Home Blood Pressure Monitoring Devices: Device Performance in an Alaska Native and American Indian Population

Scoping review of telehealth use by Indigenous populations from Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United States

INTRODUCTION

Telehealth has the potential to address health disparities experienced by Indigenous people, especially in remote areas. This scoping review aims to map and characterize the existing evidence on telehealth use by Indigenous people and explore the key concepts for effective use, cultural safety, and building therapeutic relationships.

METHODS

A search for published and gray literature, written in English, and published between 2000 and 2022 was completed in 17 electronic databases. Two reviewers independently screened retrieved records for eligibility. For included articles, data were extracted, categorized, and analyzed. Synthesis of findings was performed narratively.

RESULTS

A total of 321 studies were included. The most popular type of telehealth used was mHealth (44%), and the most common health focuses of the telehealth interventions were mental health (26%) and diabetes/diabetic retinopathy (13%). Frequently described barriers to effective telehealth use included concerns about privacy/confidentiality and limited internet availability; meanwhile, telehealth-usage facilitators included cultural relevance and community engagement. Although working in collaboration with Indigenous communities was the most frequently reported way to achieve cultural safety, 40% of the studies did not report Indigenous involvement. Finally, difficulty to establish trusting therapeutic relationships was a major concern raised about telehealth, and evidence suggests that having the first visit-in-person is a potential way to address this issue.

CONCLUSION

This comprehensive review identified critical factors to guide the development of culturally-informed telehealth services to meet the needs of Indigenous people and to achieve equitable access and positive health outcomes.

Use of Self-Measured Blood Pressure Monitoring to Improve Hypertension Equity

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To evaluate how self-measured blood pressure (SMBP) monitoring interventions impact hypertension equity.

RECENT FINDINGS

While a growing number of studies have recruited participants from safety-net settings, racial/ethnic minority groups, rural areas, or lower socio-economic backgrounds, few have reported on clinical outcomes with many choosing to evaluate only patient-reported outcomes (e.g., satisfaction, engagement). The studies with clinical outcomes demonstrate that SMBP monitoring (a) can be successfully adopted by historically excluded patient populations and safety-net settings and (b) improves outcomes when paired with clinical support. There are few studies that explicitly evaluate how SMBP monitoring impacts hypertension disparities and among rural, low-income, and some racial/ethnic minority populations. Researchers need to design SMBP monitoring studies that include disparity reduction outcomes and recruit from broader populations that experience worse hypertension outcomes. In addition to assessing effectiveness, studies must also evaluate how to mitigate multi-level barriers to real-world implementation of SMBP monitoring programs.

Choice of home blood pressure monitoring device: the role of device characteristics among Alaska Native and American Indian peoples

BACKGROUND

Home blood pressure monitoring (HBPM) is an effective tool in treatment and long-term management of hypertension. HBPM incorporates more data points to help patients and providers with diagnosis and management. The characteristics of HBPM devices matter to patients, but the relative importance of the characteristics in choosing a device remains unclear.

METHODS

We used data from a randomized cross-over pilot study with 100 Alaska Native and American Indian (ANAI) people with hypertension to assess the choice of a wrist or arm HBPM device. We use a random utility framework to evaluate the relationship between stated likely use, perceived accuracy, ease of use, comfort, and participant characteristics with choice of device. Additional analyses examined willingness to change to a more accurate device.

RESULTS

Participants ranked the wrist device higher compared to the arm on a 5-point Likert scale for likely use, ease of use, and comfort (0.3, 0.5, 0.8 percentage points, respectively). Most participants (66%) choose the wrist device. Likely use (wrist and arm devices) was related to the probability of choosing the wrist (0.7 and - 1.4 percentage points, respectively). Independent of characteristics, 75% of participants would be willing to use the more accurate device. Ease of use (wrist device) and comfort (arm device) were associated with the probability of changing to a more accurate device (- 1.1 and 0.5 percentage points, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Usability, including comfort, ease, and likely use, appeared to discount the relative importance of perceived accuracy in the device choice. Our results contribute evidence that ANAI populations value accurate HBPM, but that the devices should also be easy to use and comfortable to facilitate long-term management.