↓ Skip to main content

Patients’ and clinicians’ views on the optimum schedules for self-monitoring of blood pressure: a qualitative focus group and interview study

Overview of attention for article published in British Journal of General Practice, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
16 Mendeley
Title
Patients’ and clinicians’ views on the optimum schedules for self-monitoring of blood pressure: a qualitative focus group and interview study
Published in
British Journal of General Practice, July 2016
DOI 10.3399/bjgp16x686149
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sabrina Grant, James A Hodgkinson, Siobhan L Milner, Una Martin, Alice Tompson, FD Richard Hobbs, Jonathan Mant, Richard J McManus, Sheila M Greenfield

Abstract

Self-monitoring of blood pressure is common but guidance on how it should be carried out varies and it is currently unclear how such guidance is viewed. To explore patients' and healthcare professionals' (HCPs) views and experiences of the use of different self-monitoring regimens to determine what is acceptable and feasible, and to inform future recommendations. Thirteen focus groups and four HCP interviews were held, with a total of 66 participants (41 patients and 25 HCPs) from primary and secondary care with and without experience of self-monitoring. Standard and shortened self-monitoring protocols were both considered. Focus groups and interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analysed using the constant comparative method. Patients generally supported structured schedules but with sufficient flexibility to allow adaptation to individual routine. They preferred a shorter (3-day) schedule to longer (7-day) regimens. Although HCPs could describe benefits for patients of using a schedule, they were reluctant to recommend a specific schedule. Concerns surrounded the use of different schedules for diagnosis and subsequent monitoring. Appropriate education was seen as vital by all participants to enable a self-monitoring schedule to be followed at home. There is not a 'one size fits all approach' to developing the optimum protocol from the perspective of users and those implementing it. An approach whereby patients are asked to complete the minimum number of readings required for accurate blood pressure estimation in a flexible manner seems most likely to succeed. Informative advice and guidance should incorporate such flexibility for patients and professionals alike.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 16 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 25%
Researcher 4 25%
Unspecified 2 13%
Other 2 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 13%
Other 2 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Unspecified 6 38%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 31%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 6%
Neuroscience 1 6%
Other 2 13%