Trial reportJournal of general internal medicine2012
Blood pressure monitoring technique impacts hypertension treatment.
Trial report in Journal of general internal medicine, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
20 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Optimizing observer performance of clinic blood pressure measurement: a position statement from the Lancet Commission on Hypertension Group.Journal of hypertension · 2019Guideline
- Sources of inaccuracy in the measurement of adult patients' resting blood pressure in clinical settings: a systematic review.Journal of hypertension · 2017Pooled it
- A multi-level system quality improvement intervention to reduce racial disparities in hypertension care and control: study protocol.Implementation science : IS · 2013Trial
- Why and how do we perform physical examination(s) in clinical trials? A use case of drug intervention trials in type 2 diabetes mellitus.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2026Article
- Observational
- Low Concordance Between Blood Pressures Measured in Periodic Health Examinations and in a Workplace-Based Hypertension Management Program.Phenomics (Cham, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Blood Pressure Assessment and Treatment in the Observation Unit.Current hypertension reports · 2022Review
- Renal denervation in hypertension patients: Proceedings from an expert consensus roundtable cosponsored by SCAI and NKF.Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions · 2021Article
- Improving the quality of blood pressure measurements in an outpatient diabetes clinic.BMJ open quality · 2021Article
- Self-Instruction Video Versus Face-to-Face Instruction of Pharmacy Students' Skills in Blood Pressure Measurement.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- The impact of small to moderate inaccuracies in assessing blood pressure on hypertension prevalence and control rates.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2020Article
- [Optimizing observer performance of clinic blood Pressure measurement: a position statement from the Lancet Commission on Hypertension GroupOtimização do desempenho do observador na medição clínica da pressão arterial: posicionamento do Grupo daRevista panamericana de salud publica = Pan American journal of public health · 2020Article
- BP Measurement in Clinical Practice: Time to SPRINT to Guideline-Recommended Protocols.Journal of the American Society of Nephrology : JASN · 2018Review
- Promoting sustainability in quality improvement: an evaluation of a web-based continuing education program in blood pressure measurement.BMC family practice · 2018Article
- Clinical Implications of Different Blood Pressure Measurement Techniques.Current hypertension reports · 2017Review
- Heterogenous haemodynamic effects of adaptive servoventilation therapy in sleeping patients with heart failure and Cheyne-Stokes respiration compared to healthy volunteers.Heart and vessels · 2016Article
- Physician Acceptance of a Physician-Pharmacist Collaborative Treatment Model for Hypertension Management in Primary Care.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2015Article
- Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in clinical practice: a review.The American journal of medicine · 2015Review
- Is it time for a blood pressure measurement "bundle"?Journal of general internal medicine · 2012Article
- Barriers to Accurate Blood Pressure Measurement in the Medical Office.Journal of primary care & community healthArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn 2005 the American Heart Association (AHA) released updated recommendations for blood pressure (BP) monitoring in order to ensure accurate BP measurements.
objectiveTo determine if current methods of BP assessment in an ambulatory clinic result in significantly different BP measurements than those obtained by following the AHA recommendations and if these BP differences impact treatment decisions. RESEARCH
designRandomized prospective analysis.
settingUniversity of New Mexico Hospital Adult Internal Medicine clinic. PATIENTS: Forty adults with hypertension
methodsPatient BPs were measured using both the traditional triage method and the AHA-recommended method in cross-over fashion in random order. Two complete medical profile summaries were then constructed for each patient: one for each BP measurement obtained by each technique. These profiles were then reviewed by a panel of providers who provided hypothetical hypertension treatment recommendations.
resultsIndividual BP results varied greatly between the two methods. SBP readings differed by ≥5 mmHg in either direction for 68% of patients while 78% of patient's DBP readings differed by ≥2 mmHg in either direction. Overall, 93% of patients had a BP difference of either ≥5 mmHg systolic or ≥2 mmHg diastolic. Five patients were determined to be at goal with the triage method, but were higher than their goal BP with the AHA method Significant differences were also seen in treatment recommendations for a given patient based on the differences seen between the two obtained BP readings. The number of patients with treatment variations between their two profiles ranged from 13% to 23% depending on the reviewing provider (p < 0.01 for all providers).
conclusionInaccurate BP assessment is common and may impact hypertension treatment decisions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.