Cited by 45Mobile Health and mHealth ApplicationsTelemedicine and Telehealth ImplementationBlood Pressure and Hypertension Studies

Using mHealth for the management of hypertension in UK primary care: an embedded qualitative study of the TASMINH4 randomised controlled trial

Open access
Grant, Sabrina, Hodgkinson, James, Schwartz, Claire, Bradburn, Peter, Franssen, Marloes, Hobbs, FD Richard, Jowett, Sue, McManus, Richard J +1 more·2019·British Journal of General Practice

Abstract

Background: Self-monitoring of blood pressure is common but how telemonitoring with a mobile healthcare (mHealth) solution in the management of hypertension can be implemented by patients and healthcare professionals (HCPs) is currently unclear. Aim: Evaluation of facilitators and barriers to self- and telemonitoring interventions for hypertension within the Telemonitoring and Self-monitoring in Hypertension (TASMINH4) trial. Design and setting: An embedded process evaluation of the TASMINH4 randomised controlled trial (RCT), in the West Midlands, in UK primary care, conducted between March 2015 and September 2016. Method: A total of 40 participants comprising 23 patients were randomised to one of two arms: mHealth (self-monitoring by free text/short message service [SMS]) and self-monitoring without mHealth (self-monitoring using paper diaries). There were also15 healthcare professionals (HCPs) and two patient caregivers. Results: Four key implementation priority areas concerned: acceptability of self- and telemonitoring to patients and HCPs; managing data; communication; and integrating self-monitoring into hypertension management (structured care). Structured home monitoring engaged and empowered patients to self-monitor regardless of the use of mHealth, whereas telemonitoring potentially facilitated more rapid communication between HCPs and patients. Paper-based recording integrated better into current workflows but required additional staff input. Conclusion: Although telemonitoring by mHealth facilitates easier communication and convenience, the realities of current UK general practice meant that a paper-based approach to self-monitoring could be integrated into existing workflows with greater ease. Self-monitoring should be offered to all patients with hypertension. Telemonitoring appears to give additional benefits to practices over and above self-monitoring but both need to be offered to ensure generalisability.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3399/bjgp19x704585

Cites

33 of 33 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Meingast M, Roosta T, Sastry S. Security and privacy Issues ith healthcare information technology. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc 2006; 1: 5453-5458.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Grant, S., Hodgkinson, J., Schwartz, C., Bradburn, P., Franssen, M., Hobbs, F. R., Jowett, S., McManus, R. J., & Greenfield, S.
Affiliations
  • University of Bristol (GB)
  • University of Birmingham (GB)
  • University of Oxford (GB)
Venue
British Journal of General Practice
Published
2019-07-01
Volume
69
Issue
686
Pages
e612-e620
ISSN
  • 0960-1643 (ISSN-L)
  • 1478-5242
OpenAlex
W2944864139
Cited by
45
References
33
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 1
FWCI
6.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • British Journal of General Practice (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • University of Birmingham Research Portal (University of Birmingham) (acceptedVersion, other-oa)
  • Worcester Research and Publications (University of Worcester) (acceptedVersion)
  • Explore Bristol Research (acceptedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR‐RP‐R2‐12‐015, NIHR200201, NF-SI-0611-10273, NIHR-RP-02-12-015, 12/01/52, IS-SPC-0514-10043, RP-PG-1209-10051)
  • Department of Health and Social Care
  • NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre
  • NIHR School for Primary Care Research
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Blood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
Keywords
hypertension, mobile health, remote patient monitoring, self-measured blood pressure, primary care, implementation barriers and facilitators, patient acceptability, healthcare professional-patient communication, structured care
MeSH terms
Antihypertensive Agents, Attitude of Health Personnel, Blood Pressure Determination, Female, United Kingdom, Humans, Hypertension, Male, Patient Acceptance of Health Care, Primary Health Care, Self Care, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Telemedicine, Qualitative Research, Text Messaging

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