Cited by 154Blood Pressure and Hypertension StudiesTelemedicine and Telehealth ImplementationMobile Health and mHealth Applications

Effectiveness of home blood pressure telemonitoring: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled studies

Duan, Y, Xie, Z, Dong, F, Wu, Z, Lin, Z, Sun, N, Xu, J·2017·Journal of Human Hypertension

Abstract

To summarise evidence about the effectiveness of home blood pressure telemonitoring (HBPT) and identify the key components of intervention. We comprehensively searched PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library for relevant studies. The authors were contacted for additional information. Two authors independently extracted the data and assessed the risk of bias. 46 randomised controlled trials including a total of 13 875 cases were identified. Compared with usual care, HBPT improved office systolic blood pressure (BP) and diastolic BP by 3.99 mm Hg (95% confidence interval (CI): 5.06-2.93; P<0.001) and 1.99 mm Hg (95% CI: -2.60 to -1.39; P<0.001), respectively. A larger proportion of patients achieved BP normalisation in the intervention group (relative risk (RR): 1.16; 95% CI: 1.08-1.25; P<0.001). For HBPT plus additional support (including counselling, education, behavioural management, medication management with decision, adherence contracts and so on) versus HBPT alone (or plus less intense additional support), the mean changes in systolic and diastolic BP were 2.44 mm Hg (95% Cl, 4.88 to 0.00 mm Hg; P=0.05) and 1.12 mm Hg (95% CI, -2.34 to 0.1 mm Hg; P=0.07), respectively. For those surrogate outcomes, low-strength evidence failed to show difference. In subgroup analysis, high strength evidence supported a lower BP with HBPT that lasted for 6 or 12 months and was accompanied with counselling support from study personnel. HBPT can improve BP control in the hypertensive patients. It may be more efficacious when a proactive additional support is provided during the intervention process.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/jhh.2016.99

Cites

60 of 60 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Duan, Y., Xie, Z., Dong, F., Wu, Z., Lin, Z., Sun, N., & Xu, J.
Affiliations
  • General Hospital of Guangzhou Military Command (CN)
  • Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine (CN)
  • Guangdong Pharmaceutical University (CN)
Corresponding author
Xie, Z
Venue
Journal of Human Hypertension
Published
2017-03-23
Volume
31
Issue
7
Pages
427-437
ISSN
  • 0950-9240 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-5527
OpenAlex
W2600945132
Cited by
154
References
60
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 24 · 2021: 27 · 2020: 24 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 6
FWCI
1.74
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Human Hypertension (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Blood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
Keywords
home blood pressure telemonitoring, hypertension, blood pressure control, systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, additional support, counseling, medication adherence, behavior management
MeSH terms
Blood Pressure, Humans, Hypertension, Telemetry, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Blood Pressure Monitoring, Ambulatory

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review