Literature DB >> 26267592

Comparison of patients' confidence in office, ambulatory, and home blood pressure measurements as methods of assessing for hypertension.

Anthony J Viera1, Laura A Tuttle, Raven Voora, Emily Olsson.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Uncertainty exists when relying on office (clinic) blood pressure (BP) measurements to diagnose hypertension. Home BP monitoring and ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) provide measurements that are more strongly associated with cardiovascular disease. The degree to which patients exhibit uncertainty about office BP measurements is unknown, as is whether they would have less uncertainty about other BP measurement methods. We therefore assessed people's confidence in methods of BP measurement, comparing perceptions about office BP monitoring, home BP monitoring, and ABPM techniques.
METHODS: We surveyed adults who were 30 years or older (n=193), all whom had undergone office BP measurements, two sessions of 24-h ABPM, and two 5-day periods of home BP monitoring. Respondents were asked to indicate their level of confidence on a 1 to 9 scale that BP measurements represented their 'usual' BP.
RESULTS: Respondents had least confidence that assessments of BP made by office measurements (median 6) represented usual BP and greater confidence that assessments made by home BP monitoring (median 7, P<0.0001 vs. office) and ABPM (median 8, P<0.0001 vs. office) did so. Confidence levels did not vary significantly by BP levels, age, sex, race, or education level.
CONCLUSION: The finding that patients do not have a great deal of confidence in office BP measurements, but have a higher degree of confidence in home BP and ambulatory BP assessment methods may be helpful in guiding strategies to diagnose hypertension and improve antihypertensive medication adherence.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26267592      PMCID: PMC4631691          DOI: 10.1097/MBP.0000000000000147

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Blood Press Monit        ISSN: 1359-5237            Impact factor:   1.444


  16 in total

1.  Psychometric properties of the credibility/expectancy questionnaire.

Authors:  G J Devilly; T D Borkovec
Journal:  J Behav Ther Exp Psychiatry       Date:  2000-06

Review 2.  Clinical inertia.

Authors:  L S Phillips; W T Branch; C B Cook; J P Doyle; I M El-Kebbi; D L Gallina; C D Miller; D C Ziemer; C S Barnes
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2001-11-06       Impact factor: 25.391

3.  Measuring blood pressure accurately: new and persistent challenges.

Authors:  Daniel W Jones; Lawrence J Appel; Sheldon G Sheps; Edward J Roccella; Claude Lenfant
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2003-02-26       Impact factor: 56.272

4.  Deaths preventable in the U.S. by improvements in use of clinical preventive services.

Authors:  Thomas A Farley; Mehul A Dalal; Farzad Mostashari; Thomas R Frieden
Journal:  Am J Prev Med       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 5.043

5.  Inadequate management of blood pressure in a hypertensive population.

Authors:  D R Berlowitz; A S Ash; E C Hickey; R H Friedman; M Glickman; B Kader; M A Moskowitz
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1998-12-31       Impact factor: 91.245

6.  The role of numeracy in understanding the benefit of screening mammography.

Authors:  L M Schwartz; S Woloshin; W C Black; H G Welch
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  1997-12-01       Impact factor: 25.391

Review 7.  Poor hypertension control: let's stop blaming the patients.

Authors:  David J Hyman; Valory N Pavlik
Journal:  Cleve Clin J Med       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 2.321

8.  The role of clinical uncertainty in treatment decisions for diabetic patients with uncontrolled blood pressure.

Authors:  Eve A Kerr; Brian J Zikmund-Fisher; Mandi L Klamerus; Usha Subramanian; Mary M Hogan; Timothy P Hofer
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2008-05-20       Impact factor: 25.391

9.  Hypertensive patients' use of blood pressure monitors stationed in pharmacies and other locations: a cross-sectional mail survey.

Authors:  Anthony J Viera; Lauren W Cohen; C Madeline Mitchell; Philip D Sloane
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2008-10-22       Impact factor: 2.655

10.  Use of home blood pressure monitoring by hypertensive patients in primary care: survey of a practice-based research network cohort.

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

View more
  2 in total

1.  Home Blood Pressure Monitoring in Cases of Clinical Uncertainty to Differentiate Appropriate Inaction From Therapeutic Inertia.

Authors:  Sonal J Patil; Nuha K Wareg; Kelvin L Hodges; Jamie B Smith; Mark S Kaiser; Michael L LeFevre
Journal:  Ann Fam Med       Date:  2020-01       Impact factor: 5.166

2.  Patient perceptions of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring testing, tolerability, accessibility, and expense.

Authors:  Jennifer S Ringrose; Raj Bapuji; Wade Coutinho; Omar Mouhammed; Lindsay Bridgland; Thirza Carpenter; Raj Padwal
Journal:  J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich)       Date:  2019-12-09       Impact factor: 3.738

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.