open access

Vol 24, No 2 (2020)
ORIGINAL PAPERS
Published online: 2020-06-16
Get Citation

Effectiveness of telemedicine-guided home blood pressure compared to 24 h-ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in patients with and without chronic kidney disease.

Xavier Galloo, Tom Robberechts, Patricia Van Der Niepen
DOI: 10.5603/AH.a2020.0010
·
Arterial Hypertension 2020;24(2):83-92.

open access

Vol 24, No 2 (2020)
ORIGINAL PAPERS
Published online: 2020-06-16

Abstract

Background. Only few direct comparative studies evaluated the effectiveness of telemedicine-guided home blood pressure (tele-HBPM) compared to 24 h ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) in assessing blood pressure (BP) and BP control. Material and methods. This prospective clinical trial included patients with arterial hypertension, with (n = 23) and without (n = 18) chronic kidney disease and normal volunteers (n = 16). All subjects underwent with a 1-month interval twice one-week of BP monitoring with office BP (3 measurements at 2 visits), 24 h-ABPM and tele-HBPM during 7 consecutive days. Results. Mean (SD) BP levels were 128/77 [19/11] mm Hg and 126/75 [14/9] mm Hg for tele-HBPM, 129/78 [17/11] mm Hg and 127/75 [14/9] mm Hg for daytime-ABPM, and 133/77 [23/12] mm Hg and 130/74 [17/11] mm Hg for office BP, all respectively at the first and the second measurement periods. Blood pressure and BP control were comparable between the two out-of-office techniques. Conclusion. Both out-of-office techniques (tele-HBPM and 24h-ABPM) show good agreement for systolic as well as diastolic BP, and are equally effective in assessing BP and BP control, explicitly during daytime.

Abstract

Background. Only few direct comparative studies evaluated the effectiveness of telemedicine-guided home blood pressure (tele-HBPM) compared to 24 h ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) in assessing blood pressure (BP) and BP control. Material and methods. This prospective clinical trial included patients with arterial hypertension, with (n = 23) and without (n = 18) chronic kidney disease and normal volunteers (n = 16). All subjects underwent with a 1-month interval twice one-week of BP monitoring with office BP (3 measurements at 2 visits), 24 h-ABPM and tele-HBPM during 7 consecutive days. Results. Mean (SD) BP levels were 128/77 [19/11] mm Hg and 126/75 [14/9] mm Hg for tele-HBPM, 129/78 [17/11] mm Hg and 127/75 [14/9] mm Hg for daytime-ABPM, and 133/77 [23/12] mm Hg and 130/74 [17/11] mm Hg for office BP, all respectively at the first and the second measurement periods. Blood pressure and BP control were comparable between the two out-of-office techniques. Conclusion. Both out-of-office techniques (tele-HBPM and 24h-ABPM) show good agreement for systolic as well as diastolic BP, and are equally effective in assessing BP and BP control, explicitly during daytime.

Get Citation

Keywords

arterial hypertension; office blood pressure; ambulatory blood pressure; home blood pressure; blood pressure telemonitoring; chronic kidney disease

Supplementary Files (1)
Supplementary File
Download
90KB
About this article
Title

Effectiveness of telemedicine-guided home blood pressure compared to 24 h-ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in patients with and without chronic kidney disease.

Journal

Arterial Hypertension

Issue

Vol 24, No 2 (2020)

Pages

83-92

Published online

2020-06-16

DOI

10.5603/AH.a2020.0010

Bibliographic record

Arterial Hypertension 2020;24(2):83-92.

Keywords

arterial hypertension
office blood pressure
ambulatory blood pressure
home blood pressure
blood pressure telemonitoring
chronic kidney disease

Authors

Xavier Galloo
Tom Robberechts
Patricia Van Der Niepen

References (53)
  1. Williams B, Mancia G, Spiering W, et al. 2018 ESC/ESH Guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension. J Hypertens. 2018; 36(10): 1953–2041.
  2. Cohen D, Huan Y, Townsend R. Home Blood Pressure Monitoring in CKD. Am J Kidney Dis. 2014; 63(5): 835–842.
  3. Stergiou G, Kollias A, Zeniodi M, et al. Home Blood Pressure Monitoring: Primary Role in Hypertension Management. Curr Hypertens Rep. 2014; 16(8).
  4. Bliziotis I, Destounis A, Stergiou G. Home versus ambulatory and office blood pressure in predicting target organ damage in hypertension. J Hypertens. 2012; 30(7): 1289–1299.
  5. Shimbo D, Abdalla M, Falzon L, et al. Studies comparing ambulatory blood pressure and home blood pressure on cardiovascular disease and mortality outcomes: a systematic review. J Am Soc Hypertens. 2016; 10(3): 224–234.e17.
  6. Myers M, Stergiou G. Reporting bias: Achilles' heel of home blood pressure monitoring. J Am Soc Hypertens. 2014; 8(5): 350–357.
  7. Parati G, Omboni S. Role of home blood pressure telemonitoring in hypertension management. Blood Press Monit. 2010; 15(6): 285–295.
  8. Hodgkinson J, Mant J, Martin U, et al. Relative effectiveness of clinic and home blood pressure monitoring compared with ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in diagnosis of hypertension: systematic review. BMJ. 2011; 342: d3621–d3621.
  9. Mart??nez M, Sancho T, Garc??a P, et al. Home blood pressure in poorly controlled hypertension: relationship with ambulatory blood pressure and organ damage. Blood Press Monit. 2006; 11(4): 207–213.
  10. Bayó J, Cos F, Roca C, et al. Home blood pressure self-monitoring: diagnostic performance in white-coat hypertension. Blood Press Monit. 2006; 11(2): 47–52.
  11. Mancia G, Zanchetti A, Agebiti-Rosei E, et al. Ambulatory Blood Pressure Is Superior to Clinic Blood Pressure in Predicting Treatment-Induced Regression of Left Ventricular Hypertrophy. Circulation. 1997; 95(6): 1464–1470.
  12. Myers M, Valdivieso M, Chessman M, et al. Can sphygmomanometers designed for self-measurement of blood pressure in the home be used in office practice? Blood Press Monit. 2010; 15(6): 300–304.
  13. Hond E, Celis H, Fagard R, et al. Self-measured versus ambulatory blood pressure in the diagnosis of hypertension. J Hypertens. 2003; 21(4): 717–722.
  14. Hara A, Tanaka K, Ohkubo T, et al. Ambulatory Versus Home Versus Clinic Blood Pressure. Hypertension. 2012; 59(1): 22–28.
  15. Stergiou G, Skeva I, Baibas N, et al. Diagnosis of hypertension using home or ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. J Hypertens. 2000; 18(12): 1745–1751.
  16. Lamarre-Cliché M, Cheong N, Larochelle P. Comparative Assessment of Four Blood Pressure Measurement Methods in Hypertensives. Can J Cardiol. 2011; 27(4): 455–460.
  17. Anstey D, Muntner P, Bello N, et al. Diagnosing Masked Hypertension Using Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring, Home Blood Pressure Monitoring, or Both? Hypertension. 2018; 72(5): 1200–1207.
  18. Robberechts T, Allamani M, Van der Niepen P. Hyponatremic versus isonatremic dialysate in patients with intradialytic hypertension. A randomised controlled trial. Poster session presented at : 25th European Meeting on Hypertension and Cardiovasculair Protection, 25th Scientific Meeting of the European Society of Hypertension 12–15 June 2015, Milan, Italy.
  19. Gaborieau V, Delarche N, Gosse P. Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring versus self-measurement of blood pressure at home: correlation with target organ damage. J Hypertens. 2008; 26(10): 1919–1927.
  20. Stergiou G, Argyrak K, Moyssakis I, et al. Home Blood Pressure Is as Reliable as Ambulatory Blood Pressure in Predicting Target-Organ Damage in Hypertension. Am J Hypertens. 2007; 20(6): 616–621.
  21. Mansoor G, White W. Self-measured home blood pressure in predicting ambulatory hypertension. Am J Hypertens. 2004; 17(11): 1017–1022.
  22. Shimbo D, Pickering T, Spruill T, et al. Relative Utility of Home, Ambulatory, and Office Blood Pressures in the Prediction of End-Organ Damage. Am J Hypertens. 2007; 20(5): 476–482.
  23. Jula A, Puukka P, Karanko H. Multiple Clinic and Home Blood Pressure Measurements Versus Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring. Hypertension. 1999; 34(2): 261–266.
  24. O'Shaughnessy M, Durcan M, Kinsella S, et al. Blood Pressure Measurement in Peritoneal Dialysis: Which Method is Best? Perit Dial Int. 2020; 33(5): 544–551.
  25. Zigmond AS, Snaith RP. The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 1983; 67(6): 361–370.
  26. Bjelland I, Dahl A, Haug T, et al. The validity of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. J Psychosom Res. 2002; 52(2): 69–77.
  27. Bland-Altman plot with multiple measurements per subject, MedCalc Software bvba, consulted on 12th of May 2014. http://www.medcalc.org/manual/blandaltmanmultiple.php.
  28. Altman DG, Bland JM. Measurement in Medicine: The Analysis of Method Comparison Studies. Statistician. 1983; 32(3): 307.
  29. Bland JM, Altman D. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet. 1986; 327(8476): 307–310.
  30. Stergiou G, Nasothimiou E. Does home telemonitoring improve hypertension management? Nat Rev Nephrol. 2011; 7(9): 493–495.
  31. Madsen L, Christiansen T, Kirkegaard P, et al. Economic evaluation of home blood pressure telemonitoring: A randomized controlled trial. Blood Press. 2010; 20(2): 117–125.
  32. Agarwal R, Bills J, Hecht T, et al. Role of Home Blood Pressure Monitoring in Overcoming Therapeutic Inertia and Improving Hypertension Control. Hypertension. 2011; 57(1): 29–38.
  33. Omboni S, Guarda A. Impact of Home Blood Pressure Telemonitoring and Blood Pressure Control: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Studies. Am J Hypertens. 2011; 24(9): 989–998.
  34. Kerby T, Asche S, Maciosek M, et al. Adherence to Blood Pressure Telemonitoring in a Cluster-Randomized Clinical Trial. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2012; 14(10): 668–674.
  35. Krakoff L. Management of Cardiovascular Risk Factors Is Leaving the Office: Potential Impact of Telemedicine. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2011; 13(11): 791–794.
  36. McKinstry B, Hanley J, Wild S, et al. Telemonitoring based service redesign for the management of uncontrolled hypertension: multicentre randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 2013; 346: f3030.
  37. Stoddart A, Hanley J, Wild S, et al. Telemonitoring-based service redesign for the management of uncontrolled hypertension (HITS): cost and cost-effectiveness analysis of a randomised controlled trial. BMJ Open. 2013; 3(5): e002681.
  38. Omboni S. Connected Health in Hypertension Management. Front Cardiovasc Med. 2019; 6.
  39. Kikuya M, Hansen T, Thijs L, et al. Diagnostic thresholds for ambulatory blood pressure monitoring based on 10-year cardiovascular risk. Circulation. 2007; 15(16): 2145–2152.
  40. Palatini P. Ambulatory blood pressure and cardiovascular risk in chronic kidney disease. Curr Hypertens Rep. 2008; 10(2): 119–126.
  41. Andersen M, Khawandi W, Agarwal R. Home Blood Pressure Monitoring in CKD. Am J Kidney Dis. 2005; 45(6): 994–1001.
  42. Minutolo R, Borrelli S, Chiodini P, et al. Effects of age on hypertensive status in patients with chronic kidney disease. J Hypertens. 2007; 25(11): 2325–2333.
  43. Myers MG, Godwin M, Dawes M, et al. Conventional versus automated measurement of blood pressure in primary care patients with systolic hypertension: randomised parallel design controlled trial. BMJ. 2011; 342: d286–d286.
  44. Myers M. Replacing manual sphygmomanometers with automated blood pressure measurement in routine clinical practice. Clin Exp Pharmacol Physiol. 2013; 41(1): 46–53.
  45. Myers M. Eliminating the Human Factor in Office Blood Pressure Measurement. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2014; 16(2): 83–86.
  46. Myers MG, Kaczorowski J, Dawes M, et al. Automated office blood pressure measurement in primary care. Can Fam Physician. 2014; 60: 127–132.
  47. McManus RJ, Mant J, Bray EP, et al. Telemonitoring and self-management in the control of hypertension (TASMINH2): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2010; 376: 163–172.
  48. Margolis K, Asche S, Bergdall A, et al. Effect of Home Blood Pressure Telemonitoring and Pharmacist Management on Blood Pressure Control. JAMA. 2013; 310(1): 46.
  49. Glynn L, Murphy A, Smith S, et al. Interventions used to improve control of blood pressure in patients with hypertension. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010.
  50. Margolis K, Asche S, Dehmer S, et al. Long-term Outcomes of the Effects of Home Blood Pressure Telemonitoring and Pharmacist Management on Blood Pressure Among Adults With Uncontrolled Hypertension. JAMA Netw Open. 2018; 1(5): e181617.
  51. Staessen J, Fagard R, Thijs L, et al. A Consensus View on the Technique of Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring. Hypertension. 1995; 26(6): 912–918.
  52. Elliot L, Iqbal P. Factors associated with probability of patient rejecting a repeat 24 h ambulatory blood pressure monitoring, despite recommendation by the physician. Blood Press Monit. 2003: 191–194.
  53. Viera A, Lingley K, Hinderliter A. Tolerability of the Oscar 2 ambulatory blood pressure monitor among research participants: a cross-sectional repeated measures study. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2011; 11(1).

Important: This website uses cookies. More >>

The cookies allow us to identify your computer and find out details about your last visit. They remembering whether you've visited the site before, so that you remain logged in - or to help us work out how many new website visitors we get each month. Most internet browsers accept cookies automatically, but you can change the settings of your browser to erase cookies or prevent automatic acceptance if you prefer.

By "Via Medica sp. z o.o." sp.k., ul. Świętokrzyska 73, 80–180 Gdańsk

tel.:+48 58 320 94 94, faks:+48 58 320 94 60, e-mail: viamedica@viamedica.pl