ArticleJournal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.)2012
Evaluation of blood pressure measurement and agreement in an academic health sciences center.
Article in Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.), 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Optimizing observer performance of clinic blood pressure measurement: a position statement from the Lancet Commission on Hypertension Group.Journal of hypertension · 2019Guideline
- Implementing a home-based virtual hypertension programme-a pilot feasibility study.Family practice · 2023Trial
- Inter-observer reliability and anatomical landmarks for arm circumference to determine cuff size for blood pressure measurement.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2024Article
- Design of a pragmatic randomized implementation effectiveness trial testing a health system wide hypertension program for older adults.Contemporary clinical trials · 2024Article
- Low Concordance Between Blood Pressures Measured in Periodic Health Examinations and in a Workplace-Based Hypertension Management Program.Phenomics (Cham, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Blood Pressure Lowering May Decrease Cognitive Decline; But Are We Ready to Lower Blood Pressure in the Real World?Journal of clinical cardiology · 2021Article
- [Optimizing observer performance of clinic blood Pressure measurement: a position statement from the Lancet Commission on Hypertension GroupOtimização do desempenho do observador na medição clínica da pressão arterial: posicionamento do Grupo daRevista panamericana de salud publica = Pan American journal of public health · 2020Article
- Home Blood Pressure Monitoring in Cases of Clinical Uncertainty to Differentiate Appropriate Inaction From Therapeutic Inertia.Annals of family medicine · 2020Article
- Blood pressure control rates measured in specialty vs primary care practices within a large integrated health system.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2018Article
- Pharmacist-physician collaborative care model and time to goal blood pressure in the uninsured population.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2018Article
- Clinical Implications of Different Blood Pressure Measurement Techniques.Current hypertension reports · 2017Review
- Blood Pressure Measurement Training Program and Adherence of Public Health Nurses to BP Measurement Guidelines.Acta medica Philippina · 2017Article
- The role of the unusual threonine string in the conversion of prion protein.Scientific reports · 2016Article
- Orthostatic Circulatory Disorders: From Nosology to Nuts and Bolts.American journal of hypertension · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The authors assessed the process of blood pressure (BP) measurement and level of adherence to recommended procedures at representative sites throughout a large academic health sciences center. A casual observer assessed the setting and observed the process, noting the equipment, technique, and BP recorded by site personnel. A trained observer then repeated the patient's BP measurement following American Heart Association recommendations. Significant biases were observed between measurements by site personnel and the trained observer. Site personnel reported on average an increased systolic BP (SBP) of 5.66 mm Hg (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.09-8.23; P<.001) and a decreased diastolic BP (DBP) of -2.96 mm Hg (95% CI, -5.05 to -0.87; P=.005). Overall, 41% of patients had a ≥10-mm Hg difference in SBP between measurements. Similarly, 54% had differences of ≥5 mm Hg in DBP between measurements. Inaccurate BP measurement and poor technique may lead to misclassification, misdiagnosis, and inappropriate medical decisions. Concordance of measured SBP between our site personnel and trained observer was less than optimal. Several areas for improvement were identified. Routine calibration and use of system-wide standardized equipment, establishment of BP measurement protocols, and periodic technique and equipment recertification can be addressed in future quality initiatives.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.