Home versus office blood pressure MEasurements: reduction of unnecessary treatment study: rationale and study design of the HOMERUS trial
Open accessAbstract
The Home versus Office MEasurements, Reduction of Unnecessary treatment Study (HOMERUS) is a multicentre prospective study, primarily designed to examine in subjects with mild to moderate hypertension whether treatment decisions based on home blood pressure measurements can lead to reduction in the use of antihypertensive drugs and the associated costs, compared to office blood pressure measurements. After inclusion, 360 patients are randomized to two groups. In one group, antihypertensive therapy is based on blood pressure measured in the outpatient clinic: the office pressure (OP) group. In the other group, antihypertensive therapy is based on home blood pressure measurements: the self-pressure (SP) group. All readings, both in OP and in SP, are obtained with the same validated oscillometric device, the Omron 705 CP. Treatment decisions are taken by an independent physician at the coordinating centre, who is unaware whether the patient belongs to the SP or OP group. Following a standardized treatment schedule, blood pressure is targeted at 120-139 mmHg for systolic and 80-89 mmHg for diastolic pressure. Patients are followed for 1 year. At the start and at the end of the study, ambulatory blood pressure measurements are obtained as a reference. Microalbuminuria and echocardiography are assessed to evaluate the possible development of target organ damage. It is expected that, at the end of the trial, patients in both groups will have the same blood pressure, at the expense of more medication in the OP group. Therefore, a cost-minimization analysis will be performed first. If short-term effects appear not to be comparable for OP and SP, a cost-effectiveness analysis will be performed to assess the value of the SP strategy in comparison to standard practice. In addition, medication compliance is recorded within random subgroups of the SP and OP groups by means of Medication Event Monitoring System (MEMS) V TrackCaps.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the HOMED-BP study, no differences between more (<125/<80 mmHg) and less stringent (125-134/80-84 mmHg) HBP control groups in terms of cardiovascular events were observed, with achieved BP very similar in both groups.
“In the HOMED-BP study, participants were randomized to more (<125/<80 mmHg) or less stringent HBP control (125–134/80–84 mmHg). No differences between the groups in terms of cardiovascular events were observed. It should be noted that the achieved BP was very similar in both goups [155]”
The THOP and HOMERUS trials were the first to examine the efficacy of antihypertensive titration using HBPM, but their results are undermined by major limitations including the same BP target for both randomization arms and differences in BP titration and blinding.
“The THOP and the HOMERUS trials were the first to examine the efficacy of antihypertensive titration using HBPM [158,159], but their results are undermined by major limitations as the same BP target for both randomization arms was considered, and differences in BP titration and blinding were maintained with the prescribing physician unaware of randomization group”
During the last two decades, HBPM has been used increasingly in clinical hypertension research.
“During the last two decades, HBPM has been used increasingly in clinical hypertension research [17,155,267–273].”
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 36 · Cited by 32
- Authors
- Verberk, W. J., Kroon, A. A., Kessels, A. G. H., Dirksen, C., Nelemans, P. J., Lenders, J. W. M., Thien, T. A. B. M., van Montfrans, G. A., Smit, A. J., & de Leeuw, P. W.
- Affiliations
- Maastricht University (NL)
- Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Medical Technology Assessment, The Netherlands
- Maastricht University Medical Centre (NL)
- Radboud University Medical Center (NL)
- Department of Internal Medicine, Academic Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- University Medical Center Groningen (NL)
- Cardiovascular Research Institute Maastricht (CARIM), Maastricht University, Department of Internal Medicine, The Netherlands
- Corresponding author
- Verberk, W. J.
- ORCID
- Venue
- Blood Pressure
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2003-01
- Volume
- 12
- Issue
- 5-6
- Pages
- 326-333
- ISSN
- 0803-7051 (ISSN-L)
- 1651-1999
- OpenAlex
- W2160570666
- Cited by
- 32
- References
- 36
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 1.95
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Blood Pressure (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (publishedVersion)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
- Pure Amsterdam UMC (submittedVersion)
- Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion)
- University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Blood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiovascular Health and Disease Prevention
- Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Sodium Intake and Health
- Keywords
- home blood pressure monitoring, office blood pressure measurement, hypertension, antihypertensive therapy, cost-effectiveness, cost-minimization analysis, target organ damage, microalbuminuria, echocardiography, medication adherence
- MeSH terms
- Algorithms, Antihypertensive Agents, Blood Pressure Determination, Cost Control, Decision Making, Dose-Response Relationship, Drug, Female, Home Care Services, Humans, Hypertension, Male, Office Visits, Patient Compliance, Drug Monitoring
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