134
Clinical methods and pathophysiology
Making ambulatory blood pressure monitoring accessible in pharmacies Kirstyn Jamesa, Eamon Dolana and Eoin O’Brienb Objectives Ambulatory blood pressure measurement (ABPM), although recommended for the diagnosis and management of hypertension, has limited availability. The objective of this study was to show that if the characteristics of patients attending pharmacies for ABPM are similar to those attending primary care, the technique can be made more widely available to patients through pharmacies.
prevalent in men attending pharmacies (22.0 vs. 17.4%) and in women attending primary care (21.9 vs. 19.7%). There were more dippers in pharmacy then primary care ABPMs (84.7 vs. 79.4%). A preference for having ABPM on Fridays and Saturdays was evident in patients attending pharmacies (19.6 vs. 6.6%), whereas there was a preference for early morning recording in primary care (4.1 vs. 1.1%).
Patients and methods A comparative study using a software program that allowed central collection, analysis and comparison of ABPM data from patients attending primary care and pharmacies for assessment of hypertension in Ireland.
Conclusion This study, which is the first to report on ABPM data from the pharmacy setting, shows that the blood pressure characteristics of patients with ABPMs recorded in pharmacies are similar to those recorded in primary care practices. It is feasible, therefore, to perform ABPM in pharmacies, which can be utilized to make ABPM more accessible to the large number of patients in the population with hypertension. Blood Press c 2014 Wolters Kluwer Health | Monit 19:134–139 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
Results ABPM data from 46 978 patients attending primary care were compared with 1698 attending pharmacies between 2007 and 2013. The age, sex and blood pressure characteristics of patients attending primary care and pharmacies were similar. The mean pressures in all categories, except for systolic blood pressure recorded in primary care, were higher in men. The first ABPM measurements recorded in pharmacies were slightly higher than those in primary care (150.8±19.5/88.7±13.7 vs. 149.6±20.7/88.0±14.4 mmHg). More patients attending primary care were normotensive than those attending pharmacies (19.5 vs. 16.4%), whereas more patients attending pharmacies were hypertensive than those attending primary care (62.8 vs. 60.7%), particularly female patients (61.0 vs. 56.4%). White-coat hypertension was similar in patients attending primary care and pharmacies (19.8 vs. 20.8%), but it was more
Introduction The global prevalence of hypertension in adults aged 25 years and older in 2008 was around 40% [1]. Complications of hypertension are associated with an estimated 9.4 million deaths worldwide every year [2]. Hypertension, which affects B50 million individuals in the USA, is the most common primary diagnosis in America, with an estimated 35 million office visits to primary care physicians [3]. In the UK, B12% of primary care consultations are for hypertension and B£1 billion is spent on blood pressure (BP)-lowering drugs annually [4]. Because of the superiority of ambulatory blood pressure measurement (ABPM) over both clinic BP measurement and home BP measurement, the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) in the UK has recommended that any individual who has had an elevated BP with c 2014 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 1359-5237
Blood Pressure Monitoring 2014, 19:134–139 Keywords: ambulatory blood pressure measurement, pharmacy, primary care a Department of Geriatric Medicine, Royal College of Surgeons, Connolly Memorial Hospital, Blanchardstown and bConway Institute of Biomolecular Research, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
Correspondence to Eoin O’Brien, MSc, FRCP, MD, Conway Institute of Biomolecular Research, University College Dublin, Dublin 4, Ireland Tel: + 353 1 2803865; fax: + 353 1 2803688; e-mail: [email protected] Received 12 September 2013 Revised 16 January 2014 Accepted 30 January 2014
conventional measurement should be offered ABPM to confirm the presence or absence of sustained hypertension [4]. The recently published Position Paper on ABPM from the European Society of Hypertension also advocates wider availability of ABPM [5]. NICE has shown that ABPM is more cost-effective than either conventional BP or selfmeasurement of BP [4,6]. If ABPM was widely available, the diagnosis and treatment of hypertension would be improved. Failure to identify white-coat hypertension can lead to inappropriate treatment in normotensive patients and similarly, hypertensive individuals who show a white-coat effect may receive inappropriate dose titrations or additional antihypertensive agents. Identification of patients with white-coat hypertension would result, therefore, in large financial savings because of reduced prescribing of drugs [4]. DOI: 10.1097/MBP.0000000000000034
Copyright © Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in pharmacies James et al. 135
Although recommendations for ABPM may be scientifically and fiscally sound, in reality, the technique is not available in primary care, hospital or specialist clinics in sufficient quantity to provide ABPM to all patients with hypertension. It is important, therefore, to examine ways of making ABPM more widely accessible to a substantial proportion of the adult population. The dabl primary care module, which has been in use in primary care in Ireland for many years, has been modified for use in pharmacies. In this paper, the ABPM data from individuals having ABPM performed in pharmacies are compared with the ABPM data from primary care. To our knowledge, this is the first report of ABPM data from patients attending pharmacies.
Patients and methods Primary care patients
Patients referred for ABPM in because of an elevated office whose data were hosted on the Dublin, Ireland), were used to from pharmacies.
primary care practices BP measurement, and dabl system (dabl Ltd, compare with the data
Pharmacy patients
ABPM recordings, performed in pharmacies in a number of towns in Ireland in patients who had hypertension, or who suspected they might have hypertension, and whose data were hosted on the dabl system, were analysed. The treatment status of patients in both primary care and pharmacies was unknown. Ambulatory blood pressure measurement
ABPM was measured with either the SpaceLabs 90207 (Spacelabs Healthcare, Snoqualmie, Wisconsin, USA) or the Meditech ABPM-04 [PMS (Instrument) Ltd, Maidenhead, Berkshire, UK], both of which have been validated according to internationally accepted standards [7,8]. Daytime was defined as 9 a.m–9 p.m. and night-time from 1 a.m. to 6 a.m. [9]. Measurements were recorded at 30-min intervals over the full 24 h. The monitor was initialized by the pharmacist or primary care user by connecting it to a computer and following a simple set of instructions. When the 24-h recording was completed, the patient returned with the monitor, which was connected to a computer that loaded the data to the dabl system for central hosting and analysis. The results were then transmitted to the pharmacy or primary care computer for immediate printing. Ambulatory blood pressure measurement program
The dabl software program for primary care has been described previously [10,11]. This system provides a succinct one-page report with standardized presentation, summary statistics, including maximum BP in the whitecoat window and average BPs in the daytime and night-time windows, together with the individual BP
measurements, a plot of data and an interpretative report (which has been validated for accuracy against expert observers [12]). This software program has been modified for use in pharmacies so as to provide the same information, but with all operational options fixed to facilitate use and the need for minimal instruction. A printout of the results, with a plot and interpretative report, is given to the patient by the pharmacist. If the report is normal, the patient is instructed to bring it to the general practitioner at the next visit, but if it is abnormal, the patient is advised to arrange an early appointment. Data analysis
Data from each ABPM consisted of the first measurement, mean daytime BP, mean night-time BP, the day of the week on which it was recorded and the time of first measurement. Patients who did not have these data were excluded. Patients were classed by their mean BP as having hypertension, normotension or white-coat hypertension. Hypertension was defined as a mean daytime systolic blood pressure (SBP) of at least 135 mmHg or a mean daytime diastolic blood pressure (DBP) of at least 85 mmHg; white-coat hypertension was defined as a normal mean daytime BP with a first ABPM systolic BP measurement of at least 140 mmHg or a mean diastolic BP of at least 90 mmHg. All other individuals were defined as normotensive. The nocturnal dip was calculated as the percentage decrease in the mean BP from daytime to night-time. A patient was defined as a dipper if the percentage decrease in the mean pressure from daytime to nighttime was at least 10% for SBP or for DBP and a nondipper if this fall was not present. The days of the week, on which the ABPM was performed, were paired into Monday or Tuesday, Wednesday or Thursday, and Friday or Saturday. Eighty-eight patients, who had an ABPM performed on a Sunday, in a pharmacy, were excluded from this analysis. The time of the first measurements was classed as 07:00–08:59 (early morning), 09:00–12:59 (mid morning), 13:00–17:59 (afternoon) and 18:00–21:00 (evening). One-hundred primary care ABPMs, with times outside these periods, were excluded as it is likely that these were because of exceptional circumstances or a PC with an incorrect time. The BP classification, dipping classification, day of the week and time of day were compared for primary care and pharmacy patients and sex with crosstabs and w2, or Fisher’s exact test, analysis. The first ABPM measurement, mean daytime BP, mean night-time BP and the nocturnal dip were analysed for source and sex using analysis of variance, with Duncan post-hoc tests to compare groups along with a t-test for source comparison.
Copyright © Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
136
Blood Pressure Monitoring 2014, Vol 19 No 3
Analysis was carried out using the SPSS 10.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, Illinois, USA). Ethical approval for the study was provided by the Connolly Hospital research ethics committee (January 2012). All participants provided informed consent before taking part in the study. Data were anonymized before database extraction in accordance with data protection legislation and approved by the local ethics committee.
Results Baseline characteristics
A total of 46 978 ABPMs recorded in the primary care and 1698 ABPMs recorded in pharmacies between 2007 and 2013 were available for analysis. Fifty-three percent of all patients were women, and the mean age was 57.9 years, with the pharmacy patients being slightly younger than those in primary care. Baseline characteristics for the first ABPM measurement, for pressures in the daytime window (09:00–21:00), the night-time window (01:00–06:00) and for the nocturnal dip are shown in Table 1. Mean pressures in all categories, except for SBP recorded in primary care, were higher in men. There were no
Table 1
Blood pressure comparisons Mean (mmHg)
First measurement SBP Primary care Female Male Total Pharmacy Female Male Total DBP Primary care Female Male Total Pharmacy Female Male Total Daytime mean SBP Primary care Female Male Total Pharmacy Female Male Total DBP Primary care Female Male Total Pharmacy Female Male Total
SD (mmHg)
n
149.3 150.0 149.6
21.4 19.8 20.7
24 915 22 063 46 978
149.3 152.5 150.8
19.6 19.2 19.5
898 800 1698
86.5 89.7 88.0
14.2 14.4 14.4
24 915 22 063 46 978
86.5 91.3 88.7
13.4 13.7 13.7
898 800 1698
136.4 139.1 137.7
15.4 15.0 15.3
24 915 22 063 46 978
137.1 139.7 138.3
13.8 15.3 14.6
898 800 1698
78.3 82.2 80.2
10.8 11.2 11.2
24 915 22 063 46 978
78.4 82.9 80.5
10.6 12.0 11.5
898 800 1698
Significant t-test
Table 1 (continued)
Night-time mean SBP Primary care Female Male Total Pharmacy Female Male Total DBP Primary care Female Male Total Pharmacy Female Male Total % Dip SBP Primary care Female Male Total Pharmacy Female Male Total DBP Primary care Female Male Total Pharmacy Female Male Total
Mean (mmHg)
SD (mmHg)
n
119.5 121.6 120.5
17.4 16.5 17.0
24 915 22 063 46 978
119.0 121.6 120.2
15.3 16.3 15.8
898 800 1698
64.9 68.9 66.8
10.3 10.9 10.8
24 915 22 063 46 978
64.8 69.3 66.9
9.7 11.7 10.9
898 800 1698
12.3 12.4 12.3
9.5 9.3 9.4
24 915 22 063 46 978
13.1 12.9 13.0
7.5 7.4 7.4
898 800 1698
16.8 15.7 16.3
10.5 10.8 10.7
24 915 22 063 46 978
16.9 16.1 16.6
8.5 9.1 8.8
898 800 1698
Significant t-test
NS
NS
**
NS
*
Significant t-test: for primary care vs. pharmacy. DBP, diastolic blood pressure; SBP, systolic blood pressure. NS, not significantly different at P < 0.05. *P < 0.05. **P < 0.0005.
*
differences between the sources of the ABPM, except for the first measurement, where slightly higher values in the pharmacy ABPM (150.8±19.5/88.7±13.7 vs. 149.6± 20.7/88.0±14.4 mmHg for primary care) reached statistical significance because of the number of patients.
NS
NS
Ambulatory blood pressure measurement profiles
ABPM profiles for both the primary care and pharmacy patients are shown in Table 2. 19.4% of patients had normotension and 19.8% of patients had ambulatory white-coat hypertension. More patients were classed as hypertensive in the pharmacy group than in primary care (61.0 vs. 56.4%), particularly female patients (61.0 vs. 56.4%). White-coat hypertension was more prevalent in men attending pharmacies than in primary care (22.0 vs. 17.4%) and in women attending primary care than in pharmacies (21.9 vs. 19.7%). There were more dippers in pharmacy ABPM than in primary care (84.7 vs. 79.4%).
Copyright © Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in pharmacies James et al. 137
Table 2
Blood pressure classification Count row%
WCH on the basis of first measurement Source General practice Female Male Total Pharmacy Female Male Total Total 2 w Source and sex Source
Hypertensiona
Normalb
WCHc
Total
14 046 (56.4%) 14 466 (65.6%) 28 512 (60.7%)
5415 (21.7%) 3761 (17.0%) 9176 (19.5%)
5454 (21.9%) 3836 (17.4%) 9290 (19.8%)
24 915 22 063 46 978
548 518 1066 29 578
173 106 279 9455
177 176 353 9643
898 800 1698 48 676
(61.0%) (64.8%) (62.8%) (60.8%)
(19.3%) (13.3%) (16.4%) (19.4%)
(19.7%) (22.0%) (20.8%) (19.8%)
P < 0.0005 P < 0.006
BP, blood pressure; DBP, diastolic blood pressure; SBP, systolic blood pressure; WCH, white-coat hypertension. Daytime mean BP: SBP Z 135 mmHg or DBP Z 85 mmHg. b Daytime mean BP: SBP < 135 mmHg and DBP < 85 mmHg. First measurement: SBP r 140 mmHg and DBP r 90 mmHg. c Daytime mean BP: SBP < 135 mmHg and DBP < 85 mmHg. First measurement: SBP > 140 mmHg or DBP > 90 mmHg. a
Table 3
Day of week Count row%
Day of the week Source Primary care Female Male Total Pharmacy Female Male Total Total 88 on Sundays 2 w Source and sex Source
Monday, Tuesday
Wednesday, Thursday
Friday, Saturday
Total
12 115 (48.7%) 10 271 (46.6%) 22 386 (47.7%)
11 247 (45.2%) 10 191 (46.3%) 21 438 (45.7%)
1517 (6.1%) 1567 (7.1%) 3084 (6.6%)
24 879 22 029 46 908
353 316 669 23 055
354 328 682 22 120
183 146 329 3413
890 790 1680 48 588
(39.7%) (40.0%) (39.8%) (47.4%)
Timing of ambulatory blood pressure measurement
The availability of ABPM differed between primary care and pharmacy (Tables 3 and 4). A preference for having ABPM on Fridays and Saturdays was evident in pharmacies (19.6 vs. 6.6% for primary care), whereas there was a preference for early morning recording in primary care (4.1 vs. 1.1% for pharmacy).
Discussion To the best of our knowledge, this study is the first of its kind to report on ABPM data collected in pharmacies. There is worldwide agreement that ABPM is indicated for the exclusion or confirmation of suspected white-coat hypertension [5,13]. The NICE guideline published in 2011 has generated considerable comment for recommending ABPM in anyone suspected of having hypertension. What makes the NICE guideline different from other international guidelines is that for the first time, it is stated unequivocally that ABPM should be offered to anyone suspected of having hypertension by virtue of having had an elevated conventional BP measurement [4]. NICE has estimated that the use of ABPM could save the NHS around £10 million (h12.6
(39.8%) (41.5%) (40.6%) (45.5%)
(20.6%) (18.5%) (19.6%) (7.0%)
P < 0.0005 P < 0.0005
million) after 5 years by reducing the number of consultations and by detecting white-coat hypertension, so that drugs are only prescribed to those patients with sustained hypertension. If primary care practices were to provide ABPM, it is estimated that the initial cost would be around £1016 (h1280) to purchase devices with a further investment of around £380 (h479) a year per device for upkeep [4]. With increasing longevity, the prevalence of hypertension is growing and there is a need to provide ABPM for large numbers of individuals in all countries across the world [5]. It is evident that the demand for ABPM cannot be provided solely in primary care and alternative ways for providing patients with the technique must be explored. The results of this study show that it is feasible for patients with hypertension to attend a local pharmacy for ABPM and that these patients are very similar to those attending a primary care practice for the investigation [14]. Pharmacists are being increasingly recognized as playing an important role in healthcare delivery and particularly in
Copyright © Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
138
Blood Pressure Monitoring 2014, Vol 19 No 3
Table 4
Time of day Count row%
Time of day Source Primary care Female Male Total Pharmacy Female Male Total Total (100 outside times listed) 2 w Source and sex Source
07:00–08:59
09:00–12:59
13:00–17:59
18:00–21:00
Total
850 (3.4%) 1064 (4.8%) 1914 (4.1%)
19 339 (77.8%) 17 173 (78.0%) 36 512 (77.9%)
4580 (18.4%) 3677 (16.7%) 8257 (17.6%)
94 (0.4%) 110 (0.5%) 204 (0.4%)
24 863 22 024 46 887
10 9 19 1933
495 516 1011 37 523
340 219 559 8816
48 52 100 304
893 796 1689 48 576
(1.1%) (1.1%) (1.1%) (4.0%)
improving BP control. The movement to involve pharmacists in the management of hypertension is particularly strong in the USA [15–20], with, for example, a suggestion that the country’s 300 000 pharmacists should become a collaborative force in healthcare delivery [21]. Our study shows that BP levels in pharmacies overall follow an expected pattern, with those for men being generally higher than women. However, there were no consistent differences between ABPM recorded in pharmacies and in primary care. Similarly, the incidences of white-coat hypertension and nocturnal dipping were broadly similar. The large sample sizes meant that small differences reach statistical significance. The main differences between the two settings were in the availability of ABPM in a local and convenient pharmacy rather than having to attend a general practitioner or specialist clinic. In particular, the availability of having ABPMs on Fridays and Saturdays in pharmacies was popular as most GPs do not provide this facility simply because ABPM initiated on Fridays must be removed on Saturdays when primary care practices are closed. The opening times of pharmacies, especially availability on Saturdays, was popular with patients. The availability of an evening service in pharmacies was also preferred whereas the early morning service provided in some primary care practices, but not readily available in pharmacies, may have facilitated patients on their way to work. An unexpected aspect of the pharmacy service was that giving an interpretative report of the ABPM to the patient involved the patient in the management process, with the possibility of improving compliance to medication and management. The expansion of ABPM access in accordance with international guidelines will be challenging in the short to medium term and if the technique is to be made widely available to patients with hypertension, alternative providers to primary care and specialist clinics will have to be enlisted. Our study shows that pharmacies are a readily available provider for ABPM and that the characteristics of patients attending a pharmacist and the results obtained with ABPM do not differ from those attending primary care [22]. This comparison is important because the different
(55.4%) (64.8%) (59.9%) (77.2%)
(38.1%) (27.5%) (33.1%) (18.1%)
(5.4%) (6.5%) (5.9%) (0.6%)
P < 0.0005 P < 0.0005
referral processes in primary care and pharmacies could have influenced the prevalence of white-coat hypertension. If this was to have been the case, the main indication for ABPM as recommended by NICE, namely the substantial financial savings from less drug prescribing, would no longer have been valid. The presence of white-coat hypertension in over 20% of patients attending for ABPM in primary care and in pharmacies shows that as many patients attending pharmacies for ABPM will be identified as having whitecoat hypertension as those attending primary care, and that in both settings, considerable savings will result from reduced prescribing of BP-lowering drugs.
Acknowledgements Each author contributed to the design, collection of data, analysis of data and in the writing of the paper. E.O’B. had full access to all of the data in the study and takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis. The authors were in receipt of an unrestricted educational grant from Menarini Ireland to assist in the extraction and analysis of data. Conflicts of interest
E.D. and K.J. have received educational grants from Menarini Ireland. E.O’B. is a director and shareholder of dabl Ltd, Ireland, and has been in receipt of honoraria for meeting presentations by Menarini Ireland and Servier Laboratories, France.
References 1 2
3
World Health Organization. Global status report on noncommunicable diseases 2010. Geneva, Switzerland: WHO; 2010. Lim SS, Vos T, Flaxman AD, Danaei G, Shibuya K, Adair-Rohani H, et al. A comparative risk assessment of burden of disease and injury attributable to 67 risk factors and risk factor clusters in 21 regions, 1990–2010: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease study 2010. Lancet 2012; 380:2224–2260. Chobanian AV, Bakris GL, Black HR, Cushman WC, Green LA, Izzo JL Jr, et al. Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; National High Blood Pressure Education Program Coordinating Committee.
Copyright © Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in pharmacies James et al.
Seventh report of the Joint National Committee On Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure. Hypertension 2003; 42:1206–1252. 4 National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE). Hypertension. The clinical management of primary hypertension in adults. Clinical Guideline 127. London, UK: NICE 2011; Available at: http:// www.nice.org.uk/guidance/CG127. [Accessed 10 December 2013]. 5 O’Brien E, Parati G, Stergiou G, Asmar R, Beilin L, Bilo G, et al. on behalf of the European Society of Hypertension Working Group on Blood Pressure Monitoring. European Society of Hypertension position paper on ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. J Hypertens 2013; 31:1731–1767. 6 Lovibond K, Jowett S, Barton P, Caulfield M, Heneghan C, Hobbs FDR, et al. Cost-effectiveness of options for the diagnosis of high blood pressure in primary care: a modeling study. Lancet 2011; 378:1219–1230. 7 O’Brien E, Mee F, Atkins N, O’Malley K. Accuracy of the Spacelabs 90 207 determined by to the British Hypertension Society Protocol. J Hypertens 1991; 9 (Suppl 5):S25–S31. 8 Barna I, Keszei A, Dunai A. Evaluation of Meditech ABPM-04 ambulatory blood pressure measuring device according to the British Hypertension Society protocol. Blood Press Monit 1998; 3:363–368. 9 O’Brien E, Asmar R, Beilin L, Bilo G, de Leeuw P, Imai Y, et al. on behalf of the European Society of Hypertension Working Group on Blood Pressure Monitoring. European Society of Hypertension recommendations for conventional, ambulatory and home blood pressure measurement. J Hypertens 2003; 21:821–848. 10 O’Brien E, Atkins N. Can improved software facilitate the wider use of ambulatory blood pressure measurement in clinical practice? Blood Press Monit 2004; 9:237–241. 11 O’Brien E. 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure measurement in clinical practice and research: a critical review of a technique in need of implementation. J Inter Med 2011; 269:478–495. 12 McGowan N, Atkins N, O’Brien E, Padfield P. Computerised reporting improves the clinical use of ambulatory blood pressure measurement. Blood Press Monit 2010; 15:115–123.
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21 22
139
O’Brien E. First Thomas Pickering memorial lecture: ambulatory blood pressure measurement is essential for the management of hypertension. J Clin Hypertens 2012; 14:836–847. James K, Salvi L, Leahy A, Dolan E, O’Brien E. The profile of patients having ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in a pharmacy setting. J Hypertens 2013; 31 (e-Suppl A):e21. Lee JK, Grace KA, Taylor AJ. Effect of a pharmacy care program on medication adherence and persistence, blood pressure, and low density lipoprotein cholesterol: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2006; 296:2563–2571. Weber CA, Ernst ME, Sezate GS, Zheng S, Carter BL. Pharmacistphysician co-management of hypertension and reduction in 24-hour ambulatory blood pressures. Arch Intern Med 2010; 170:1634–1639. Sendra-Lillo J, Sabater-Hernandez D, Sendra-Ortola A, Martinez-Martinez F. Agreement between community pharmacy, physician’s office, and home blood pressure measurement methods: the Palmera study. Am J Hypertens 2012; 25:290–296. Carter BL, Foppe van Mil JW. Comparative effectiveness research: evaluating pharmacist interventions and strategies to improve medication adherence. Am J Hypertens 2010; 23:949–955. Heisler M, Hofer TP, Schmittdiel JA, Selby JV, Klamerus ML, Bosworth HB, et al. Improving blood pressure control through a clinical pharmacist outreach program in diabetes patients in two-high performing health systems: the adherence and intensification of medications (AIM) cluster randomized controlled pragmatic trial. Circulation 2012; 125: 2863–2872. Margolis KL, Asche SE, Bergdall AR, Dehmer SP, Groen SE, Kadrmas HM, et al. Effect of home blood pressure telemonitoring and pharmacist management on blood pressure control. A cluster randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2013; 310:46–56. Vanderveen P. How to care for 30 million more patients. Wall Street J 2010. James K, Dolan E, O’Brien E. Insights from a large national database of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring: ABPM population study in Ireland (APSI study). J Hypertens 2013; 31 (Suppl A):e67.
Copyright © Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
Clinical methods and pathophysiology
Making ambulatory blood pressure monitoring accessible in pharmacies Kirstyn Jamesa, Eamon Dolana and Eoin O’Brienb Objectives Ambulatory blood pressure measurement (ABPM), although recommended for the diagnosis and management of hypertension, has limited availability. The objective of this study was to show that if the characteristics of patients attending pharmacies for ABPM are similar to those attending primary care, the technique can be made more widely available to patients through pharmacies.
prevalent in men attending pharmacies (22.0 vs. 17.4%) and in women attending primary care (21.9 vs. 19.7%). There were more dippers in pharmacy then primary care ABPMs (84.7 vs. 79.4%). A preference for having ABPM on Fridays and Saturdays was evident in patients attending pharmacies (19.6 vs. 6.6%), whereas there was a preference for early morning recording in primary care (4.1 vs. 1.1%).
Patients and methods A comparative study using a software program that allowed central collection, analysis and comparison of ABPM data from patients attending primary care and pharmacies for assessment of hypertension in Ireland.
Conclusion This study, which is the first to report on ABPM data from the pharmacy setting, shows that the blood pressure characteristics of patients with ABPMs recorded in pharmacies are similar to those recorded in primary care practices. It is feasible, therefore, to perform ABPM in pharmacies, which can be utilized to make ABPM more accessible to the large number of patients in the population with hypertension. Blood Press c 2014 Wolters Kluwer Health | Monit 19:134–139 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
Results ABPM data from 46 978 patients attending primary care were compared with 1698 attending pharmacies between 2007 and 2013. The age, sex and blood pressure characteristics of patients attending primary care and pharmacies were similar. The mean pressures in all categories, except for systolic blood pressure recorded in primary care, were higher in men. The first ABPM measurements recorded in pharmacies were slightly higher than those in primary care (150.8±19.5/88.7±13.7 vs. 149.6±20.7/88.0±14.4 mmHg). More patients attending primary care were normotensive than those attending pharmacies (19.5 vs. 16.4%), whereas more patients attending pharmacies were hypertensive than those attending primary care (62.8 vs. 60.7%), particularly female patients (61.0 vs. 56.4%). White-coat hypertension was similar in patients attending primary care and pharmacies (19.8 vs. 20.8%), but it was more
Introduction The global prevalence of hypertension in adults aged 25 years and older in 2008 was around 40% [1]. Complications of hypertension are associated with an estimated 9.4 million deaths worldwide every year [2]. Hypertension, which affects B50 million individuals in the USA, is the most common primary diagnosis in America, with an estimated 35 million office visits to primary care physicians [3]. In the UK, B12% of primary care consultations are for hypertension and B£1 billion is spent on blood pressure (BP)-lowering drugs annually [4]. Because of the superiority of ambulatory blood pressure measurement (ABPM) over both clinic BP measurement and home BP measurement, the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) in the UK has recommended that any individual who has had an elevated BP with c 2014 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 1359-5237
Blood Pressure Monitoring 2014, 19:134–139 Keywords: ambulatory blood pressure measurement, pharmacy, primary care a Department of Geriatric Medicine, Royal College of Surgeons, Connolly Memorial Hospital, Blanchardstown and bConway Institute of Biomolecular Research, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
Correspondence to Eoin O’Brien, MSc, FRCP, MD, Conway Institute of Biomolecular Research, University College Dublin, Dublin 4, Ireland Tel: + 353 1 2803865; fax: + 353 1 2803688; e-mail: [email protected] Received 12 September 2013 Revised 16 January 2014 Accepted 30 January 2014
conventional measurement should be offered ABPM to confirm the presence or absence of sustained hypertension [4]. The recently published Position Paper on ABPM from the European Society of Hypertension also advocates wider availability of ABPM [5]. NICE has shown that ABPM is more cost-effective than either conventional BP or selfmeasurement of BP [4,6]. If ABPM was widely available, the diagnosis and treatment of hypertension would be improved. Failure to identify white-coat hypertension can lead to inappropriate treatment in normotensive patients and similarly, hypertensive individuals who show a white-coat effect may receive inappropriate dose titrations or additional antihypertensive agents. Identification of patients with white-coat hypertension would result, therefore, in large financial savings because of reduced prescribing of drugs [4]. DOI: 10.1097/MBP.0000000000000034
Copyright © Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in pharmacies James et al. 135
Although recommendations for ABPM may be scientifically and fiscally sound, in reality, the technique is not available in primary care, hospital or specialist clinics in sufficient quantity to provide ABPM to all patients with hypertension. It is important, therefore, to examine ways of making ABPM more widely accessible to a substantial proportion of the adult population. The dabl primary care module, which has been in use in primary care in Ireland for many years, has been modified for use in pharmacies. In this paper, the ABPM data from individuals having ABPM performed in pharmacies are compared with the ABPM data from primary care. To our knowledge, this is the first report of ABPM data from patients attending pharmacies.
Patients and methods Primary care patients
Patients referred for ABPM in because of an elevated office whose data were hosted on the Dublin, Ireland), were used to from pharmacies.
primary care practices BP measurement, and dabl system (dabl Ltd, compare with the data
Pharmacy patients
ABPM recordings, performed in pharmacies in a number of towns in Ireland in patients who had hypertension, or who suspected they might have hypertension, and whose data were hosted on the dabl system, were analysed. The treatment status of patients in both primary care and pharmacies was unknown. Ambulatory blood pressure measurement
ABPM was measured with either the SpaceLabs 90207 (Spacelabs Healthcare, Snoqualmie, Wisconsin, USA) or the Meditech ABPM-04 [PMS (Instrument) Ltd, Maidenhead, Berkshire, UK], both of which have been validated according to internationally accepted standards [7,8]. Daytime was defined as 9 a.m–9 p.m. and night-time from 1 a.m. to 6 a.m. [9]. Measurements were recorded at 30-min intervals over the full 24 h. The monitor was initialized by the pharmacist or primary care user by connecting it to a computer and following a simple set of instructions. When the 24-h recording was completed, the patient returned with the monitor, which was connected to a computer that loaded the data to the dabl system for central hosting and analysis. The results were then transmitted to the pharmacy or primary care computer for immediate printing. Ambulatory blood pressure measurement program
The dabl software program for primary care has been described previously [10,11]. This system provides a succinct one-page report with standardized presentation, summary statistics, including maximum BP in the whitecoat window and average BPs in the daytime and night-time windows, together with the individual BP
measurements, a plot of data and an interpretative report (which has been validated for accuracy against expert observers [12]). This software program has been modified for use in pharmacies so as to provide the same information, but with all operational options fixed to facilitate use and the need for minimal instruction. A printout of the results, with a plot and interpretative report, is given to the patient by the pharmacist. If the report is normal, the patient is instructed to bring it to the general practitioner at the next visit, but if it is abnormal, the patient is advised to arrange an early appointment. Data analysis
Data from each ABPM consisted of the first measurement, mean daytime BP, mean night-time BP, the day of the week on which it was recorded and the time of first measurement. Patients who did not have these data were excluded. Patients were classed by their mean BP as having hypertension, normotension or white-coat hypertension. Hypertension was defined as a mean daytime systolic blood pressure (SBP) of at least 135 mmHg or a mean daytime diastolic blood pressure (DBP) of at least 85 mmHg; white-coat hypertension was defined as a normal mean daytime BP with a first ABPM systolic BP measurement of at least 140 mmHg or a mean diastolic BP of at least 90 mmHg. All other individuals were defined as normotensive. The nocturnal dip was calculated as the percentage decrease in the mean BP from daytime to night-time. A patient was defined as a dipper if the percentage decrease in the mean pressure from daytime to nighttime was at least 10% for SBP or for DBP and a nondipper if this fall was not present. The days of the week, on which the ABPM was performed, were paired into Monday or Tuesday, Wednesday or Thursday, and Friday or Saturday. Eighty-eight patients, who had an ABPM performed on a Sunday, in a pharmacy, were excluded from this analysis. The time of the first measurements was classed as 07:00–08:59 (early morning), 09:00–12:59 (mid morning), 13:00–17:59 (afternoon) and 18:00–21:00 (evening). One-hundred primary care ABPMs, with times outside these periods, were excluded as it is likely that these were because of exceptional circumstances or a PC with an incorrect time. The BP classification, dipping classification, day of the week and time of day were compared for primary care and pharmacy patients and sex with crosstabs and w2, or Fisher’s exact test, analysis. The first ABPM measurement, mean daytime BP, mean night-time BP and the nocturnal dip were analysed for source and sex using analysis of variance, with Duncan post-hoc tests to compare groups along with a t-test for source comparison.
Copyright © Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
136
Blood Pressure Monitoring 2014, Vol 19 No 3
Analysis was carried out using the SPSS 10.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, Illinois, USA). Ethical approval for the study was provided by the Connolly Hospital research ethics committee (January 2012). All participants provided informed consent before taking part in the study. Data were anonymized before database extraction in accordance with data protection legislation and approved by the local ethics committee.
Results Baseline characteristics
A total of 46 978 ABPMs recorded in the primary care and 1698 ABPMs recorded in pharmacies between 2007 and 2013 were available for analysis. Fifty-three percent of all patients were women, and the mean age was 57.9 years, with the pharmacy patients being slightly younger than those in primary care. Baseline characteristics for the first ABPM measurement, for pressures in the daytime window (09:00–21:00), the night-time window (01:00–06:00) and for the nocturnal dip are shown in Table 1. Mean pressures in all categories, except for SBP recorded in primary care, were higher in men. There were no
Table 1
Blood pressure comparisons Mean (mmHg)
First measurement SBP Primary care Female Male Total Pharmacy Female Male Total DBP Primary care Female Male Total Pharmacy Female Male Total Daytime mean SBP Primary care Female Male Total Pharmacy Female Male Total DBP Primary care Female Male Total Pharmacy Female Male Total
SD (mmHg)
n
149.3 150.0 149.6
21.4 19.8 20.7
24 915 22 063 46 978
149.3 152.5 150.8
19.6 19.2 19.5
898 800 1698
86.5 89.7 88.0
14.2 14.4 14.4
24 915 22 063 46 978
86.5 91.3 88.7
13.4 13.7 13.7
898 800 1698
136.4 139.1 137.7
15.4 15.0 15.3
24 915 22 063 46 978
137.1 139.7 138.3
13.8 15.3 14.6
898 800 1698
78.3 82.2 80.2
10.8 11.2 11.2
24 915 22 063 46 978
78.4 82.9 80.5
10.6 12.0 11.5
898 800 1698
Significant t-test
Table 1 (continued)
Night-time mean SBP Primary care Female Male Total Pharmacy Female Male Total DBP Primary care Female Male Total Pharmacy Female Male Total % Dip SBP Primary care Female Male Total Pharmacy Female Male Total DBP Primary care Female Male Total Pharmacy Female Male Total
Mean (mmHg)
SD (mmHg)
n
119.5 121.6 120.5
17.4 16.5 17.0
24 915 22 063 46 978
119.0 121.6 120.2
15.3 16.3 15.8
898 800 1698
64.9 68.9 66.8
10.3 10.9 10.8
24 915 22 063 46 978
64.8 69.3 66.9
9.7 11.7 10.9
898 800 1698
12.3 12.4 12.3
9.5 9.3 9.4
24 915 22 063 46 978
13.1 12.9 13.0
7.5 7.4 7.4
898 800 1698
16.8 15.7 16.3
10.5 10.8 10.7
24 915 22 063 46 978
16.9 16.1 16.6
8.5 9.1 8.8
898 800 1698
Significant t-test
NS
NS
**
NS
*
Significant t-test: for primary care vs. pharmacy. DBP, diastolic blood pressure; SBP, systolic blood pressure. NS, not significantly different at P < 0.05. *P < 0.05. **P < 0.0005.
*
differences between the sources of the ABPM, except for the first measurement, where slightly higher values in the pharmacy ABPM (150.8±19.5/88.7±13.7 vs. 149.6± 20.7/88.0±14.4 mmHg for primary care) reached statistical significance because of the number of patients.
NS
NS
Ambulatory blood pressure measurement profiles
ABPM profiles for both the primary care and pharmacy patients are shown in Table 2. 19.4% of patients had normotension and 19.8% of patients had ambulatory white-coat hypertension. More patients were classed as hypertensive in the pharmacy group than in primary care (61.0 vs. 56.4%), particularly female patients (61.0 vs. 56.4%). White-coat hypertension was more prevalent in men attending pharmacies than in primary care (22.0 vs. 17.4%) and in women attending primary care than in pharmacies (21.9 vs. 19.7%). There were more dippers in pharmacy ABPM than in primary care (84.7 vs. 79.4%).
Copyright © Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in pharmacies James et al. 137
Table 2
Blood pressure classification Count row%
WCH on the basis of first measurement Source General practice Female Male Total Pharmacy Female Male Total Total 2 w Source and sex Source
Hypertensiona
Normalb
WCHc
Total
14 046 (56.4%) 14 466 (65.6%) 28 512 (60.7%)
5415 (21.7%) 3761 (17.0%) 9176 (19.5%)
5454 (21.9%) 3836 (17.4%) 9290 (19.8%)
24 915 22 063 46 978
548 518 1066 29 578
173 106 279 9455
177 176 353 9643
898 800 1698 48 676
(61.0%) (64.8%) (62.8%) (60.8%)
(19.3%) (13.3%) (16.4%) (19.4%)
(19.7%) (22.0%) (20.8%) (19.8%)
P < 0.0005 P < 0.006
BP, blood pressure; DBP, diastolic blood pressure; SBP, systolic blood pressure; WCH, white-coat hypertension. Daytime mean BP: SBP Z 135 mmHg or DBP Z 85 mmHg. b Daytime mean BP: SBP < 135 mmHg and DBP < 85 mmHg. First measurement: SBP r 140 mmHg and DBP r 90 mmHg. c Daytime mean BP: SBP < 135 mmHg and DBP < 85 mmHg. First measurement: SBP > 140 mmHg or DBP > 90 mmHg. a
Table 3
Day of week Count row%
Day of the week Source Primary care Female Male Total Pharmacy Female Male Total Total 88 on Sundays 2 w Source and sex Source
Monday, Tuesday
Wednesday, Thursday
Friday, Saturday
Total
12 115 (48.7%) 10 271 (46.6%) 22 386 (47.7%)
11 247 (45.2%) 10 191 (46.3%) 21 438 (45.7%)
1517 (6.1%) 1567 (7.1%) 3084 (6.6%)
24 879 22 029 46 908
353 316 669 23 055
354 328 682 22 120
183 146 329 3413
890 790 1680 48 588
(39.7%) (40.0%) (39.8%) (47.4%)
Timing of ambulatory blood pressure measurement
The availability of ABPM differed between primary care and pharmacy (Tables 3 and 4). A preference for having ABPM on Fridays and Saturdays was evident in pharmacies (19.6 vs. 6.6% for primary care), whereas there was a preference for early morning recording in primary care (4.1 vs. 1.1% for pharmacy).
Discussion To the best of our knowledge, this study is the first of its kind to report on ABPM data collected in pharmacies. There is worldwide agreement that ABPM is indicated for the exclusion or confirmation of suspected white-coat hypertension [5,13]. The NICE guideline published in 2011 has generated considerable comment for recommending ABPM in anyone suspected of having hypertension. What makes the NICE guideline different from other international guidelines is that for the first time, it is stated unequivocally that ABPM should be offered to anyone suspected of having hypertension by virtue of having had an elevated conventional BP measurement [4]. NICE has estimated that the use of ABPM could save the NHS around £10 million (h12.6
(39.8%) (41.5%) (40.6%) (45.5%)
(20.6%) (18.5%) (19.6%) (7.0%)
P < 0.0005 P < 0.0005
million) after 5 years by reducing the number of consultations and by detecting white-coat hypertension, so that drugs are only prescribed to those patients with sustained hypertension. If primary care practices were to provide ABPM, it is estimated that the initial cost would be around £1016 (h1280) to purchase devices with a further investment of around £380 (h479) a year per device for upkeep [4]. With increasing longevity, the prevalence of hypertension is growing and there is a need to provide ABPM for large numbers of individuals in all countries across the world [5]. It is evident that the demand for ABPM cannot be provided solely in primary care and alternative ways for providing patients with the technique must be explored. The results of this study show that it is feasible for patients with hypertension to attend a local pharmacy for ABPM and that these patients are very similar to those attending a primary care practice for the investigation [14]. Pharmacists are being increasingly recognized as playing an important role in healthcare delivery and particularly in
Copyright © Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
138
Blood Pressure Monitoring 2014, Vol 19 No 3
Table 4
Time of day Count row%
Time of day Source Primary care Female Male Total Pharmacy Female Male Total Total (100 outside times listed) 2 w Source and sex Source
07:00–08:59
09:00–12:59
13:00–17:59
18:00–21:00
Total
850 (3.4%) 1064 (4.8%) 1914 (4.1%)
19 339 (77.8%) 17 173 (78.0%) 36 512 (77.9%)
4580 (18.4%) 3677 (16.7%) 8257 (17.6%)
94 (0.4%) 110 (0.5%) 204 (0.4%)
24 863 22 024 46 887
10 9 19 1933
495 516 1011 37 523
340 219 559 8816
48 52 100 304
893 796 1689 48 576
(1.1%) (1.1%) (1.1%) (4.0%)
improving BP control. The movement to involve pharmacists in the management of hypertension is particularly strong in the USA [15–20], with, for example, a suggestion that the country’s 300 000 pharmacists should become a collaborative force in healthcare delivery [21]. Our study shows that BP levels in pharmacies overall follow an expected pattern, with those for men being generally higher than women. However, there were no consistent differences between ABPM recorded in pharmacies and in primary care. Similarly, the incidences of white-coat hypertension and nocturnal dipping were broadly similar. The large sample sizes meant that small differences reach statistical significance. The main differences between the two settings were in the availability of ABPM in a local and convenient pharmacy rather than having to attend a general practitioner or specialist clinic. In particular, the availability of having ABPMs on Fridays and Saturdays in pharmacies was popular as most GPs do not provide this facility simply because ABPM initiated on Fridays must be removed on Saturdays when primary care practices are closed. The opening times of pharmacies, especially availability on Saturdays, was popular with patients. The availability of an evening service in pharmacies was also preferred whereas the early morning service provided in some primary care practices, but not readily available in pharmacies, may have facilitated patients on their way to work. An unexpected aspect of the pharmacy service was that giving an interpretative report of the ABPM to the patient involved the patient in the management process, with the possibility of improving compliance to medication and management. The expansion of ABPM access in accordance with international guidelines will be challenging in the short to medium term and if the technique is to be made widely available to patients with hypertension, alternative providers to primary care and specialist clinics will have to be enlisted. Our study shows that pharmacies are a readily available provider for ABPM and that the characteristics of patients attending a pharmacist and the results obtained with ABPM do not differ from those attending primary care [22]. This comparison is important because the different
(55.4%) (64.8%) (59.9%) (77.2%)
(38.1%) (27.5%) (33.1%) (18.1%)
(5.4%) (6.5%) (5.9%) (0.6%)
P < 0.0005 P < 0.0005
referral processes in primary care and pharmacies could have influenced the prevalence of white-coat hypertension. If this was to have been the case, the main indication for ABPM as recommended by NICE, namely the substantial financial savings from less drug prescribing, would no longer have been valid. The presence of white-coat hypertension in over 20% of patients attending for ABPM in primary care and in pharmacies shows that as many patients attending pharmacies for ABPM will be identified as having whitecoat hypertension as those attending primary care, and that in both settings, considerable savings will result from reduced prescribing of BP-lowering drugs.
Acknowledgements Each author contributed to the design, collection of data, analysis of data and in the writing of the paper. E.O’B. had full access to all of the data in the study and takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis. The authors were in receipt of an unrestricted educational grant from Menarini Ireland to assist in the extraction and analysis of data. Conflicts of interest
E.D. and K.J. have received educational grants from Menarini Ireland. E.O’B. is a director and shareholder of dabl Ltd, Ireland, and has been in receipt of honoraria for meeting presentations by Menarini Ireland and Servier Laboratories, France.
References 1 2
3
World Health Organization. Global status report on noncommunicable diseases 2010. Geneva, Switzerland: WHO; 2010. Lim SS, Vos T, Flaxman AD, Danaei G, Shibuya K, Adair-Rohani H, et al. A comparative risk assessment of burden of disease and injury attributable to 67 risk factors and risk factor clusters in 21 regions, 1990–2010: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease study 2010. Lancet 2012; 380:2224–2260. Chobanian AV, Bakris GL, Black HR, Cushman WC, Green LA, Izzo JL Jr, et al. Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; National High Blood Pressure Education Program Coordinating Committee.
Copyright © Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in pharmacies James et al.
Seventh report of the Joint National Committee On Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure. Hypertension 2003; 42:1206–1252. 4 National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE). Hypertension. The clinical management of primary hypertension in adults. Clinical Guideline 127. London, UK: NICE 2011; Available at: http:// www.nice.org.uk/guidance/CG127. [Accessed 10 December 2013]. 5 O’Brien E, Parati G, Stergiou G, Asmar R, Beilin L, Bilo G, et al. on behalf of the European Society of Hypertension Working Group on Blood Pressure Monitoring. European Society of Hypertension position paper on ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. J Hypertens 2013; 31:1731–1767. 6 Lovibond K, Jowett S, Barton P, Caulfield M, Heneghan C, Hobbs FDR, et al. Cost-effectiveness of options for the diagnosis of high blood pressure in primary care: a modeling study. Lancet 2011; 378:1219–1230. 7 O’Brien E, Mee F, Atkins N, O’Malley K. Accuracy of the Spacelabs 90 207 determined by to the British Hypertension Society Protocol. J Hypertens 1991; 9 (Suppl 5):S25–S31. 8 Barna I, Keszei A, Dunai A. Evaluation of Meditech ABPM-04 ambulatory blood pressure measuring device according to the British Hypertension Society protocol. Blood Press Monit 1998; 3:363–368. 9 O’Brien E, Asmar R, Beilin L, Bilo G, de Leeuw P, Imai Y, et al. on behalf of the European Society of Hypertension Working Group on Blood Pressure Monitoring. European Society of Hypertension recommendations for conventional, ambulatory and home blood pressure measurement. J Hypertens 2003; 21:821–848. 10 O’Brien E, Atkins N. Can improved software facilitate the wider use of ambulatory blood pressure measurement in clinical practice? Blood Press Monit 2004; 9:237–241. 11 O’Brien E. 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure measurement in clinical practice and research: a critical review of a technique in need of implementation. J Inter Med 2011; 269:478–495. 12 McGowan N, Atkins N, O’Brien E, Padfield P. Computerised reporting improves the clinical use of ambulatory blood pressure measurement. Blood Press Monit 2010; 15:115–123.
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21 22
139
O’Brien E. First Thomas Pickering memorial lecture: ambulatory blood pressure measurement is essential for the management of hypertension. J Clin Hypertens 2012; 14:836–847. James K, Salvi L, Leahy A, Dolan E, O’Brien E. The profile of patients having ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in a pharmacy setting. J Hypertens 2013; 31 (e-Suppl A):e21. Lee JK, Grace KA, Taylor AJ. Effect of a pharmacy care program on medication adherence and persistence, blood pressure, and low density lipoprotein cholesterol: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2006; 296:2563–2571. Weber CA, Ernst ME, Sezate GS, Zheng S, Carter BL. Pharmacistphysician co-management of hypertension and reduction in 24-hour ambulatory blood pressures. Arch Intern Med 2010; 170:1634–1639. Sendra-Lillo J, Sabater-Hernandez D, Sendra-Ortola A, Martinez-Martinez F. Agreement between community pharmacy, physician’s office, and home blood pressure measurement methods: the Palmera study. Am J Hypertens 2012; 25:290–296. Carter BL, Foppe van Mil JW. Comparative effectiveness research: evaluating pharmacist interventions and strategies to improve medication adherence. Am J Hypertens 2010; 23:949–955. Heisler M, Hofer TP, Schmittdiel JA, Selby JV, Klamerus ML, Bosworth HB, et al. Improving blood pressure control through a clinical pharmacist outreach program in diabetes patients in two-high performing health systems: the adherence and intensification of medications (AIM) cluster randomized controlled pragmatic trial. Circulation 2012; 125: 2863–2872. Margolis KL, Asche SE, Bergdall AR, Dehmer SP, Groen SE, Kadrmas HM, et al. Effect of home blood pressure telemonitoring and pharmacist management on blood pressure control. A cluster randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2013; 310:46–56. Vanderveen P. How to care for 30 million more patients. Wall Street J 2010. James K, Dolan E, O’Brien E. Insights from a large national database of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring: ABPM population study in Ireland (APSI study). J Hypertens 2013; 31 (Suppl A):e67.
Copyright © Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
