Larry W Chambers1, Janusz Kaczorowski2, Susan O'Rielly3, Sandra Ignagni4, Stephen J C Hearps5. 1. Bruyère Research Institute, Ottawa, Ont. 2. Department of Family and Emergency Medicine and the University of Montréal Hospital Research Centre, University of Montréal, Montréal, Que. 3. Dave Smith Youth Treatment Centre, Ottawa, Ont. 4. University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC. 5. Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Melbourne, Australia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Accurate measurement of blood pressure is the foundation of appropriate diagnosis, treatment and ongoing management of hypertension. The use of automated blood pressure devices in community settings such as pharmacies provide opportunities for additional blood pressure measurement; however, it is important to ensure that these measurements are comparable to those taken in physicians' offices using the same devices. We conducted a randomized controlled trial to assess whether blood pressure readings assessed by use of an automated device differed according to the setting, specifically in community pharmacies and family physicians' offices. METHODS: We included adults aged 65 years and older who did not live in long-term care facilities or in hospital. The trial was administered by volunteer peer health educators, family physicians and pharmacists in 2 midsized communities in Ontario from April to September 2010. The 5 participating family physicians mailed invitations to their eligible patients. Those who gave informed consent were randomly allocated to 1 of 2 assessment sequences: group A had their blood pressure measured at their physician's office, then at a pharmacy, then again at their physician's office; those in group B had their blood pressure measured at a pharmacy, then at their physician's office, then again at a pharmacy. An automated blood pressure device (BpTRU) was used in both settings. We calculated the differences in mean systolic and diastolic blood pressure, and we compared the readings at both settings and by sequence of assessment. RESULTS: In total, 275 adults completed the trial (mean age 75.9 yr, 49.5% male, 46.9% with a self-reported diagnosis of hypertension). There were no statistically significant differences in systolic or diastolic blood pressure measurements associated with the sequence of assessment or the setting. There was a significant difference in the overall mean systolic blood pressure between the 2 assessment sequences (group A 122.0 v. group B 127.8 mm Hg, p < 0.001). INTERPRETATION: Automated devices used in pharmacies to measure blood pressure provide accurate and valid information that can be used in the diagnosis and management of hypertension among older adults in the community. TRIAL REGISTRATION: www.controlled-trials.com, no. ISRCTN91799042.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Accurate measurement of blood pressure is the foundation of appropriate diagnosis, treatment and ongoing management of hypertension. The use of automated blood pressure devices in community settings such as pharmacies provide opportunities for additional blood pressure measurement; however, it is important to ensure that these measurements are comparable to those taken in physicians' offices using the same devices. We conducted a randomized controlled trial to assess whether blood pressure readings assessed by use of an automated device differed according to the setting, specifically in community pharmacies and family physicians' offices. METHODS: We included adults aged 65 years and older who did not live in long-term care facilities or in hospital. The trial was administered by volunteer peer health educators, family physicians and pharmacists in 2 midsized communities in Ontario from April to September 2010. The 5 participating family physicians mailed invitations to their eligible patients. Those who gave informed consent were randomly allocated to 1 of 2 assessment sequences: group A had their blood pressure measured at their physician's office, then at a pharmacy, then again at their physician's office; those in group B had their blood pressure measured at a pharmacy, then at their physician's office, then again at a pharmacy. An automated blood pressure device (BpTRU) was used in both settings. We calculated the differences in mean systolic and diastolic blood pressure, and we compared the readings at both settings and by sequence of assessment. RESULTS: In total, 275 adults completed the trial (mean age 75.9 yr, 49.5% male, 46.9% with a self-reported diagnosis of hypertension). There were no statistically significant differences in systolic or diastolic blood pressure measurements associated with the sequence of assessment or the setting. There was a significant difference in the overall mean systolic blood pressure between the 2 assessment sequences (group A 122.0 v. group B 127.8 mm Hg, p < 0.001). INTERPRETATION: Automated devices used in pharmacies to measure blood pressure provide accurate and valid information that can be used in the diagnosis and management of hypertension among older adults in the community. TRIAL REGISTRATION: www.controlled-trials.com, no. ISRCTN91799042.
Authors: Robert J Glynn; Gilbert J L'Italien; Howard D Sesso; Elizabeth A Jackson; Julie E Buring Journal: Hypertension Date: 2002-01 Impact factor: 10.190
Authors: Carlene M M Lawes; Stephen Vander Hoorn; Malcolm R Law; Paul Elliott; Stephen MacMahon; Anthony Rodgers Journal: J Hypertens Date: 2006-03 Impact factor: 4.844
Authors: Kevin E Thorpe; Merrick Zwarenstein; Andrew D Oxman; Shaun Treweek; Curt D Furberg; Douglas G Altman; Sean Tunis; Eduardo Bergel; Ian Harvey; David J Magid; Kalipso Chalkidou Journal: CMAJ Date: 2009-04-16 Impact factor: 8.262
Authors: Martin G Myers; Marshall Godwin; Martin Dawes; Alexander Kiss; Sheldon W Tobe; Janusz Kaczorowski Journal: Hypertension Date: 2009-12-28 Impact factor: 10.190
Authors: Martin G Myers; Marshall Godwin; Martin Dawes; Alexander Kiss; Sheldon W Tobe; F Curry Grant; Janusz Kaczorowski Journal: BMJ Date: 2011-02-07
Authors: Janusz Kaczorowski; Larry W Chambers; Lisa Dolovich; J Michael Paterson; Tina Karwalajtys; Tracy Gierman; Barbara Farrell; Beatrice McDonough; Lehana Thabane; Karen Tu; Brandon Zagorski; Ron Goeree; Cheryl A Levitt; William Hogg; Stephanie Laryea; Megan Ann Carter; Dana Cross; Rolf J Sabaldt Journal: BMJ Date: 2011-02-07
Authors: Tina Karwalajtys; Janusz Kaczorowski; Larry W Chambers; Cheryl Levitt; Lisa Dolovich; Bea McDonough; Christopher Patterson; James E Williams Journal: BMC Fam Pract Date: 2005-08-19 Impact factor: 2.497
Authors: Anthony Rodgers; Majid Ezzati; Stephen Vander Hoorn; Alan D Lopez; Ruey-Bin Lin; Christopher J L Murray Journal: PLoS Med Date: 2004-10-19 Impact factor: 11.069
Authors: Nan Lv; Lan Xiao; Martha L Simmons; Lisa G Rosas; Albert Chan; Martin Entwistle Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2017-09-19 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Ali Albasri; Jack W OʼSullivan; Nia W Roberts; Suman Prinjha; Richard J McManus; James P Sheppard Journal: J Hypertens Date: 2017-10 Impact factor: 4.844
Authors: Chenglin Ye; Gary Foster; Janusz Kaczorowski; Larry W Chambers; Ricardo Angeles; Francine Marzanek-Lefebvre; Stephanie Laryea; Lehana Thabane; Lisa Dolovich Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2013-12-25 Impact factor: 3.295