BACKGROUND: Clinical guidelines recommend that adults with hypertension self-monitor their blood pressure (BP). PURPOSE: To summarize evidence about the effectiveness of self-measured blood pressure (SMBP) monitoring in adults with hypertension. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE (inception to 8 February 2013) and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (fourth quarter 2012). STUDY SELECTION: 52 prospective comparative studies of SMBP monitoring with or without additional support versus usual care or an alternative SMBP monitoring intervention in persons with hypertension. DATA EXTRACTION: Data on population, interventions, BP, other outcomes, and study method were extracted. Random-effects model meta-analyses were done. DATA SYNTHESIS: For SMBP monitoring alone versus usual care (26 comparisons), moderate-strength evidence supports a lower BP with SMBP monitoring at 6 months (summary net difference, -3.9 mm Hg and -2.4 mm Hg for systolic BP and diastolic BP) but not at 12 months. For SMBP monitoring plus additional support versus usual care (25 comparisons), high-strength evidence supports a lower BP with use of SMBP monitoring, ranging from -3.4 to -8.9 mm Hg for systolic BP and from -1.9 to -4.4 mm Hg for diastolic BP, at 12 months in good-quality studies. For SMBP monitoring plus additional support versus SMBP monitoring alone or with less intense additional support (13 comparisons), low-strength evidence fails to support a difference. Across all comparisons, evidence for clinical outcomes is insufficient. For other surrogate or intermediate outcomes, low-strength evidence fails to show differences. LIMITATION: Clinical heterogeneity in protocols for SMBP monitoring, additional support, BP targets, and management; follow-up of 1 year or less in most studies, with sparse clinical outcome data. CONCLUSION: Self-measured BP monitoring with or without additional support lowers BP compared with usual care, but the BP effect beyond 12 months and long-term benefits remain uncertain. Additional support enhances the BP-lowering effect. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.
BACKGROUND: Clinical guidelines recommend that adults with hypertension self-monitor their blood pressure (BP). PURPOSE: To summarize evidence about the effectiveness of self-measured blood pressure (SMBP) monitoring in adults with hypertension. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE (inception to 8 February 2013) and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (fourth quarter 2012). STUDY SELECTION: 52 prospective comparative studies of SMBP monitoring with or without additional support versus usual care or an alternative SMBP monitoring intervention in persons with hypertension. DATA EXTRACTION: Data on population, interventions, BP, other outcomes, and study method were extracted. Random-effects model meta-analyses were done. DATA SYNTHESIS: For SMBP monitoring alone versus usual care (26 comparisons), moderate-strength evidence supports a lower BP with SMBP monitoring at 6 months (summary net difference, -3.9 mm Hg and -2.4 mm Hg for systolic BP and diastolic BP) but not at 12 months. For SMBP monitoring plus additional support versus usual care (25 comparisons), high-strength evidence supports a lower BP with use of SMBP monitoring, ranging from -3.4 to -8.9 mm Hg for systolic BP and from -1.9 to -4.4 mm Hg for diastolic BP, at 12 months in good-quality studies. For SMBP monitoring plus additional support versus SMBP monitoring alone or with less intense additional support (13 comparisons), low-strength evidence fails to support a difference. Across all comparisons, evidence for clinical outcomes is insufficient. For other surrogate or intermediate outcomes, low-strength evidence fails to show differences. LIMITATION: Clinical heterogeneity in protocols for SMBP monitoring, additional support, BP targets, and management; follow-up of 1 year or less in most studies, with sparse clinical outcome data. CONCLUSION: Self-measured BP monitoring with or without additional support lowers BP compared with usual care, but the BP effect beyond 12 months and long-term benefits remain uncertain. Additional support enhances the BP-lowering effect. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.
Authors: Lora E Burke; Jun Ma; Kristen M J Azar; Gary G Bennett; Eric D Peterson; Yaguang Zheng; William Riley; Janna Stephens; Svati H Shah; Brian Suffoletto; Tanya N Turan; Bonnie Spring; Julia Steinberger; Charlene C Quinn Journal: Circulation Date: 2015-08-13 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Matthew E Allen; Taya Irizarry; Julian Einhorn; Thomas W Kamarck; Brian P Suffoletto; Lora E Burke; Bruce L Rollman; Matthew F Muldoon Journal: Patient Educ Couns Date: 2019-06-17
Authors: R Jay Widmer; Nerissa M Collins; C Scott Collins; Colin P West; Lilach O Lerman; Amir Lerman Journal: Mayo Clin Proc Date: 2015-04 Impact factor: 7.616
Authors: Karen L Margolis; Steven P Dehmer; JoAnn Sperl-Hillen; Patrick J O'Connor; Stephen E Asche; Anna R Bergdall; Beverly B Green; Rachel A Nyboer; Pamala A Pawloski; Nicole K Trower; Michael V Maciosek Journal: Hypertension Date: 2020-08-31 Impact factor: 10.190
Authors: Wichai Aekplakorn; Paibul Suriyawongpaisal; Rassamee Tansirisithikul; Thida Sakulpipat; Phikul Charoensuk Journal: J Prim Care Community Health Date: 2015-11-16