Comparison of 3 Devices for 24-Hour Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring in a Nonclinical Environment Through a Randomized Trial

Design and rationale of the Comprehensive intelligent Hypertension managEment SyStem (CHESS) evaluation study: A cluster randomized controlled trial for hypertension management in primary care

BACKGROUND

Hypertension management in China is suboptimal with high prevalence and low control rate due to various barriers, including lack of self-management awareness of patients and inadequate capacity of physicians. Digital therapeutic interventions including mobile health and computational device algorithms such as clinical decision support systems (CDSS) are scalable with the potential to improve blood pressure (BP) management and strengthen the healthcare system in resource-constrained areas, yet their effectiveness remains to be tested. The aim of this report is to describe the protocol of the Comprehensive intelligent Hypertension managEment SyStem (CHESS) evaluation study assessing the effect of a multifaceted hypertension management system for supporting patients and physicians on BP lowering in primary care settings.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The CHESS evaluation study is a parallel-group, cluster-randomized controlled trial conducted in primary care settings in China. Forty-one primary care sites from 3 counties of China are randomly assigned to either the usual care or the intervention group with the implementation of the CHESS system, more than 1,600 patients aged 35 to 80 years with uncontrolled hypertension and access to a smartphone by themselves or relatives are recruited into the study and followed up for 12 months. In the intervention group, participants receive patient-tailored reminders and alerts via messages or intelligent voice calls triggered by uploaded home blood pressure monitoring data and participants' characteristics, while physicians receive guideline-based prescription instructions according to updated individual data from each visit, and administrators receive auto-renewed feedback of hypertension management performance from the data analysis platform. The multiple components of the CHESS system can work synergistically and have undergone rigorous development and pilot evaluation using a theory-informed approach. The primary outcome is the mean change in 24-hour ambulatory systolic BP from baseline to 12 months.

DISCUSSION

The CHESS trial will provide evidence and novel insight into the effectiveness and feasibility of an implementation strategy using a comprehensive digital BP management system for reducing hypertension burden in primary care settings.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

https://www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov, NCT05605418.

Feasibility and Effectiveness of a Ring-Type Blood Pressure Measurement Device Compared With 24-Hour Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring Device

BACKGROUNDS AND OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to evaluate the applicability and precision of a ring-type cuffless blood pressure (BP) measurement device, CART-I Plus, compared to conventional 24-hour ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM).

METHODS

Forty patients were recruited, and 33 participants were included in the final analysis. Each participant wore both CART-I Plus and ABPM devices on the same arm for approximately 24 hours. BP estimation from CART-I Plus, derived from photoplethysmography (PPG) signals, were compared with the corresponding ABPM measurements.

RESULTS

The CART-I Plus recorded systolic blood pressure (SBP)/diastolic blood pressure (DBP) values of 131.4±14.1/81.1±12.0, 132.7±13.9/81.9±11.9, and 128.7±14.6/79.3±12.2 mmHg for 24-hour, daytime, and nighttime periods respectively, compared to ABPM values of 129.7±11.7/84.4±11.2, 131.9±11.6/86.3±11.1, and 124.5±13.6/80.0±12.2 mmHg. Mean differences in SBP/DBP between the two devices were 1.74±6.69/-3.24±6.51 mmHg, 0.75±7.44/-4.41±7.42 mmHg, and 4.15±6.15/-0.67±5.23 mmHg for 24-hour, daytime, and nighttime periods respectively. Strong correlations were also observed between the devices, with r=0.725 and r=0.750 for transitions in SBP and DBP from daytime to nighttime, respectively (both p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The CART-I Plus device, with its unique ring-type design, shows promising accuracy in BP estimation and offers a potential avenue for continuous BP monitoring in clinical practice.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT06084065.

European Society of Hypertension recommendations for the validation of cuffless blood pressure measuring devices: European Society of Hypertension Working Group on Blood Pressure Monitoring and Cardiovascular Variability

BACKGROUND

There is intense effort to develop cuffless blood pressure (BP) measuring devices, and several are already on the market claiming that they provide accurate measurements. These devices are heterogeneous in measurement principle, intended use, functions, and calibration, and have special accuracy issues requiring different validation than classic cuff BP monitors. To date, there are no generally accepted protocols for their validation to ensure adequate accuracy for clinical use.

OBJECTIVE

This statement by the European Society of Hypertension (ESH) Working Group on BP Monitoring and Cardiovascular Variability recommends procedures for validating intermittent cuffless BP devices (providing measurements every >30 sec and usually 30-60 min, or upon user initiation), which are most common.

VALIDATION PROCEDURES

Six validation tests are defined for evaluating different aspects of intermittent cuffless devices: static test (absolute BP accuracy); device position test (hydrostatic pressure effect robustness); treatment test (BP decrease accuracy); awake/asleep test (BP change accuracy); exercise test (BP increase accuracy); and recalibration test (cuff calibration stability over time). Not all these tests are required for a given device. The necessary tests depend on whether the device requires individual user calibration, measures automatically or manually, and takes measurements in more than one position.

CONCLUSION

The validation of cuffless BP devices is complex and needs to be tailored according to their functions and calibration. These ESH recommendations present specific, clinically meaningful, and pragmatic validation procedures for different types of intermittent cuffless devices to ensure that only accurate devices will be used in the evaluation and management of hypertension.

Status of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring and home blood pressure monitoring for the diagnosis and management of hypertension in the US: an up-to-date review

The diagnosis and management of hypertension has been based on the measurement of blood pressure (BP) in the office setting. However, data have demonstrated that BP may substantially differ when measured in the office than when measured outside the office setting. Higher out-of-office BP is associated with increased cardiovascular risk independent of office BP. Ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) and home BP monitoring (HBPM) are validated approaches for out-of-office BP measurement. In the 2015 and 2021 United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) reports on screening for hypertension, ABPM was recommended as the reference standard for out-of-office BP monitoring and for confirming an initial diagnosis of hypertension. This recommendation was based on data from more published studies of ABPM vs. HBPM on the predictive value of out-of-office BP independent of office BP. Therefore, HBPM was recommended as an alternative approach when ABPM was not available or well tolerated. The 2017 American College of Cardiology (ACC)/American Heart Association (AHA) BP guideline recommended ABPM as the preferred initial approach for detecting white-coat hypertension and masked hypertension among adults not taking antihypertensive medication. In contrast, HBPM was recommended as the preferred initial approach for detecting the white-coat effect and masked uncontrolled hypertension among adults taking antihypertensive medication. The current review provides an overview of ABPM and HBPM in the US, including best practices, BP thresholds that should be used for the diagnosis and treatment of hypertension, barriers to widespread use of such monitoring, US guideline recommendations for ABPM and HBPM, and data supporting HBPM over ABPM.