↓ Skip to main content

[OP.6C.03] DO PATIENTS ACTUALLY DO WHAT WE ASK? PATIENT PERFORMANCE AND PERSISTENCE IN THE TASMIN-SR BLOOD PRESSURE SELF-MANAGEMENT TRIAL

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Hypertension, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Readers on

mendeley
4 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
[OP.6C.03] DO PATIENTS ACTUALLY DO WHAT WE ASK? PATIENT PERFORMANCE AND PERSISTENCE IN THE TASMIN-SR BLOOD PRESSURE SELF-MANAGEMENT TRIAL
Published in
Journal of Hypertension, September 2016
DOI 10.1097/01.hjh.0000491525.34594.dc
Pubmed ID
Authors

C. Schwartz, A. Seyed-Safi, M. Sayeed Haque, E. Bray, S. Greenfield, R. Hobbs, P. Little, J. Mant, B. Williams, R. McManus

Abstract

This study assessed how accurately patients reported their blood pressure (BP) and titrated their antihypertensive medications according to the protocol set out by the TASMIN-SR trial. The TASMIN-SR self-management intervention involved patients with above target clinic BP and stroke, diabetes, CHD or CKD, self-monitoring their BP for the first week of every month followed by implementation of an individualised self-titration schedule. 276 patients were randomised to the intervention and 226 (80%) successfully completed 2 or 3 training sessions. Patients were followed up for 12 months and during this time submitted written records of home BP readings, and details of any medication changes made, on a monthly basis. BP readings were downloaded from each patient's monitor at 6 and 12 month follow-up clinics and these were compared to those submitted along with an assessment of protocol fidelity. Of 226 patients who were successfully trained, 174 (77%) completed self-management. 10,038/11,684 (85.9% (95% CI, 85.3 - 86.5) of all readings submitted were reported accurately, when compared to the readings downloaded from the monitor, and 164 patients (95%) reported their readings with at least 80% accuracy. There was an average error rate of 6.7% per patient and the only characteristic affecting this was age, under 65 years compared to those above (4.5%, (95% CI 3.2 - 5.6) vs 7.7%, (95% CI 6.4 - 9.0), p < 0.005).In terms of protocol fidelity, 1811 (98%) of submitted records were sufficient to make a decision on whether a medication change was necessary according to the algorithm. Patients made 58.6% (370/631) of suggested medication changes, equating to 2.1/3.6 changes per patient. Baseline mean systolic BP for patients who completed the training was 143.1 mmHg. Mean 12 month systolic BP was 120.9 mmHg for patients who made all recommended changes, and 131.2 mmHg for patients who did not make any of the recommended changes, resulting in an overall mean SBP of 126.1 mmHg. In conclusion the majority of higher risk patients with hypertension successfully monitored and reported their home BP readings and persisted with the protocol over the study resulting in significantly lower BP.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 4 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 4 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 3 75%
Unspecified 1 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Unspecified 1 25%
Psychology 1 25%
Social Sciences 1 25%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 25%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 September 2016.
All research outputs
#7,736,090
of 12,366,438 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Hypertension
#1,868
of 3,608 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#145,616
of 265,708 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Hypertension
#67
of 232 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,366,438 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,608 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.2. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 265,708 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 232 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.