BP self-monitoring/self-titrating decreases BP
--mean baseline BP was 143/80. mean age 70, 60% men, 97% white, BMI 31, 79% professional or skilled workers,
--after
12 months: the intervention group achieved BP 128/74, control group 139/77,
with a significant difference from the baselines of each group of 9.2/3.4. data
at 6 months was 6.1/3.0 difference. more meds in intervention group (mean daily
dose, per WHO criteria, 3.34 vs 2.61). subgroup analysis: no diff by underlying
disease, gender, age
--no
diff in adverse events
for perspective, a few points:1. hypertension is leading risk factor for disease burden/cause of premature mortality globally; and in the US, only about 1/2 meet the guideline-suggested goal (which, is better with JNC-8 criteria, but still in the 50% range)
2.
there are evident issues with this study methodology: those in the intervention
group had more personal training and contact with health professionals;
this was a pretty particular group with very particular inclusions and
exclusions; the group was a pretty educated white middle-class group so ??
generalizability
3.
blood pressure goals have changed since this study started (are higher), so is
this useful?
BUT...
1.
there probably is a real utility in empowering patients in terms of their
health (ie, converting the traditional doctor-patient relationship from one of
the patient passively accepting the wisdom and instruction of the clinician to
one where the patient is actively involved in monitoring and fixing the
problem). and there are some old medication adherence studies from the 1970s
which found that in the group of patients who were
not taking hypertension meds regularly, giving them blood pressure
cuffs and training led to much higher levels of medication taking (my
recollection: in 2 studies, one in a workplace and one in a shopping mall, they
found patients who were not taking their meds and acknowledged it, were given BP
cuffs and instructions, and on follow-up about 30% of them had
achieved improved medication-taking and blood pressure control).
2.
in my own practice over the years (in a predominantly poor, non-English
speaking community), home blood pressure monitoring has improved blood pressure
control (i always ask the patient to bring in their cuff to make sure it is
accurate), and a few patients with more erratic blood pressure have done
exceedingly well self-titrating their medications depending on the blood pressure
readings (with my giving them clear instructions about how to do so). my guess
is that part of the benefit of this self-titration approach is that blood
pressure does vary significantly from day-to-day (related to food intake,
variability of smoking/alcohol, weather -- eg esp my older patients have lower
blood pressure on hot days when they sweat a lot, exercise, etc), and that
self-titration allows better day-to-day control (sort of similar to diabetics
who can check their blood sugar after a meal to see which foods are good
or bad for them, as well as adjust their rapid insulin based on the
result)
3.
there are relatively impressive data suggesting that home blood pressure
evaluation is more predictive of clinical events than office-based blood
pressure readings, adding another aspect validating this
home-based approach. eg, see meta-analysis (htn ambulat
bp monitor metanal bmj 2011 in dropbox, or doi:
10.1136/bmj.d3621) or the really extensive (and really good, from my
perspective) NICE recommendations (see Htn nice recs 2011 in dropbox, or https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/qs28/resources/guidance-quality-standard-for-hypertension-pdf for
a summary of recommendations, or http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22855971 for
full recommendations)
4. it
seems reasonable to assume that the above technique would apply equally well to
the higher BP goals we currently accept.
Comments
Post a Comment
if you would like to receive the near-daily emails regularly, please email me at gmodest@uphams.org