ArticleCMAJ open2013
Comparison of blood pressure measurements using an automated blood pressure device in community pharmacies and family physicians' offices: a randomized controlled trial.
Article in CMAJ open, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 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
19 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparing Automated Office Blood Pressure Readings With Other Methods of Blood Pressure Measurement for Identifying Patients With Possible Hypertension: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.JAMA internal medicine · 2019Pooled it
- A comparison of blood pressure in community pharmacies with ambulatory, home and general practitioner office readings: systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of hypertension · 2017Pooled it
- Pharmacist interventions to improve blood pressure control in primary care: a cluster randomised trial.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2023Trial
- Automated office blood pressure measurement: a Hypertension Australia and National Hypertension Taskforce of Australia position statement.Journal of hypertension · 2025Article
- Blood Pressure Protocol: Processing Time of Standard Versus Automated.PRiMER (Leawood, Kan.) · 2025Article
- Management of hypertensive urgencies: a new opportunity for unattended blood pressure measurement.Journal of human hypertension · 2024Article
- Advances in Pharmacy Practice: A Look towards the Future.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Attendance, activation and health profiles of participants, a prospective study on a regional cardiometabolic disease self-management program in Laval, Canada.BMC public health · 2021Article
- Office blood pressure measurement: A comprehensive review.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2021Review
- Variation in Blood Pressure Classification Using 7 Blood Pressure Estimation Protocols Among Adults in Taiwan.JAMA network open · 2020Observational
- Article
- Automated Office-Based Blood Pressure Measurement: an Overview and Guidance for Implementation in Primary Care.Current hypertension reports · 2019Review
- Comparison of awake ambulatory blood pressure and automated office blood pressure using linear regression analysis in untreated patients in routine clinical practice.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2018Article
- Office blood pressure measurement in the 21st century.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2018Article
- Automated Office Blood Pressure Measurement.Korean circulation journal · 2018Review
- Personalized Hypertension Management Using Patient-Generated Health Data Integrated With Electronic Health Records (EMPOWER-H): Six-Month Pre-Post Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2017Article
- Hypertension Canada's 2016 Canadian Hypertension Education Program guidelines for pharmacists: An update.Canadian pharmacists journal : CPJ = Revue des pharmaciens du Canada : RPC · 2016Article
- A Short History of Automated Office Blood Pressure - 15 Years to SPRINT.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2016Article
- The impact of a cardiovascular health awareness program (CHAP) on reducing blood pressure: a prospective cohort study.BMC public health · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAccurate 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.
methodsWe 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.
resultsIn 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).
interpretationAutomated 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 registrationwww.controlled-trials.com, no. ISRCTN91799042.
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.