4.5 Article

Managing hypertension in urban underserved subjects using telemedicine-A clinical trial

Journal

AMERICAN HEART JOURNAL
Volume 165, Issue 4, Pages 615-621

Publisher

MOSBY-ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ahj.2013.01.004

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Agency for Healthcare Quality and Research

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background We evaluated an Internet-and telephone-based telemedicine system for reducing blood pressure (BP) in underserved subjects with hypertension. Methods A total of 241 patients with systolic BP >= 140 mm Hg were randomized to usual care (C; n = 121) or telemedicine (T; n = 120). The T group reported BP, heart rate, weight, steps/day, and tobacco use twice weekly. The primary outcome was BP control at 6 months. Results Average age was 59.6 years, average body mass index was 33.7 kg/m(2), 79% were female, 81% were African American, 15% were white, 53% were at or below the federal poverty level, 18% were smokers, and 32% had diabetes. Six-month follow-up was achieved in 206 subjects (C: 107, T: 99). Goal BP was achieved in 52.3% in C and 54.5% in T (P = .43). Systolic BP change (C: -13.9 mm Hg, T: -18.2; P = .118) was similar in both groups. Subjects in the T group reported BP 7.7 +/- 6.9 d/mo. Results were not affected by age, sex, ethnicity, education, or income. In nondiabetic T subjects, goal BP was achieved in 58.2% compared with 45.2% of diabetic T subjects (P = .024). Nondiabetic T subjects demonstrated a greater reduction in systolic BP (T: -19 +/- 20 mm Hg, C: -12 +/- 19 mm Hg; P = .037). No difference in BP response between C and T was noted in patients with diabetes. Conclusion In hypertensive subjects, engagement in a system of care with or without telemedicine resulted in significant BP reduction. Telemedicine for nondiabetic patients resulted in a greater reduction in systolic BP compared with usual care. Telemedicine may be a useful tool for managing hypertension particularly among nondiabetic subjects. (Am Heart J 2013;165:615-21.)

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available