Literature DB >> 19300424

Cluster-randomized controlled trial of oscillometric vs. manual sphygmomanometer for blood pressure management in primary care (CRAB).

Mark R Nelson1, Stephen Quinn, Linda Bowers-Ingram, Jan M Nelson, Tania M Winzenberg.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Although mercury sphygmomanometers are seen as the gold standard instrument for blood pressure (BP) measurement, they are being withdrawn due to safety concerns. CRAB was a cluster-randomized controlled trial in 24 family practices in Tasmania, Australia, which aimed to determine the effect of an oscillometric device on BP management.
METHODS: Cluster-randomized controlled trial. Intervention practices were supplied with automated monitors and control (usual care) practices used mercury or aneroid sphygmomanometers. They were subsequently audited by a research nurse. Usual care practice audit periods were matched to intervention practices. All analyses were intention-to-treat and adjusted for potential clustering. Differences in BP were analyzed using generalized estimating equations. All other outcomes were analyzed using multilevel mixed-effects Poisson regression. Post hoc analyses were performed to determine the mediators of changes in prescribing behavior.
RESULTS: A total of 3,355 records were reviewed (828 visits had BP recordings). The percentage of BP recordings ending in "0" was significantly lower in intervention vs. usual care practices (systolic BP (SBP) 18% (107/587) vs. 71% (233/329), diastolic BP (DBP) 20% (119/584) vs. 70% (229/328), P < 0.001). The mean of SBP recordings in the intervention group was 7.5 mm Hg (95% confidence interval (CI) 5.2, 9.9 mm Hg, P < 0.001) higher than in the usual care group. Patients taking BP lowering drugs were more likely (incidence rate ratio (IRR) 1.3, 95% CI 1.1, 1.7, P = 0.01) to have a BP lowering drug prescribed if they were in the intervention compared to the usual care.
CONCLUSIONS: Although digit preference was largely eliminated by oscillometric measurement, prescribing behavior was mediated by SBP.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19300424     DOI: 10.1038/ajh.2009.55

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Hypertens        ISSN: 0895-7061            Impact factor:   2.689


  9 in total

1.  Why use automated office blood pressure measurements in clinical practice?

Authors:  Emmanuel A Andreadis; Epameinondas T Angelopoulos; Gerasimos D Agaliotis; Athanasios P Tsakanikas; George P Mousoulis
Journal:  High Blood Press Cardiovasc Prev       Date:  2011-09-01

2.  Clinic, Home, and Kiosk Blood Pressure Measurements for Diagnosing Hypertension: a Randomized Diagnostic Study.

Authors:  Beverly B Green; Melissa L Anderson; Andrea J Cook; Kelly Ehrlich; Yoshio N Hall; Clarissa Hsu; Dwayne Joseph; Predrag Klasnja; Karen L Margolis; Jennifer B McClure; Sean A Munson; Mathew J Thompson
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2022-03-03       Impact factor: 6.473

3.  The evolving clinical management of hypertension.

Authors:  Michael A Weber
Journal:  J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich)       Date:  2014-11-10       Impact factor: 3.738

4.  Comparison of aneroid and oscillometric blood pressure measurements in children.

Authors:  Sigridur B Eliasdottir; Sandra D Steinthorsdottir; Olafur S Indridason; Runolfur Palsson; Vidar O Edvardsson
Journal:  J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich)       Date:  2013-09-20       Impact factor: 3.738

Review 5.  Blood pressure: at what level is treatment worthwhile?

Authors:  Emily R Atkins; Vlado Perkovic
Journal:  Aust Prescr       Date:  2019-08-01

6.  Association of an Automated Blood Pressure Measurement Quality Improvement Program With Terminal Digit Preference and Recorded Mean Blood Pressure in 11 Clinics.

Authors:  Thomas E Kottke; Jeffrey P Anderson; Jacob D Zillhardt; JoAnn M Sperl-Hillen; Patrick J O'Connor; Beverly B Green; Rae Ann Williams; Beth M Averbeck; Michael N Stiffman; MarySue Beran; Michael Rakotz; Karen L Margolis
Journal:  JAMA Netw Open       Date:  2022-08-01

7.  Manual or automated sphygmomanometer? A historical cohort to quantify measurement bias in blood pressure recording.

Authors:  Arash A Nargesi; Zaniar Ghazizadeh; Mehrdad Larry; Afsaneh Morteza; Firuzeh Heidari; Firuzeh Asgarani; Alireza Esteghamati; Kazem Mohammad; Manouchehr Nakhjavani
Journal:  J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich)       Date:  2014-09-08       Impact factor: 3.738

8.  Ankle-Brachial Index determination and peripheral arterial disease diagnosis by an oscillometric blood pressure device in primary care: validation and diagnostic accuracy study.

Authors:  Mark R Nelson; Stephen Quinn; Tania M Winzenberg; Faline Howes; Louise Shiel; Christopher M Reid
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2012-10-25       Impact factor: 2.692

9.  Effects of a multifaceted intervention on cardiovascular risk factors in high-risk hypertensive patients: the ESCAPE trial, a pragmatic cluster randomized trial in general practice.

Authors:  Denis Pouchain; Michel Lièvre; Dominique Huas; Jean-Pierre Lebeau; Vincent Renard; Eric Bruckert; Xavier Girerd; Florent Boutitie
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2013-10-01       Impact factor: 2.279

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.