Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41248137›Full record

ArticlePloS one2025

Comparison of patients' acceptance of cuff-based vs wearable 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring devices: A multi-method study.

Ariffin Kawaja, Aminath Shiwaza Moosa, Eric Kam Pui Lee, Ian Kwong Yun Phoon, Andrew Teck Wee Ang, Zi Ying Chang, Aileen Chelsea Ai'En Lim, Jonathan Yap, Weiting Huang, Ding Xuan Ng and 3 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07790978 (Real-World Validation for Less-Disturbing Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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.

NCT07790978 not yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

Real-World Validation for Less-Disturbing Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring (ABPM) in Malaysia Using Huawei Wearables

Typeobservational_patient_registrySponsorSunway UniversityRan2026 to 2028Enrolled500ConditionsHypertension
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

13 authors.

Ariffin KawajaSingHealth Polyclinics, Singapore, Singapore.
Aminath Shiwaza MoosaSingHealth Polyclinics, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1239-8215
Eric Kam Pui LeeJockey Club School of Public Health and Primary Care, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, HKSAR, China.
Ian Kwong Yun PhoonSingHealth Polyclinics, Singapore, Singapore.
Andrew Teck Wee AngSingHealth Polyclinics, Singapore, Singapore.
Zi Ying ChangSingHealth Polyclinics, Singapore, Singapore.
Aileen Chelsea Ai'En LimSingHealth Polyclinics, Singapore, Singapore.
Jonathan YapNational Heart Centre Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Weiting HuangNational Heart Centre Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Ding Xuan NgSingHealth Polyclinics, Singapore, Singapore.
Melvin Yuansheng SngMinistry of Health Holdings (Singapore) Private Limited, Singapore, Singapore.
Hao Yuan LohMinistry of Health Holdings (Singapore) Private Limited, Singapore, Singapore.
Chirk Jenn NgSingHealth Polyclinics, Singapore, Singapore.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionRecent hypertension guidelines recommend ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) for accurate diagnosis and monitoring. However, patients' experiences with cuff and wearable ABPM devices in primary care remain unclear. This study compared the acceptance of three devices (oscillometry cuff, tonometry wrist, and photoplethysmography chest devices) among patients with hypertension in primary care.

methodsA multi-method study was conducted. Thirty-five participants with hypertension were recruited from two public primary care clinics in Singapore. All participants used cuff-based and either wrist or chest wearable devices for 24 hours. Structured surveys and in-depth audio-recorded interviews were used to gather feedback on their views, experiences, and challenges using the devices. The interviews were thematically analysed, and the surveys were analysed using descriptive statistics.

resultsAll participants used the cuff (n = 35) device, while the wrist and chest devices were used by two-thirds (n = 22) and a third (n = 11) of the participants, respectively. The device usability questionnaire found that most participants were satisfied with the chest device, which did not disrupt their daily activities. Conversely, cuff arm devices interfered with daily activities (48%) and sleep (26%), were cumbersome (32%), and caused embarrassment (26%). The wrist device was uncomfortable (33%) and painful (22%) for some participants. The qualitative data were categorised into five themes: comfort, convenience, perceived accuracy, and impact on routine and sleep. Participants found the chest device more comfortable and convenient than the cuff and wrist devices. The cuff device was perceived as the most accurate due to its inflation-based BP measurement. All devices minimally affected routines and sleep, though participants expressed safety concerns about the cuff device, particularly while driving.

conclusionWhile wearable ABPM devices offer increased comfort, convenience and reduced impact on patient's daily activities, concerns regarding their accuracy must be addressed before the widespread adoption of these devices in routine clinical practice.

Indexed as

Blood Pressure Monitoring, AmbulatoryHypertensionPatient Acceptance of Health CareWearable Electronic DevicesAdultAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient SatisfactionSingaporeSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID41248137
PMCPMC12622775

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.