ArticleAmerican journal of hypertension2026
Implementation of a Self-Measured Blood Pressure Pilot Program in an Academic Internal Medicine Practice.
Article in American journal of hypertension, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSelf-measured blood pressure (SMBP) monitoring is a proposed strategy to improve hypertension control, but few studies compare SMBP with automated office blood pressure (AOBP) measurements over time. Moreover, little is known about reimbursement for these services.
methodsWe describe a quality improvement initiative in our academic internal medicine practice. Patients received validated home blood pressure (BP) devices and were instructed to check their BP twice daily for 7 days each month. Devices transmitted readings seamlessly via a smartphone application that averaged weekly readings. Clinicians reviewed the data and adjusted therapy if indicated. We tracked changes in SMBP, AOBP, antihypertensive medications, and reimbursement.
resultsAmong 140 patients referred (mean age 57.6 years, 57.1% women, 25.7% Black), 59 completed the program. Over 6 months, the mean self-measured systolic BP decreased by 5.8 mm Hg (95% CI: -8.2 to -3.5) and the mean diastolic BP decreased by 2.8 mm Hg (95% CI: -4.2 to -1.4) and the number with BP <130/<80 mm Hg increased by 22 percentage points (P = 0.007). However, unattended AOBP showed no change in either systolic (change: 0.1 mm Hg; P = 0.98) or diastolic (change: -0.6 mm Hg; P = 0.64) readings. Reimbursement was variable and ranged from no payment to a maximum payment of $51; when paid, the average payment was $13.81.
conclusionsIn this program, SMBP decreased over time while AOBP remained similar. Reimbursement, when received, was modest. Future work should evaluate whether using SMBP as a therapeutic target reduces cardiovascular events.
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.