SORA

Advancing, promoting and sharing knowledge of health through excellence in teaching, clinical practice and research into the prevention and treatment of illness

Self-monitoring of blood pressure in hypertension: A systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis.

Tucker, KL; Sheppard, JP; Stevens, R; Bosworth, HB; Bove, A; Bray, EP; Earle, K; George, J; Godwin, M; Green, BB; et al. Tucker, KL; Sheppard, JP; Stevens, R; Bosworth, HB; Bove, A; Bray, EP; Earle, K; George, J; Godwin, M; Green, BB; Hebert, P; Hobbs, FDR; Kantola, I; Kerry, SM; Leiva, A; Magid, DJ; Mant, J; Margolis, KL; McKinstry, B; McLaughlin, MA; Omboni, S; Ogedegbe, O; Parati, G; Qamar, N; Tabaei, BP; Varis, J; Verberk, WJ; Wakefield, BJ; McManus, RJ (2017) Self-monitoring of blood pressure in hypertension: A systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis. PLoS Med, 14 (9). e1002389. ISSN 1549-1676 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1002389
SGUL Authors: Earle, Kenneth Anthony

[img]
Preview
PDF Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.

Download (5MB) | Preview

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Self-monitoring of blood pressure (BP) appears to reduce BP in hypertension but important questions remain regarding effective implementation and which groups may benefit most. This individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis was performed to better understand the effectiveness of BP self-monitoring to lower BP and control hypertension. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched for randomised trials comparing self-monitoring to no self-monitoring in hypertensive patients (June 2016). Two reviewers independently assessed articles for eligibility and the authors of eligible trials were approached requesting IPD. Of 2,846 articles in the initial search, 36 were eligible. IPD were provided from 25 trials, including 1 unpublished study. Data for the primary outcomes-change in mean clinic or ambulatory BP and proportion controlled below target at 12 months-were available from 15/19 possible studies (7,138/8,292 [86%] of randomised participants). Overall, self-monitoring was associated with reduced clinic systolic blood pressure (sBP) compared to usual care at 12 months (-3.2 mmHg, [95% CI -4.9, -1.6 mmHg]). However, this effect was strongly influenced by the intensity of co-intervention ranging from no effect with self-monitoring alone (-1.0 mmHg [-3.3, 1.2]), to a 6.1 mmHg (-9.0, -3.2) reduction when monitoring was combined with intensive support. Self-monitoring was most effective in those with fewer antihypertensive medications and higher baseline sBP up to 170 mmHg. No differences in efficacy were seen by sex or by most comorbidities. Ambulatory BP data at 12 months were available from 4 trials (1,478 patients), which assessed self-monitoring with little or no co-intervention. There was no association between self-monitoring and either lower clinic or ambulatory sBP in this group (clinic -0.2 mmHg [-2.2, 1.8]; ambulatory 1.1 mmHg [-0.3, 2.5]). Results for diastolic blood pressure (dBP) were similar. The main limitation of this work was that significant heterogeneity remained. This was at least in part due to different inclusion criteria, self-monitoring regimes, and target BPs in included studies. CONCLUSIONS: Self-monitoring alone is not associated with lower BP or better control, but in conjunction with co-interventions (including systematic medication titration by doctors, pharmacists, or patients; education; or lifestyle counselling) leads to clinically significant BP reduction which persists for at least 12 months. The implementation of self-monitoring in hypertension should be accompanied by such co-interventions.

Item Type: Article
Additional Information: © 2017 Tucker et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Keywords: General & Internal Medicine, 11 Medical And Health Sciences
SGUL Research Institute / Research Centre: Academic Structure > Institute of Medical & Biomedical Education (IMBE)
Academic Structure > Institute of Medical & Biomedical Education (IMBE) > Centre for Clinical Education (INMECE )
Journal or Publication Title: PLoS Med
ISSN: 1549-1676
Language: eng
Dates:
DateEvent
19 September 2017Published
10 August 2017Accepted
Publisher License: Creative Commons: Attribution 4.0
Projects:
Project IDFunderFunder ID
112National Institute for Health Researchhttp://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000272
NIHR-RP-02-12-015National Institute for Health Researchhttp://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000272
MR/K022032/1Medical Research Councilhttp://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000265
PubMed ID: 28926573
Go to PubMed abstract
URI: https://openaccess.sgul.ac.uk/id/eprint/109156
Publisher's version: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1002389

Actions (login required)

Edit Item Edit Item