BackgroundSelf-monitoring of blood pressure (BP) appears to reduce BP in hypertension but important questions remain regarding effective implementation and which groups may benefit most. This individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis was performed to better understand the effectiveness of BP self-monitoring to lower BP and control hypertension.Methods and findingsMedline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched for randomised trials comparing self-monitoring to no self-monitoring in hypertensive patients (June 2016). Two reviewers independently assessed articles for eligibility and the authors of eligible trials were approached requesting IPD. Of 2,846 articles in the initial search, 36 were eligible. IPD were provided from 25 trials, including 1 unpublished study. Data for the primary outcomes—change in mean clinic or ambulatory BP and proportion controlled below target at 12 months—were available from 15/19 possible studies (7,138/8,292 [86%] of randomised participants). Overall, self-monitoring was associated with reduced clinic systolic blood pressure (sBP) compared to usual care at 12 months (−3.2 mmHg, [95% CI −4.9, −1.6 mmHg]). However, this effect was strongly influenced by the intensity of co-intervention ranging from no effect with self-monitoring alone (−1.0 mmHg [−3.3, 1.2]), to a 6.1 mmHg (−9.0, −3.2) reduction when monitoring was combined with intensive support. Self-monitoring was most effective in those with fewer antihypertensive medications and higher baseline sBP up to 170 mmHg. No differences in efficacy were seen by sex or by most comorbidities. Ambulatory BP data at 12 months were available from 4 trials (1,478 patients), which assessed self-monitoring with little or no co-intervention. There was no association between self-monitoring and either lower clinic or ambulatory sBP in this group (clinic −0.2 mmHg [−2.2, 1.8]; ambulatory 1.1 mmHg [−0.3, 2.5]). Results for diastolic blood pressure (dBP) were similar. The main limitation of this work was that significant heterogeneity remained. This was at least in part due to different inclusion criteria, self-monitoring regimes, and target BPs in included studies.ConclusionsSelf-monitoring alone is not associated with lower BP or better control, but in conjunction with co-interventions (including systematic medication titration by doctors, pharmacists, or patients; education; or lifestyle counselling) leads to clinically significant BP reduction which persists for at least 12 months. The implementation of self-monitoring in hypertension should be accompanied by such co-interventions.

The purpose of this research was to review the literature on home blood pressure measurement (HBPM) and to provide recommendations regarding HBPM assessment. Observational studies on HBPM, published after 1992, as identified by PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane literature searches were reviewed. Studies were selected if they met the following criteria: 1) self-measurements had been performed with validated devices; 2) measurement procedures were described in sufficient detail; and 3) papers clearly explained how final HBPM results were calculated upon which conclusions and/or treatment decisions were based. Office blood pressure measurement (OBPM) yields higher blood pressure values than HBPM. For systolic blood pressure, differences between OBPM and HBPM increase with age and the height of office pressure. Differences also tend to be greater in men than in women and greater in patients without than in those with antihypertensive treatment. Furthermore, HBPM can diagnose normotension with almost absolute certainty; it correlates better with target organ damage and cardiovascular mortality than OBPM, it enables prediction of sustained hypertension in patients with borderline hypertension, and it proves to be an appropriate tool for assessing drug efficacy. Despite some limitations and although more data are needed, HBPM is suitable for routine clinical practice.

Screening for IAD of BP is important but the measurement methodology has a major influence on IAD results. To prevent overestimation and observer bias IAD should be assessed simultaneously at both arms, with one or two automatic devices and multiple readings should be taken.

Abstract-It is still uncertain whether one can safely base treatment decisions on self-measurement of blood pressure. In the present study, we investigated whether antihypertensive treatment based on self-measurement of blood pressure leads to the use of less medication without the loss of blood pressure control. We randomly assigned 430 hypertensive patients to receive treatment either on the basis of self-measured pressures (nϭ216) or office pressures (OPs; nϭ214). During 1-year follow-up, blood pressure was measured by office measurement (10 visits), ambulatory monitoring (start and end), and self-measurement (8 times, self-pressure group only). In addition, drug use, associated costs, and degree of target organ damage (echocardiography and microalbuminuria) were assessed. Key Words: blood pressure Ⅲ hypertension Ⅲ self-measurements Ⅲ home monitoring Ⅲ ambulatory blood pressure measurement Ⅲ treatment A s indications for lowering blood pressure (BP) become increasingly stringent, the associated medication use and costs rise markedly. 1 This calls for proper diagnosis and careful selection of patients in whom treatment is really indicated. In this respect, conventional office BP measurements (OBPMs) have disadvantages, because they can easily elicit a white-coat effect, overestimation of a patient's BP, 2 and unnecessary drug prescription. Self-BP measurements (SBPMs) are less liable to the white-coat effect 3 and may provide a more reliable estimate of a patient's "true" BP. In addition, SBPM correlates better with the development of target organ damage (TOD) than OBPM 4 -6 and for the occurrence of cardiovascular complications. 7,8 Therefore, SBPM has the potential to identify subjects that may not need treatment. This could reduce drug use and lead to considerable costs savings. The Home versus Office Measurement, Reduction of Unnecessary treatment Study (HOMERUS) was designed to determine whether treatment based on SBPM leads to a decreased drug prescription without an impaired BP control and TOD as compared with treatment based on OBPM. MethodsThe design of the HOMERUS has been described in detail elsewhere. 9 Briefly, HOMERUS is a multicenter, prospective, randomContinuing medical education (CME) credit is available for this article. Go to http://cme.ahajournals.org to take the quiz.

Measurement of the ankle-brachial index (ABI) using a Doppler device is widely used to identify subjects with peripheral artery disease (PAD), and those who are at high risk of cardiovascular disease. This paper presents a systematic review (Medline/ PubMed, Embase and Cochrane) and meta-analysis of studies assessing the usefulness of automated oscillometric devices for ABI estimation and PAD detection compared with the conventional Doppler method. A total of 25 studies including 4186 subjects were analyzed. A random-effects model analysis showed that the average oscillometric ABI was similar to the Doppler ABI (mean difference ± s.e. 0.020 ± 0.018, P ¼ 0.3) but that the absolute differences were significant (0.048 ± 0.009, Po0.01). The pooled correlation coefficient (r) between the oscillometric and Doppler ABI was 0.71 ± 0.05. Simultaneous arm-leg measurements resulted in a smaller difference between the average oscillometric ABI value and the average Doppler ABI value than did sequential measurements ( À0.012 ± 0.022 vs. 0.040 ± 0.026, respectively, Po0.01). The average sensitivity and specificity of the oscillometric ABI estimation in PAD diagnosis was 69 ± 6% and 96 ± 1%, respectively (with Doppler ABI taken as the reference). These data suggest that an automated ABI measurement obtained by oscillometric blood pressure monitors is a reliable and practical alternative to the conventional Doppler measurement for the detection of PAD.To increase the sensitivity of the PAD diagnosis based on an oscillometric ABI, a higher threshold of 1.0 might be preferable.

MH strikes about a quarter of the patients who were initially classified as normotensives (based on office BP measurements) and of treated hypertensives. Patients with MH seem to have a similar cardiovascular risk as sustained hypertensives but they may remain undetected. The presence of MH seems to be a matter of a coincidently low office BP value not related to certain subject characteristics although the chance of its presence may be increased by smoking and antihypertensive treatment.

Abstract-Poor adherence to treatment is one of the major determinants of an uncontrolled blood pressure. Participation in a clinical trial may increase patient's adherence to treatment. This prompted us to investigate adherence and persistence profiles in patients with hypertension who had participated in a clinical trial, by collecting pharmacy refill data before, during, and after participation in the trial.

There is an increasing interest for using telecare(TC) in the management of hypertension. A systematic review to the use of blood pressure (BP) measurement in TC has been performed (Medline/PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library), selecting randomized clinical trials that compared TC with usual care (UC) for hypertension management (treatment and/or coaching). Nine randomized clinical trials were selected (n=2501, 61.4±0.6 years, 42±2.7% males). Overall there was a significant larger decrease in the TC group than in the UC group for systolic (5.2±1.5 mmHg; P<0.001) and diastolic BP (2.1±0.8 mmHg; P<0.01). When studies were separated for antihypertensive treatment modification during the study (yes or no), systolic BP decrease difference between the TC and UC groups (ΔTC-ΔUC) tended to be significantly lower (5.1±2.9 mmHg lower) with treatment modification compared with nontreatment modification in which the ΔTC-ΔUC was 8.6±2.4 mmHg, P=0.07. TC led to a greater decrease in systolic and diastolic BP than UC. The differences between TC and UC for systolic BP tend to become larger when no treatment modification is applied. TC seems a valuable tool for hypertension management.