Practice and awareness of physicians regarding casual-clinic blood pressure measurement in Japan

Knowledge, perception and practice of Québec nurses for ambulatory and clinic blood pressure measurement methods: are we there yet?

BACKGROUND

Guidelines regarding blood pressure measurement (BPM) methods, namely home (HBPM), ambulatory (ABPM), office (OBPM) and automated (AOBP) are published by Hypertension Canada and rely on accurate measurement technique. Nurses commonly perform BPM but their knowledge, perception and practice considering all methods is understudied. This study is the first to establish the picture of Québec nurses working in primary care settings concerning the four BPM methods.

METHODS

All nurses licensed to practice in primary care in Québec were targeted in our survey. Data were collected using a validated and pretested investigator-initiated questionnaire in English and French. A personalized e-mail invitation, and two reminders, including a link to a secured platform was sent in December 2019. A certificate of ethics was issued by UQTR.

RESULTS

A total of 453 nurses participated in the study. Median age was 40 ± 11 years, and 92% were women. The overall score on BPM methods knowledge was slightly below 50% (46% ± 23). The perception was mostly positive, with an overall score above 50% (73% ± 8). In practice, HBPM was recommended by 47% of nurses, and ABPM by 18%. Although AOBP is the preferred method in Canada, only 25% of the nurses use it, including the 57% that use an oscillometric device and 11% that use manual auscultation.

CONCLUSION

Nurses working in primary care play a central role in BPM. Our results highlight that overall knowledge and practice are suboptimal. Resources should, therefore, be allocated to ensure that initial training and continuing education are addressed.

Knowledge, perception and practice of health professionals regarding blood pressure measurement methods: a scoping review

OBJECTIVE

Guideline-concordant performance of accurate blood pressure measurement (BPM), whether the modality is home (HBPM), ambulatory (ABPM), automated (AOBP) or office (OBPM), is dependent on proper technique. Knowledge, perception and practice of health professionals for BPM is crucial and has been partly studied, but a thorough review has never been reported. A scoping review of global studies was conducted to synthesize published data on this topic.

METHODS

An Arksey and O'Malley methodological framework was used. Keywords were identified and extraction was completed to April 2019 using CINAHL and MEDLINE. Studies were classified as positive for knowledge, perception and practice if the majority (>50%) of reported responses were favourable, and negative otherwise. If specific results were not reported, the author's conclusions were used to classified.

RESULTS

Seventy-two studies were identified: 25 HBPM, 14 ABPM, two AOBP, 40 OBPM. For knowledge, the percentage of negative studies were higher for HBPM (40%) and OBPM (68%) and lower for ABPM (14%) regarding BPM techniques. For perception, the number of negative studies were lower for HBPM (20%) and ABPM (7%) regarding usefulness of BPM methods in hypertension management. For practice, the number of negative studies were higher for HBPM (48%), ABPM (71%), OBPM (73%) and AOBP (50%) regarding implementation of hypertension guidelines.

CONCLUSION

The results of this scoping review demonstrate adequate perception of BPM but suboptimal knowledge and practice. Education is still needed to improve knowledge and practice. Future efforts should focus on improving what we know and what we do when measuring BP.

Preference of blood pressure measurement methods by primary care doctors in Hong Kong: a cross-sectional survey

Background

Hypertension is the most common chronic disease and is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality. Its screening, diagnosis, and management depend heavily on accurate blood pressure (BP) measurement. It is recommended that the diagnosis of hypertension should be confirmed or corroborated by out-of-office BP values, measured using ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) and home BP monitoring (HBPM). When office BP is used, automated office BP (AOBP) measurement method, which automatically provides an average of 3–5 BP readings, should be preferred. This study aimed to describe the BP measurement methods commonly used by doctors in primary care in Hong Kong, to screen, diagnose, and manage hypertensive patients.

Methods

In this cross-sectional survey, all doctors registered in the Hong Kong “Primary Care Directory” were mailed a questionnaire, asking their preferred BP-measuring methods to screen, diagnose, and manage hypertensive patients. Furthermore, we also elicited information on the usual number of office BP or HBPM readings obtained, to diagnose or manage hypertension.

Results

Of the 1738 doctors included from the directory, 445 responded. Manual measurement using a mercury or aneroid device was found to be the commonest method to screen (63.1%), diagnose (56.4%), and manage (72.4%) hypertension. There was a significant underutilisation of ABPM, with only 1.6% doctors using this method to diagnose hypertension. HBPM was used by 22.2% and 56.8% of the respondents to diagnose and manage hypertension, respectively. A quarter (26.7%) of the respondents reported using only one in-office BP reading, while around 40% participants reported using ≥12 HBPM readings. Doctors with specialist qualification in family medicine were more likely to use AOBP in clinics and to obtain the recommended number of office BP readings for diagnosis and management of hypertension.

Conclusion

Primary Care doctors in Hong Kong prefer to use manual office BP values, measured using mercury or aneroid devices, to screen, diagnose, and manage hypertension, highlighting a marked underutilisation of AOBP and out-of-office BP measuring techniques, especially that of ABPM. Further studies are indicated to understand the underlying reasons and to minimise the gap between real-life clinical practice and those recommended, based on scientific advances.

Trial registration

Clinicaltrial.gov; ref. no.: NCT03926897.

Miction-induced Hypertension Disclosed by Home Blood Pressure Measurement in a Patient with Small Paraganglioma

A 46-year-old woman complained of a 10-year history of headache, nausea, a precordial oppressive feeling and shortness of breath on miction. She had noted a marked elevation in her blood pressure after miction using home blood pressure measurement. Her catecholamine levels were less than twice the value of the normal upper limit. Several imaging modalities detected a urinary bladder tumor, and ¹²³I-metaiodobenzylguanidine scintigraphy showed positive accumulation. The diagnosis of urinary bladder paraganglioma was confirmed by partial cystectomy. We must keep in mind that paroxysms and hypertension associated with miction are important diagnostic clues of pheochromocytoma/paraganglioma. Home blood pressure measurement was very useful for detecting hypertension in this case.

Implementation of home blood pressure monitoring among French GPs: A long and winding road

BACKGROUND

To explore the perception of home blood pressure monitoring (HBPM) by general practitioners (GPs) in everyday practice in order to identify facilitators and barriers to its implementation in daily practice.

METHODS

A qualitative study comprising the conduct of six focus groups between October 2016 and February 2017, gathering 41 general practitioners in primary care practice in Lorraine (North Eastern France), with thematic and comprehensive analysis.

RESULTS

The first reasons given by GPs to explain their difficulties with HBPM (Home Blood Pressure Monitoring) implementation were the usual lack of time, material and human resources. However, all of these motives masked other substantial limiting factors including insufficient knowledge regarding HBPM, poor adherence to recommendations on HBPM and fear of losing their medical authority. GPs admitted that HBPM use could enhance patient observance and decrease therapeutic inertia. Despite this observation, most GPs used HBPM only at the time of diagnosis and rarely for follow-up. One explanation for GP reluctance towards HBPM may be, along with guidelines regarding hypertension, HBPM is perceived as being a binding framework and being difficult to implement. This barrier was more predominantly observed among aging GPs than in young GPs and was less frequent when GPs practiced in multidisciplinary health centers because the logistical barrier was no longer present.

DISCUSSION

In order to improve HBPM implementation in everyday practice in France, it is necessary to focus on GP training and patient education. We must also end "medical power" in hypertension management and turn to multidisciplinary care including nurses, pharmacists and patients.

Comparison of blood pressure values-self-measured at home, measured at an unattended office, and measured at a conventional attended office

Self-measured blood pressure (BP) at home (HBP) has been commonly used in clinical practice. Although the unattended office BP (UBP), in which a patient is left alone before and during the measurement, has been investigated, the advantages of UBP over HBP or conventionally measured attended office BP obtained using automated devices (CBP) remain unclear. We performed a multicenter clinical study in Japan to compare the UBP, CBP, and HBP among 308 patients with hypertension at 3 clinics (women, 57.8%; mean age 71.8 years; under antihypertensive drug therapy, 96.4%). The patients measured HBP twice in the morning and twice in the evening for 5 days according to the Japanese Society of Hypertension guidelines. Using the Omron HEM-907 cuff-oscillometric device, the UBP and CBP were measured in line with the protocol in the Systolic blood PRessure INtervention Trial (SPRINT) and in accordance with the guidelines, respectively. Correlation coefficients were ≤0.16 for the comparison of UBP versus morning and evening HBP for the systolic measurement, whereas they were approximately 0.5 (P < 0.001) for the diastolic measurement. The difference between UBP minus HBP was small on average but varied among individuals (mean ± SD for UBP minus morning HBP: 0.9 ± 17.8/-4.5 ± 10.5 mmHg; UBP minus evening HBP: 5.7 ± 17.8/-0.1 ± 11.3 mmHg). In contrast, the measurement values of CBP and UBP were highly correlated (r ≥ 0.72), but the difference between CBP minus UBP was 10.4 ± 12.0/4.2 ± 6.5 mmHg. Based on the low correlations and wide range of differences, UBP cannot be used as an alternative to HBP.

Connecting Home-Based Self-Monitoring of Blood Pressure Data Into Electronic Health Records for Hypertension Care: A Qualitative Inquiry With Primary Care Providers

Background

There is a lack of research on how to best incorporate home-based self-measured blood pressure (SMBP) measurements, combined with other patient-generated health data (PGHD), into electronic health record (EHR) systems in a way that promotes primary care workflow without burdening the primary care team with irrelevant or superfluous data.

Objective

The purpose of this study was to explore the perspectives of primary care providers in utilizing SMBP measurements and integrating SMBP data into the clinical workflow for the management of hypertension in the primary care setting.

Methods

A total of 13 primary care physicians were interviewed in total; 5 in individual interviews and 8 in a focus group. The interview questions were centered on (1) the value of SMBP in hypertension care, (2) needs of viewing SMBP and desired visual display, (3) desired alert algorithm and critical values, (4) needs for other PGHD, and (5) workflow of primary care team in utilizing SMBP. The interviews were audiotaped and transcribed verbatim, and a thematic analysis was performed to extract overarching themes.

Results

The primary care experience of the 13 providers ranged from 5 to 35 years. The following themes emerged from the individual and focus group interviews: (1) ways to utilize SMBP measurements in primary care, (2) preferred visual display of SMBP, (3) patient condition determines preferred scheduling of patient SMBP measurements and provider’s preferred frequency of viewing SMBP data, (4) effect of patient condition on alert parameters, (5) location to receive critical value alerts, (6) primary recipient of critical value alerts, and (7) the need of additional PGHD (eg, emotional stressors, food diary, and medication adherence) to provide context of SMBP values.

Conclusions

The perspectives of primary care providers need to be incorporated into the design of a built-in interface in the EHR to incorporate SMBP and other PGHD. Future usability evaluation should be conducted with mock-up interfaces to solicit opinions on the optimal alert frequency and mechanism to best fit the workflow in the primary care setting. Future studies should examine how the utilization of a built-in interface that fully integrates SMBP measurements and PGHD into EHR systems can support patient self-management and thus, improve patient outcomes.

Long-Term Stroke Risk Due to Partial White-Coat or Masked Hypertension Based on Home and Ambulatory Blood Pressure Measurements: The Ohasama Study

The prognostic significance of white-coat hypertension (WCHT) is controversial, and different findings on self-measured home measurements and 24-h ambulatory monitoring make identifying WCHT difficult. We examined whether individuals with partially or completely defined WCHT, as well as masked hypertension, as determined by different out-of-office blood pressure measurements, have a distinct long-term stroke risk. We followed 1464 participants (31.8% men; mean age, 60.6±10.8 years) in the general population of Ohasama, Japan, for a median of 17.1 years. A first stroke occurred in 212 subjects. Using sustained normal blood pressure (events/n=61/776) as a reference, adjusted hazard ratios for stroke (95% confidence intervals; events/n) were 1.38 (0.82-2.32; 19/137) for complete WCHT (isolated office hypertension), 2.16 (1.36-3.43; 29/117) for partial WCHT (either home or ambulatory normotension with office hypertension), 2.05 (1.24-3.41; 23/100) for complete masked hypertension (both home and ambulatory hypertension with office normotension), 2.08 (1.37-3.16; 38/180) for partial masked hypertension (either home or ambulatory hypertension with office normotension), and 2.46 (1.61-3.77; 42/154) for sustained hypertension. When partial WCHT and partial masked hypertension groups were further divided into participants only with home hypertension and those only with ambulatory hypertension, all subgroups had a significantly higher stroke risk (adjusted hazard ratio ≥1.84, P≤0.04). In conclusion, impacts of partial WCHT as well as partial masked hypertension for long-term stroke risk were comparable to those of complete masked hypertension or sustained hypertension. We need both home and 24-h ambulatory blood pressure measurements to evaluate stroke risk accurately.