stroke concerns significantly higher in the Kiosk compared Clinic and Home groups. At 6 months, thoughts about having a heart attack or stroke returned to baseline overall and in the Kiosk group, however BP-related worry was significantly higher among those with, compared to those without, a new hypertension diagnosis.

CONCLUSIONS

The hypertension diagnostic process did not lead to short-term or intermediate-term changes in self-reported HRQOL. However, BP-related worry increased short-term and persisted at 6 months among individuals with a new hypertension diagnosis. Results warrant validation in more representative populations and additional exploration of the impacts of this worry on psychological well-being and hypertension control.

CLINICALTRIALS.GOV IDENTIFIER

NCT03130257.

A Multifaceted Implementation Strategy to Increase Out-of-Office Blood Pressure Monitoring: The EMBRACE Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Few primary care patients complete guideline-recommended out-of-office blood pressure (BP) monitoring prior to having hypertension diagnosed.

Objective

To evaluate the effectiveness of a behavioral theory-informed, multifaceted implementation strategy on out-of-office BP monitoring (ambulatory BP monitoring [ABPM] or home BP monitoring [HBPM]) among patients with new hypertension.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This 2-group, pre-post cluster randomized trial was conducted within a primary care network of 8 practices (4 intervention practices with 99 clinicians; 4 control practices with 55 clinicians) and 1186 patients (857 intervention; 329 control) with at least 1 visit with elevated office BP and no prior hypertension diagnosis between October 2016 and September 2017 (preimplementation period) or between April 2018 and March 2019 (postimplementation period). Data were analyzed from February to July 2023.

Interventions

Usual care (control group) or a multifaceted implementation strategy consisting of an accessible ABPM service; electronic health record (EHR) tools to facilitate test ordering; clinician education, reminders, and feedback relevant to out-of-office BP monitoring; nurse training on HBPM; and patient information handouts.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was patient completion of out-of-office BP monitoring within 6 months of an eligible visit. Secondary outcomes included clinician ordering of out-of-office BP monitoring. Blinded assessors extracted outcomes from the EHR.

Results

A total of 1186 patients (857 intervention; 329 control) were included, with a mean (SD) age of 54 (16) years; 808 (68%) were female, and 549 (48%) were Spanish speaking; among those with race and ethnicity documented, 123 (10%) were Black or African American, and 368 (31%) were Hispanic. Among intervention practices, the percentage of visits resulting in completed out-of-office BP monitoring increased from 0.6% (0% ABPM; 0.6% HBPM) to 5.7% (3.7% ABPM; 2.0% HBPM) between the preimplementation and postimplementation periods (P = .009). Among control practices, the percentage of visits resulting in completed out-of-office BP monitoring changed from 5.4% (0% ABPM; 5.4% HBPM) to 4.3% (0% ABPM; 4.3% HBPM) during the corresponding period (P = .94). The ratio of relative risks (RRs) of out-of-office BP monitoring in the postimplementation vs preimplementation periods for intervention vs control practices was 10.5 (95% CI, 1.9-58.0; P = .01). The ratio of RRs of out-of-office BP monitoring being ordered was 2.2 (95% CI, 0.8-6.3; P = .12).

Conclusions and Relevance

This study found that a theory-informed implementation strategy that included access to ABPM modestly increased out-of-office BP monitoring among patients with elevated office BP but no hypertension diagnosis.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03480217.

Acceptability and Adherence to Home, Kiosk, and Clinic Blood Pressure Measurement Compared to 24-H Ambulatory Monitoring

BACKGROUND

The US Preventive Services Task Force recommends measuring blood pressure (BP) outside of clinic/office settings. While various options are available, including home devices, BP kiosks, and 24-h ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM), understanding patient acceptability and adherence is a critical factor for implementation.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the acceptability and adherence of clinic, home, kiosk, and ABPM measurement.

DESIGN

Comparative diagnostic accuracy study which randomized adults to one of three BP measurement arms: clinic, home, and kiosk. ABPM was conducted on all participants.

PARTICIPANTS

Adults (18-85 years) receiving care at 12 Kaiser Permanente Washington primary care clinics (Washington State, USA) with a high BP (≥ 138 mmHg systolic or ≥ 88 mmHg diastolic) in the electronic health record with no hypertension diagnosis and on no hypertensive medications and with high BP at a research screening visit.

MEASURES

Patient acceptability was measured using a validated survey which was used to calculate an overall acceptability score (range 1-7) at baseline, after completing their assigned BP measurement intervention, and after completing ABPM. Adherence was defined based on the pre-specified number of BP measurements completed.

KEY RESULTS

Five hundred ten participants were randomized (mean age 59 years), with mean BP of 150/88. Overall acceptability score was highest (i.e. most acceptable) for Home BP (mean 6.2, SD 0.7) and lowest (least acceptable) for ABPM (mean 5.0, SD 1.0); scores were intermediate for Clinic (5.5, SD 1.1) and Kiosk (5.4, SD 1.0). Adherence was higher for Home (154/170, 90.6%) and Clinic (150/172, 87.2%) than for Kiosk (114/168, 67.9%)). The majority of participants (467/510, 91.6%) were adherent to ABPM.

CONCLUSIONS

Participants found home BP measurement most acceptable followed by clinic, BP kiosks, and ABPM. Our findings, coupled with recent evidence regarding the accuracy of home BP measurement, further support the routine use of home-based BP measurement in primary care practice in the US.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03130257 https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03130257.

Randomized trial protocol for remote monitoring for equity in advancing the control of hypertension in safety net systems (REACH-SNS) study

BACKGROUND

Self-measured blood pressure monitoring (SMBP) is essential to effective management of hypertension. This study aims to evaluate effectiveness and implementation of SMBP that leverages: cellular-enabled home BP monitors without a need for Wi-Fi or Bluetooth; simple communication modalities such as text messaging to support patient engagement; and integration into existing team-based workflows in safety-net clinics.

METHODS

This study will be conducted with patients in San Francisco who are treated within a network of safety-net clinics. English and Spanish-speaking patients with diagnosed hypertension will be eligible for the trial if they have recent BP readings ≥140/90 mmHg and do not have co-morbid conditions that make home BP monitoring more complex to manage. This study will implement a three-arm randomized controlled trial to compare varying levels of implementation support: 1) cellular-enabled BP monitors (with minimal implementation support), 2) cellular-enabled BP monitors with protocol-based implementation support (text reminders for patients; aggregated BP summaries sent to primary care providers), and 3) cellular-enabled BP monitors and pharmacist-led support (pharmacist coaching and independent medication adjustments).

RESULTS

For the main analysis, we will use mixed effects linear regression to compare the change in primary outcome of systolic BP. Secondary outcomes include BP control (<140/90 mmHg), medication intensification, patient-reported outcomes, and implementation processes (i.e., engagement with the intervention).

DISCUSSION

This study will design and test a digital health intervention for use in marginalized populations treated within safety net settings, evaluating both effectiveness and implementation to advance more equitable health outcomes.

Primary care physician beliefs and practices regarding blood pressure measurement: results from BP-CHECK qualitative interviews

BACKGROUND

Early identification and control of hypertension is critical to reducing cardiovascular disease events and death. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force guidelines recommend health care professionals screen all adults for hypertension, yet 1 in 4 adults with hypertension are unaware of their condition. This gap between guidelines and clinical practices highlights an important opportunity to improve blood pressure (BP) screening and hypertension diagnosis, including measurement outside of clinic settings. To identify targets for future diagnostic interventions, we sought to understand primary care physicians' (PCPs) beliefs and practices regarding use of common forms of BP measurement.

METHODS

Study participants were PCPs (N = 27) who had patients enrolled in the BP-CHECK trial. The trial compared the accuracy of 24-h ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) to: 1) clinic-based monitoring, 2) home BP monitoring (HBPM), or 3) use of a BP kiosk in clinics or pharmacies. Physicians were interviewed by phone and compensated for their participation. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using a template analysis approach.

RESULTS

Overall, PCPs preferred and trusted clinic BP measurement for diagnosing hypertension, particularly when measured with a manual sphygmomanometer. Concerns with HBPM included the belief that patients did not follow protocols for rest and body positioning at home, that home machines were not accurate, that home BPs could not be entered into the medical record, and that HBPM would make some patients anxious. Issues regarding kiosk measurement included beliefs that the public setting created stress for patients, that patients did not follow resting protocols when using kiosks, and concerns about the maintenance of these machines. ABPM was recognized as highly accurate but was not perceived as accessible. Additionally, some PCPs found it challenging to interpret the multiple readings generated by ABPM and HBPM, especially when these readings differed from clinic BPs.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that both additional physician education and training and investments in equipment and system-level processes are needed to increase the acceptance and utilization of out of office BP measurement for identification and treatment of hypertension. These changes are needed to improve ensure everyone in the U.S receive optimal care for hypertension.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03130257 . Initial registration date: 4/21/2017.

E-health as a sine qua non for modern healthcare

In each era we need to balance between being able to provide care with our “technical skill, scientific knowledge, and human understanding” (Harrison's Principles of Internal Medicine, 1950) to the individual patient and simultaneously ensure that our healthcare serves all. With the increasing demand of healthcare by an aging population and the lack of specialists, accessible healthcare within a reasonable time frame is not always guaranteed. E-health provides solutions for current situations where we do not meet our own aims of good healthcare, such as restrictions in access to care and a reduction in care availability by a reducing workforce. In addition, telemedicine offers opportunities to improve our healthcare beyond what is possible by in person visits. However, e-health is often viewed as an deficient version of healthcare of low quality. We disagree with this view. In this article we will discuss how to position e-health in the current situation of healthcare, given the continuing rapid development of digital technologies and the changing needs of healthcare professionals and patients. We will address the evolution of e-health towards connected and intelligent systems and the stakeholders perspective, aiming to open up the discussion on e-Health.