ArticleHealth SA = SA Gesondheid2020
Acceptance of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in a semi-rural population in South Africa.
Article in Health SA = SA Gesondheid, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAmbulatory blood pressure monitoring is a valuable tool that helps in providing an insight into the diagnosis and management of hypertension; however, no evidence exists of its acceptance in the diverse South African population.
aimWe assessed the acceptance of an ambulatory blood pressure monitor in patients attending public sector primary health care (PHC) clinics.
settingFive PHC clinics in the Makana subdistrict in the Eastern Cape.
methodA cross-sectional study was conducted with 70 hypertensive patients. Eligible patients were between 40 and 75 years old, taking either enalapril and hydrochlorothiazide or enalapril, hydrochlorothiazide and amlodipine. Socio-demographic, clinical and acceptance data were collected. The monitor cuff remained in place for 24 h. Acceptance was assessed after the monitor was removed. An overall acceptance score was generated to classify acceptance as either good or poor.
resultsThe mean years of schooling was 5.9 years, with 22 reporting no school attendance. Generally, acceptance was good, with 70% of the population rating the technique as 'acceptable' (acceptance score of > 23/30). Most participants reported minimal discomfort with only 13.3% reporting that it hindered normal daily activities. Night readings interrupted sleep in 43%, with extreme sleep disturbance (≥ 3 awakenings) reported in just over half the patients. Increased years of schooling was the only variable associated with acceptance score (
conclusionAmbulatory blood pressure monitoring was generally well-accepted, with few adverse effects being reported. Use of this technique at PHC facilities could reduce the incidence of misdiagnosis and uncontrolled hypertension.
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.