BACKGROUND: Recent studies suggest that the self-monitoring of blood pressure (SMBP) may improve the identification and control of hypertension. Although endorsed by the Joint National Committee VII guidelines, home monitoring is not currently part of the standard care of hypertension. OBJECTIVE: To assess community- and university-based primary care physicians' opinions of SMBP. METHODS: A written, 5-point, Likert-scale questionnaire was mailed to physicians in a primary care research network. RESULTS: We received completed surveys from 138 of 170 providers (81%). Physician ages ranged from 25 to 72 years. Half of the providers were female, and approximately half were residents. Most physicians (63%) reported having patients using SMBP. Physician opinions of SMBP were unrelated to age, gender and number of years in practice. Three key beliefs were expressed: SMBP could be useful, economical and problematic. Community-based physicians were more likely than university-based physicians to believe in the benefits of SMBP use, and to disagree that the use of SMBP could cause problems for them or their patients (P < 0.05). Compared with their peers, physicians with fewer than five patients using SMBP agreed more strongly with statements that SMBP use could cause problems for themselves and their patients in hypertension treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the providers responded that SMBP could be useful to them in managing hypertension but seem hesitant to endorse it fully at this time, possibly anticipating potential problems that could arise with SMBP use. Physicians with more patients using self-monitoring were more likely to endorse it.
BACKGROUND: Recent studies suggest that the self-monitoring of blood pressure (SMBP) may improve the identification and control of hypertension. Although endorsed by the Joint National Committee VII guidelines, home monitoring is not currently part of the standard care of hypertension. OBJECTIVE: To assess community- and university-based primary care physicians' opinions of SMBP. METHODS: A written, 5-point, Likert-scale questionnaire was mailed to physicians in a primary care research network. RESULTS: We received completed surveys from 138 of 170 providers (81%). Physician ages ranged from 25 to 72 years. Half of the providers were female, and approximately half were residents. Most physicians (63%) reported having patients using SMBP. Physician opinions of SMBP were unrelated to age, gender and number of years in practice. Three key beliefs were expressed: SMBP could be useful, economical and problematic. Community-based physicians were more likely than university-based physicians to believe in the benefits of SMBP use, and to disagree that the use of SMBP could cause problems for them or their patients (P < 0.05). Compared with their peers, physicians with fewer than five patients using SMBP agreed more strongly with statements that SMBP use could cause problems for themselves and their patients in hypertension treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the providers responded that SMBP could be useful to them in managing hypertension but seem hesitant to endorse it fully at this time, possibly anticipating potential problems that could arise with SMBP use. Physicians with more patients using self-monitoring were more likely to endorse it.
Authors: Ian M Kronish; Shia Kent; Nathalie Moise; Daichi Shimbo; Monika M Safford; Robert E Kynerd; Ronan O'Beirne; Alexandra Sullivan; Paul Muntner Journal: J Am Soc Hypertens Date: 2017-07-06
Authors: Paul Muntner; Paula T Einhorn; William C Cushman; Paul K Whelton; Natalie A Bello; Paul E Drawz; Beverly B Green; Daniel W Jones; Stephen P Juraschek; Karen L Margolis; Edgar R Miller; Ann Marie Navar; Yechiam Ostchega; Michael K Rakotz; Bernard Rosner; Joseph E Schwartz; Daichi Shimbo; George S Stergiou; Raymond R Townsend; Jeff D Williamson; Jackson T Wright; Lawrence J Appel Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2019-01-29 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Michael H Kramer; Eugene Breydo; Maria Shubina; Kelly Babcock; Jonathan S Einbinder; Alexander Turchin Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2010-05-27 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Miren I Jones; Sheila M Greenfield; Emma P Bray; Fd Richard Hobbs; Roger Holder; Paul Little; Jonathan Mant; Bryan Williams; Richard J McManus Journal: Br J Gen Pract Date: 2013-06 Impact factor: 5.386
Authors: Natalia Świątoniowska-Lonc; Jacek Polański; Wojciech Tański; Beata Jankowska-Polańska Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2020-11-16 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Anthony J Viera; Lauren W Cohen; C Madeline Mitchell; Philip D Sloane Journal: J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich) Date: 2008-04 Impact factor: 3.738