ArticleJournal of human hypertension2023
Blood pressure outcomes at 12 months in primary care patients prescribed remote physiological monitoring for hypertension: a prospective cohort study.
Article in Journal of human hypertension, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 10 papers.
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.
A Pilot Study of Hypertension Management Using Remote Patient Monitoring- Extended Follow Up Using Matched Cohort Design
Effects of Manually Recorded or Automatically Transmitted Home Blood Pressures With or Without Automated Patient Feedback on Hypertension Care
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cardiovascular Health Markers With Remote Team-Based Hypertension Management in a Safety-Net Population.American journal of preventive medicine · 2025Trial
- Effectiveness of remote monitoring for patients with a high risk of cardiovascular disease: a 12-month matched cohort study in primary care.European heart journal. Digital health · 2026Article
- Digital Pharmacist-Physician Collaborative Care Management of Hypertension for Medicare Patients.Journal of general internal medicine · 2025Observational
- Developing and Deploying a Hypertension Remote Patient Monitoring Program 101.Mayo Clinic proceedings. Innovations, quality & outcomes · 2025Article
- Tailoring remote patient management to optimise cardiovascular risk management in primary care: a mixed-methods implementation study informing large-scale implementation.BMC primary care · 2025Article
- Clinical and Engagement Results of a Nationwide Comprehensive Remote Patient Care Hypertension Program.JACC. Advances · 2025Article
- Assessment of clinical pharmacist outreach and medication titration in remote patient monitoring program for hypertension.Journal of human hypertension · 2025Article
- Closing the Gap: Digital Innovations to Address Hypertension Disparities.Current cardiology reports · 2025Review
- Blood pressure outcomes at 18 months in primary care patients prescribed remote physiological monitoring for hypertension: a prospective cohort study.Journal of human hypertension · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Remote patient monitoring (RPM) for hypertension enables automatic transmission of blood pressure (BP) and pulse into the electronic health record (EHR), but its effectiveness in primary care is unknown. This pragmatic matched cohort study using EHR data compared BP outcomes between individuals prescribed RPM and temporally-matched controls from six primary care practices. We retrospectively created a cohort of 288 Medicare-enrolled patients prescribed BP RPM (cases) and 1152 propensity score-matched controls (1:4). Matching was based on age, sex, systolic blood pressure (SBP), marital status, and other characteristics. Outcomes at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months were: controlling high BP (most recent BP < 140/90 mm Hg), antihypertensive medication intensification, and most recent SBP assessed using: all measurements, and office measurements only. At baseline, RPM-prescribed patients and controls had similar ages and systolic BP. BP control diverged at 3 months (RPM: 72.2%, control: 51%, p < 0.001). This difference persisted but decreased over follow-up. After 12 months, the RPM-prescribed cohort had greater BP control (RPM: 71.5%, control: 58.1%, p < 0.001) and lower SBP (132.3 versus 136.5 mm Hg, p = 0.003) using all measurements, but they did not differ using only office measurements (12 month BP control: 60.8% versus 58.1%, p = 0.44; SBP: 135.9 versus 136.5 mm Hg, p = 0.91). At 12 months, the most recent BP measurements were more current for RPM-prescribed patients (median [IQR] 8 [0-109] versus 134 [56-239] days). Net increases in antihypertensive medications by 12 months were similar. Implementation of RPM in primary care could inform hypertension management strategies and increase hypertension control. Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05562921.
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.