Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39269685›Full record

ArticleJournal of primary care & community health

Feasibility and Methodology of a Pilot Free Blood Pressure Monitoring and Follow-Up Program at Two Free Clinics.

Georgios Mikos, Brian Yu, Jessica Balbin, Laisha Martinez-Reyes, Jonathan M Tang, Brandon Nguyen Lieu, Edward Tran, Athena Xue, Jiwoo Lee, Neil Wary and 22 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of primary care & community health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

32 authors.

Georgios MikosSchool of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1144-5585
Brian YuSchool of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5250-1892
Jessica BalbinSchool of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Laisha Martinez-ReyesSchool of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Jonathan M TangSchool of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Brandon Nguyen LieuSchool of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Edward TranSchool of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.ORCID 0009-0005-4327-0291
Athena XueSchool of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Jiwoo LeeSchool of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Neil WarySchool of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Camryn FrankeSchool of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Nicholas PanyanouvongSchool of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Melody J ChaclanSchool of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Tony H ChangSchool of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Crystal ChenSchool of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Michaela Y GuoSchool of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.ORCID 0009-0008-2835-3242
Kelly HarvellSchool of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-7450-0532
Rose HoranSchool of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Nicole A JohnsonSchool of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Audrey KimSchool of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Eric LiuSchool of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Linda LiuSchool of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Pablo Nuñez-PerezSchool of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Madison QuigSchool of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Anushka SanyalSchool of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Krishna SharmaSchool of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Iris WangSchool of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Kelly WangSchool of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.ORCID 0009-0007-3007-291X
Amy FilsoofSchool of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Mina CharonSchool of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Tamara MontacuteSchool of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Baldeep SinghSchool of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHypertension affects approximately 1 in 2 adults in the US. Home blood pressure (BP) monitoring programs are effective in the diagnosis and management of hypertension. Free clinics serve as an integral safety net for millions of uninsured and economically disadvantaged patients in the US. The feasibility and effects of a free home BP monitoring and follow-up program in a free clinic setting is not well characterized.

methodsThis was a prospective study of the implementation of a pilot BP monitoring and follow-up program between March 2021 and August 2023 at 2 free clinics in the San Francisco Bay Area. A total of 78 hypertensive patients were enrolled in the program and given a free BP monitor. We surveyed via telephone the change in systolic and diastolic BPs and BP monitor use and comfort at 3 weeks. Volunteers in clinic roles involved in the BP monitoring program were surveyed to assess their time spent and perceptions of the program.

resultsOf the 78 patients, 37 provided responses to the 3-week survey. A total of 36 of 37 (97%) patients reported using their BP monitor. A total of 35 patients reported using it at least once a week (95%), with the majority reporting at least four uses a week (68%). A total of 36 patients (97%) planned on continuing to use their BP monitor. At 3 weeks, the mean systolic and diastolic BP changed by -6.40 mmHg (95% CI, -10.8 to -2.01 mmHg; P = .00577) and -2.72 mmHg (95% CI, -5.62 to 0.188 mmHg; P = .0657), respectively. The time commitment for this program ranged from 130 ± 51 min for program leaders to 16 ± 14 min per week for patient-facing roles. All volunteer roles (patient-facing, phone follow-up, program leaders) expressed that they had a clear understanding of their responsibilities in the program (median 4 on Likert scale, IQR 3-5).

conclusionHome BP monitoring and follow-up is feasible to implement in free clinics, resulting in high rates of patient engagement among respondents. Our findings suggest that home BP monitoring and follow-up programs may be beneficial in vulnerable patient populations.

Indexed as

Blood Pressure Monitoring, AmbulatoryFeasibility StudiesHypertensionAdultAgedAmbulatory Care FacilitiesFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedPilot ProjectsProspective StudiesSan Franciscoblood pressure monitoringfree clinicshypertension

Identifiers

PMID39269685
PMCPMC11402090

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.