ArticleBMC primary care2026
Feasibility and acceptability of using ABPM to manage hypertension in primary care: a qualitative study.
Article in BMC primary care, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Pharmacist-Led Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring in Community Pharmacy: An Operational Feasibility Case Series.Turkish journal of pharmaceutical sciences · 2026Article
- Renin-to-Aldosterone Ratio Is Associated with Ambulatory Blood Pressure Levels and Control in Treated Hypertensive Patients with Overweight or Obesity.Obesity facts · 2026Article
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
introductionAmbulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring (ABPM) offers advantages over conventional methods in hypertension diagnosis and monitoring; however, it is underutilised in primary care. This study explores the feasibility and acceptability of ABPM among primary care providers (PCPs) in Singapore.
methodsThe study used a qualitative research design. Between August 2022 to January 2024, eleven primary care physicians (PCPs) from two public primary care clinics in the Eastern region of Singapore were interviewed using a semi-structured topic guide through focus group discussions and in-depth interviews. The audio-recorded interviews were transcribed verbatim before thematic analysis.
resultsThree main themes emerged: utility of ABPM, challenges to implementing ABPM, and utility and usability of the ABPM reports. PCPs recognised the value of ABPM in optimising hypertension management in primary care, particularly in addressing diagnostic dilemmas, guiding medication titration, and facilitating patient counselling. They also emphasised the importance of a user-friendly ABPM report to support clinical decision-making. However, implementation challenges were identified, including challenges in explaining ABPM to patients due to limited time and resources, unfamiliarity with its workflow and uncertainty in follow-up action for ABPM reported hypertension phenotypes. Additionally, some PCPs stressed that ABPM should be applied selectively and is not appropriate for all patients with hypertension.
conclusionWhile PCPs recognised the benefits of ABPM for accurate hypertension diagnosis and clinical decision-making, significant barriers remain. Addressing concerns about limited time, resources, and workflow integration is crucial for the broader adoption of ABPM in primary care settings. While user-friendly reports are preferred, careful attention to their design and presentation is essential.
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.