Lindsey Elliot1, Pervaiz Iqbal. 1. Chesterfield and North Derbyshire Hypertension Clinic, Chesterfield and North Derbyshire Royal Hospital NHS Trust, Chesterfield, UK.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of our study was to find out factors associated with patient acceptance of repeat 24 h ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) using the Mobil-O-Graph ambulatory blood pressure monitor. METHODS: Six hundred and fifty patients had ABPM performed between July 1999 and Oct 2000. Following 24 h ABPM patients were asked to complete 13-item questionnaire. RESULTS: Ninety-five percent of the patients were willing to have 24 h ABPM repeated. There was no relation to patient's refusal to further ABPM with gender, age, height, weight, BMI, arm circumference, clinic blood pressure or 24 h ABPM profile. Patients were unlikely to have 24 h ABPM repeated if they found the monitor heavy and cumbersome (68%), if the monitor interfered with sleep (45%), or if they were so disturbed by the 24 h ABPM that they considered switching the monitor off (93%). CONCLUSIONS: Most patients were willing to have repeat ABPM using the Mobil-O-Graph and reported few problems with monitor noise, heaviness and interference with sleep. These factors however still remain significant and need more technological attention and innovation from the manufacturers.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of our study was to find out factors associated with patient acceptance of repeat 24 h ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) using the Mobil-O-Graph ambulatory blood pressure monitor. METHODS: Six hundred and fifty patients had ABPM performed between July 1999 and Oct 2000. Following 24 h ABPM patients were asked to complete 13-item questionnaire. RESULTS: Ninety-five percent of the patients were willing to have 24 h ABPM repeated. There was no relation to patient's refusal to further ABPM with gender, age, height, weight, BMI, arm circumference, clinic blood pressure or 24 h ABPM profile. Patients were unlikely to have 24 h ABPM repeated if they found the monitor heavy and cumbersome (68%), if the monitor interfered with sleep (45%), or if they were so disturbed by the 24 h ABPM that they considered switching the monitor off (93%). CONCLUSIONS: Most patients were willing to have repeat ABPM using the Mobil-O-Graph and reported few problems with monitor noise, heaviness and interference with sleep. These factors however still remain significant and need more technological attention and innovation from the manufacturers.
Authors: Michael K Rakotz; Bernard G Ewigman; Menaka Sarav; Ruth E Ross; Ari Robicsek; Chad W Konchak; Thomas F Gavagan; David W Baker; David J Hyman; Kenneth P Anderson; Christopher M Masi Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2014-07 Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Tatiana Nwankwo; Sallyann M Coleman King; Yechiam Ostchega; Guangyu Zhang; Fleetwood Loustalot; Cathleen Gillespie; Tiffany E Chang; Elin B Begley; Mary G George; Daichi Shimbo; Joseph E Schwartz; Paul Muntner; Ian M Kronish; Yuling Hong; Robert Merritt Journal: Am J Hypertens Date: 2020-11-03 Impact factor: 2.689
Authors: Eileen J Carter; Nathalie Moise; Carmela Alcántara; Alexandra M Sullivan; Ian M Kronish Journal: Am J Hypertens Date: 2018-07-16 Impact factor: 2.689