Self-monitoring blood pressure in hypertension, patient and provider perspectives: A systematic review and thematic synthesis

Fletcher, Benjamin; Hinton, Lisa; Hartmann‐Boyce, Jamie; Roberts, Nia; Bobrovitz, Niklas; McManus, Richard J

doi:10.1016/j.pec.2015.08.026

Cited by 94 publications

(95 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, a review of qualitative studies found that few patients shared this concern, and that in fact many patients felt empowered by and enjoyed self-monitoring. 24 …”

Section: Comparison With Existing Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Self-monitoring blood pressure in patients with hypertension: an internet-based survey of UK GPs

et al. 2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…However, a review of qualitative studies found that few patients shared this concern, and that in fact many patients felt empowered by and enjoyed self-monitoring. 24 …”

Section: Comparison With Existing Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Self-monitoring blood pressure in patients with hypertension: an internet-based survey of UK GPs

et al. 2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…48 Primary care clinicians have expressed several concerns about implementing AOBP and HBPM in a nonresearch setting: whether an AOBP/HBPM program can be efficiently incorporated into daily clinical practice; whether patients will follow through with HBPM despite its substantial time/ effort commitment; and whether patients will perform HBPM with sufficient accuracy. 14,49 With respect to the first concern about clinic efficiency, 68% of our clinic staff reported that the AOBP/ HBPM program positively affected hypertension management and did not require excessive time/ effort, an interpretation supported by the estimated time commitments noted in Table 3. While we did not objectively assess staff time commitments to the AOBP/HBPM program, 2 out of 19 respondents reported excessive time commitments of 31 to 45 minutes per patient.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 72%

Measuring and Managing Blood Pressure in a Primary Care Setting: A Pragmatic Implementation Study

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Such risks have been described in patients using blood glucose and blood pressure self-monitoring devices [26,27]. Thus far, studies have suggested a decrease in adherence to EAMs over time, without mentioning the risk of addiction to physical activity data [22].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prescribing of Electronic Activity Monitors in Cardiometabolic Diseases: Qualitative Interview-Based Study

Bellicha¹,

Macé²,

Oppert³

2017

J Med Internet Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe prevalence of noncommunicable diseases, including those such as type 2 diabetes, obesity, dyslipidemia, and hypertension, so-called cardiometabolic diseases, is high and is increasing worldwide. Strong evidence supports the role of physical activity in management of these diseases. There is general consensus that mHealth technology, including electronic activity monitors, can potentially increase physical activity in patients, but their use in clinical settings remains limited. Practitioners’ requirements when prescribing electronic activity monitors have been poorly described.ObjectiveThe aims of this qualitative study were (1) to explore how specialist physicians prescribe electronic activity monitors to patients presenting with cardiometabolic conditions, and (2) to better understand their motivation for and barriers to prescribing such monitors.MethodsWe conducted qualitative semistructured interviews in March to May 2016 with 11 senior physicians from a public university hospital in France with expertise in management of cardiometabolic diseases (type 1 and type 2 diabetes, obesity, hypertension, and dyslipidemia). Interviews lasted 45 to 60 minutes and were audiotaped, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using directed content analysis. We report our findings following the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research (COREQ) checklist.ResultsMost physicians we interviewed had never prescribed electronic activity monitors, whereas they frequently prescribed blood glucose or blood pressure self-monitoring devices. Reasons for nonprescription included lack of interest in the data collected, lack of evidence for data accuracy, concern about work overload possibly resulting from automatic data transfer, and risk of patients becoming addicted to data. Physicians expected future marketing of easy-to-use monitors that will accurately measure physical activity duration and intensity and provide understandable motivating feedback.ConclusionsFeatures of electronic activity monitors, although popular among the general public, do not meet the needs of physicians. In-depth understanding of physicians’ expectations is a first step toward designing technologies that can be widely used in clinical settings and facilitate physical activity prescription. Physicians should have a role, along with key health care stakeholders—patients, researchers, information technology firms, the public, and private payers—in developing the most effective methods for integrating activity monitors into patient care.

show abstract

Self-monitoring blood pressure in hypertension, patient and provider perspectives: A systematic review and thematic synthesis

Abstract: Uncertainty could be reduced by providing information specifically about how to interpret SMBP, what variation is acceptable, adjustment for home-clinic difference, and for patients what they should be concerned about and how to act.

Cited by 94 publications

References 29 publications

Self-monitoring blood pressure in patients with hypertension: an internet-based survey of UK GPs

Self-monitoring blood pressure in patients with hypertension: an internet-based survey of UK GPs

Measuring and Managing Blood Pressure in a Primary Care Setting: A Pragmatic Implementation Study

Prescribing of Electronic Activity Monitors in Cardiometabolic Diseases: Qualitative Interview-Based Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About