Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Cardiovascular Disorders 1/2024

Open Access 01-12-2024 | Research

A comparative trial of blood pressure monitoring in a self-care kiosk, in office, and with ambulatory blood pressure monitoring

Authors: Gunnar Nilsson, Anna Lindam

Published in: BMC Cardiovascular Disorders | Issue 1/2024

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Automated measurement of blood pressure (BP) in designated BP kiosks have in recent years been introduced in primary care. If kiosk blood pressure (BP) monitoring provides results equivalent to in-office BP or daytime ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM), follow-up of adult patients could be managed primarily by self-checks. We therefore designed a comparative trial and evaluated the diagnostic performance of kiosk- and office-based BP (nurse- versus physician-measured) compared with daytime ABPM.

Methods

A trial of automated BP monitoring in three settings: a designated BP kiosk, by nurses and physicians in clinic, and by ABPM. The primary outcome was systolic and diastolic BP, with respective diagnostic thresholds of ≥135 mmHg and/or ≥ 85 mmHg for daytime ABPM and kiosk BP and ≥ 140 mmHg and/or ≥ 90 mmHg for office BP (nurse- and physician-measured).

Results

Compared with daytime ABPM, mean systolic kiosk BP was higher by 6.2 mmHg (95% confidence interval [CI] 3.8–8.6) and diastolic by 7.9 mmHg (95% CI 6.2–9.6; p < 0.001). Mean systolic BP taken by nurses was similar to daytime ABPM values (+ 2.0 mmHg; 95% CI − 0.2–4.2; p = 0.071), but nurse-measured diastolic values were higher, by 7.2 mmHg (95% CI 5.9–9.6; p < 0.001). Mean systolic and diastolic physician-measured BPs were higher compared with daytime ABPM (systolic, by 7.6 mmHg [95% CI 4.5–10.2] and diastolic by 5.8 mmHg [95% CI 4.1–7.6]; p < 0.001). Receiver operating characteristic curves of BP monitoring across pairs of systolic/diastolic cut-off levels among the three settings, with daytime ABPM as reference, demonstrated overall similar diagnostic performance between kiosk and nurse-measured values and over the curve performance for physician-measured BP. Accuracy with nurse-measured BP was 69.2% (95% CI 60.0–77.4%), compared with 65.8% (95% CI 56.5–74.3%) for kiosk BP.

Conclusions

In this study kiosk BP monitoring was not comparable to daytime ABPM but could be an alternative to in-office BP monitoring by trained nurses. The diagnostic performance of kiosk and nurse-measured BP monitoring was similar and better than that of physician-measured BP.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04488289) 27/07/2020.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
2.
go back to reference Forouzanfar MH, Liu P, Roth GA, Ng M, Biryukov S, Marczak L, et al. Global burden of hypertension and systolic blood pressure of at least 110 to 115 mm hg, 1990-2015. JAMA. 2017;317:165–82.CrossRefPubMed Forouzanfar MH, Liu P, Roth GA, Ng M, Biryukov S, Marczak L, et al. Global burden of hypertension and systolic blood pressure of at least 110 to 115 mm hg, 1990-2015. JAMA. 2017;317:165–82.CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference NCD Risk Factor Collaboration (NCD-RisC). Worldwide trends in blood pressure from 1975 to 2015: a pooled analysis of 1479 population-based measurement studies with 19·1 million participants. Lancet. 2017;389:37–55. Erratum in: Lancet. 2020;396:886CrossRef NCD Risk Factor Collaboration (NCD-RisC). Worldwide trends in blood pressure from 1975 to 2015: a pooled analysis of 1479 population-based measurement studies with 19·1 million participants. Lancet. 2017;389:37–55. Erratum in: Lancet. 2020;396:886CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Williams B, Mancia G, Spiering W, Agabiti Rosei E, Azizi M, Burnier M, et al. ESC scientific document group. 2018 ESC/ESH guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension. Eur Heart J. 2018;39:3021–104.CrossRefPubMed Williams B, Mancia G, Spiering W, Agabiti Rosei E, Azizi M, Burnier M, et al. ESC scientific document group. 2018 ESC/ESH guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension. Eur Heart J. 2018;39:3021–104.CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Banegas JR, López-García E, Dallongeville J, Guallar E, Halcox JP, Borghi C, et al. Achievement of treatment goals for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease in clinical practice across Europe: the EURIKA study. Eur Heart J. 2011;32:2143–52.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Banegas JR, López-García E, Dallongeville J, Guallar E, Halcox JP, Borghi C, et al. Achievement of treatment goals for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease in clinical practice across Europe: the EURIKA study. Eur Heart J. 2011;32:2143–52.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
6.
go back to reference Egan BM, Kjeldsen SE, Grassi G, Esler M, Mancia G. The global burden of hypertension exceeds 1.4 billion people: should a systolic blood pressure target below 130 become the universal standard? J Hypertens. 2019;37:1148–53.CrossRefPubMed Egan BM, Kjeldsen SE, Grassi G, Esler M, Mancia G. The global burden of hypertension exceeds 1.4 billion people: should a systolic blood pressure target below 130 become the universal standard? J Hypertens. 2019;37:1148–53.CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference SPRINT Research Group, Wright JT Jr, Williamson JD, Whelton PK, Snyder JK, Sink KM, Rocco MV, et al. A Randomized Trial of Intensive versus Standard Blood-Pressure Control. N Engl J Med. 2015;373:2103–16. Erratum in: N Engl J Med. 2017;377:2506CrossRef SPRINT Research Group, Wright JT Jr, Williamson JD, Whelton PK, Snyder JK, Sink KM, Rocco MV, et al. A Randomized Trial of Intensive versus Standard Blood-Pressure Control. N Engl J Med. 2015;373:2103–16. Erratum in: N Engl J Med. 2017;377:2506CrossRef
8.
go back to reference SPS3 Study Group, Benavente OR, Coffey CS, Conwit R, Hart RG, McClure LA, Pearce LA, et al. Blood-pressure targets in patients with recent lacunar stroke: the SPS3 randomised trial. Lancet. 2013;382:507–15. Erratum in: Lancet. 2013;382:506CrossRef SPS3 Study Group, Benavente OR, Coffey CS, Conwit R, Hart RG, McClure LA, Pearce LA, et al. Blood-pressure targets in patients with recent lacunar stroke: the SPS3 randomised trial. Lancet. 2013;382:507–15. Erratum in: Lancet. 2013;382:506CrossRef
9.
go back to reference ACCORD Study Group, Cushman WC, Evans GW, Byington RP, Goff DC Jr, Grimm RH Jr, Cutler JA, et al. Effects of intensive blood-pressure control in type 2 diabetes mellitus. N Engl J Med. 2010;362:1575–85.CrossRef ACCORD Study Group, Cushman WC, Evans GW, Byington RP, Goff DC Jr, Grimm RH Jr, Cutler JA, et al. Effects of intensive blood-pressure control in type 2 diabetes mellitus. N Engl J Med. 2010;362:1575–85.CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Hansson L, Zanchetti A, Carruthers SG, Dahlöf B, Elmfeldt D, Julius S, et al. Effects of intensive blood-pressure lowering and low-dose aspirin in patients with hypertension: principal results of the hypertension optimal treatment (HOT) randomised trial. HOT Study Group Lancet. 1998;351:1755–62. Hansson L, Zanchetti A, Carruthers SG, Dahlöf B, Elmfeldt D, Julius S, et al. Effects of intensive blood-pressure lowering and low-dose aspirin in patients with hypertension: principal results of the hypertension optimal treatment (HOT) randomised trial. HOT Study Group Lancet. 1998;351:1755–62.
11.
go back to reference O'Brien E, Parati G, Stergiou G, Asmar R, Beilin L, Bilo G, et al. European Society of Hypertension Working Group on blood pressure monitoring. European Society of Hypertension position paper on ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. J Hypertens. 2013;31:1731–68. Erratum in: J Hypertens 2013:2467CrossRefPubMed O'Brien E, Parati G, Stergiou G, Asmar R, Beilin L, Bilo G, et al. European Society of Hypertension Working Group on blood pressure monitoring. European Society of Hypertension position paper on ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. J Hypertens. 2013;31:1731–68. Erratum in: J Hypertens 2013:2467CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Parati G, Stergiou G, O'Brien E, Asmar R, Beilin L, Bilo G, et al. European Society of Hypertension Working Group on blood pressure monitoring and cardiovascular variability. European Society of Hypertension practice guidelines for ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. J Hypertens. 2014;32:1359–66.CrossRefPubMed Parati G, Stergiou G, O'Brien E, Asmar R, Beilin L, Bilo G, et al. European Society of Hypertension Working Group on blood pressure monitoring and cardiovascular variability. European Society of Hypertension practice guidelines for ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. J Hypertens. 2014;32:1359–66.CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Seidlerová J, Gelžinský J, Mateřánková M, Ceral J, König P, Filipovský J. In the aftermath of SPRINT: further comparison of unattended automated office blood pressure measurement and 24-hour blood pressure monitoring. Blood Press. 2018;27:256–61.CrossRefPubMed Seidlerová J, Gelžinský J, Mateřánková M, Ceral J, König P, Filipovský J. In the aftermath of SPRINT: further comparison of unattended automated office blood pressure measurement and 24-hour blood pressure monitoring. Blood Press. 2018;27:256–61.CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Seidlerová J, Ceral J, Mateřánková M, König P, Řiháček I, Vysočanová P, et al. Long-term relationship between unattended automated blood pressure and auscultatory BP measurements in hypertensive patients. Blood Press. 2019;28:34–9.CrossRefPubMed Seidlerová J, Ceral J, Mateřánková M, König P, Řiháček I, Vysočanová P, et al. Long-term relationship between unattended automated blood pressure and auscultatory BP measurements in hypertensive patients. Blood Press. 2019;28:34–9.CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Filipovský J, Seidlerová J, Kratochvíl Z, Karnosová P, Hronová M, Mayer O Jr. Automated compared to manual office blood pressure and to home blood pressure in hypertensive patients. Blood Press. 2016;25:228–34.CrossRefPubMed Filipovský J, Seidlerová J, Kratochvíl Z, Karnosová P, Hronová M, Mayer O Jr. Automated compared to manual office blood pressure and to home blood pressure in hypertensive patients. Blood Press. 2016;25:228–34.CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Green BB, Anderson ML, Campbell J, Cook AJ, Ehrlich K, Evers S, et al. Blood pressure checks and diagnosing hypertension (BP-CHECK): design and methods of a randomized controlled diagnostic study comparing clinic, home, kiosk, and 24-hour ambulatory BP monitoring. Contemp Clin Trials. 2019;79:1–13.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Green BB, Anderson ML, Campbell J, Cook AJ, Ehrlich K, Evers S, et al. Blood pressure checks and diagnosing hypertension (BP-CHECK): design and methods of a randomized controlled diagnostic study comparing clinic, home, kiosk, and 24-hour ambulatory BP monitoring. Contemp Clin Trials. 2019;79:1–13.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
17.
go back to reference Green BB, Anderson ML, Cook AJ, Ehrlich K, Hall YN, Hsu C, et al. Clinic, home, and kiosk blood pressure measurements for diagnosing hypertension: a randomized diagnostic study. J Gen Intern Med. 2022;37:2948–56.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Green BB, Anderson ML, Cook AJ, Ehrlich K, Hall YN, Hsu C, et al. Clinic, home, and kiosk blood pressure measurements for diagnosing hypertension: a randomized diagnostic study. J Gen Intern Med. 2022;37:2948–56.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
18.
go back to reference Kjeldsen SE, Lund-Johansen P, Nilsson PM, Mancia G. Unattended blood pressure measurements in the systolic blood pressure intervention trial: implications for entry and achieved blood pressure values compared with other trials. Hypertension. 2016;67:808–12.CrossRefPubMed Kjeldsen SE, Lund-Johansen P, Nilsson PM, Mancia G. Unattended blood pressure measurements in the systolic blood pressure intervention trial: implications for entry and achieved blood pressure values compared with other trials. Hypertension. 2016;67:808–12.CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Andreadis EA, Geladari CV, Angelopoulos ET, Savva FS, Georgantoni AI, Papademetriou V. Attended and unattended automated office blood pressure measurements have better agreement with ambulatory monitoring than conventional office readings. J Am Heart Assoc. 2018;7:e008994.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Andreadis EA, Geladari CV, Angelopoulos ET, Savva FS, Georgantoni AI, Papademetriou V. Attended and unattended automated office blood pressure measurements have better agreement with ambulatory monitoring than conventional office readings. J Am Heart Assoc. 2018;7:e008994.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
22.
23.
go back to reference Al Hamarneh YN, Houle SK, Chatterley P, Tsuyuki RT. The validity of blood pressure kiosk validation studies: a systematic review. Blood Press Monit. 2013;18:167–72.CrossRefPubMed Al Hamarneh YN, Houle SK, Chatterley P, Tsuyuki RT. The validity of blood pressure kiosk validation studies: a systematic review. Blood Press Monit. 2013;18:167–72.CrossRefPubMed
24.
go back to reference Alpert BS, Dart RA, Sica DA. Public-use blood pressure measurement: the kiosk quandary. J Am Soc Hypertens. 2014;8:739–42.CrossRefPubMed Alpert BS, Dart RA, Sica DA. Public-use blood pressure measurement: the kiosk quandary. J Am Soc Hypertens. 2014;8:739–42.CrossRefPubMed
25.
go back to reference Padwal RS, Townsend RR, Trudeau L, Hamilton PG, Gelfer M. Comparison of an in-pharmacy automated blood pressure kiosk to daytime ambulatory blood pressure in hypertensive subjects. J Am Soc Hypertens. 2015;9:123–9.CrossRefPubMed Padwal RS, Townsend RR, Trudeau L, Hamilton PG, Gelfer M. Comparison of an in-pharmacy automated blood pressure kiosk to daytime ambulatory blood pressure in hypertensive subjects. J Am Soc Hypertens. 2015;9:123–9.CrossRefPubMed
26.
go back to reference Bager JE, Mourtzinis G, Andersson T, Nåtman J, Rosengren A, Björck S, et al. Trends in blood pressure, blood lipids, and smoking from 259 753 patients with hypertension in a Swedish primary care register: results from QregPV. Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2022;29:158–66.CrossRefPubMed Bager JE, Mourtzinis G, Andersson T, Nåtman J, Rosengren A, Björck S, et al. Trends in blood pressure, blood lipids, and smoking from 259 753 patients with hypertension in a Swedish primary care register: results from QregPV. Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2022;29:158–66.CrossRefPubMed
27.
go back to reference Cohen DL, Townsend RR. Blood pressure readings using public kiosks or smart phone apps: caveat emptor (for now). J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2017;19:946–7.CrossRefPubMed Cohen DL, Townsend RR. Blood pressure readings using public kiosks or smart phone apps: caveat emptor (for now). J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2017;19:946–7.CrossRefPubMed
28.
go back to reference GBD 2017 Risk Factor Collaborators. Global, regional, and national comparative risk assessment of 84 behavioural, environmental and occupational, and metabolic risks or clusters of risks for 195 countries and territories, 1990–2017: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017. Lancet. 2018;392:1923–94. Erratum in: Lancet. 2019;393:132. Erratum in: Lancet. 2019;393:e44CrossRef GBD 2017 Risk Factor Collaborators. Global, regional, and national comparative risk assessment of 84 behavioural, environmental and occupational, and metabolic risks or clusters of risks for 195 countries and territories, 1990–2017: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017. Lancet. 2018;392:1923–94. Erratum in: Lancet. 2019;393:132. Erratum in: Lancet. 2019;393:e44CrossRef
Metadata
Title
A comparative trial of blood pressure monitoring in a self-care kiosk, in office, and with ambulatory blood pressure monitoring
Authors
Gunnar Nilsson
Anna Lindam
Publication date
01-12-2024
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Cardiovascular Disorders / Issue 1/2024
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2261
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12872-023-03701-1

Other articles of this Issue 1/2024

BMC Cardiovascular Disorders 1/2024 Go to the issue