MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W1973832787 · doi:10.1111/jch.12061

Public‐Use Blood Pressure Machines in Pharmacies for Identification of Undetected Hypertension in the Community

2013· letter· en· W1973832787 sur OpenAlexafffundabout
Sherilyn K. D. Houle, Ross T. Tsuyuki

Notice bibliographique

RevueJournal of Clinical Hypertension · 2013
Typeletter
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueBlood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
Établissements canadiensUniversity of Alberta
Organismes subventionnairesAlberta Innovates - Health Solutions
Mots-clésMedicineBlood pressureInteractive kioskCommunity pharmacyPharmacyInternal medicineFamily medicineWorld Wide Web

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Detection and monitoring of hypertension is largely dependent on screening at medical visits, which may explain why one third to one half of patients have poorly controlled blood pressure (BP) and many patients are unaware that they have hypertension.1, 2 Community pharmacies offer a highly accessible and frequently used platform for patients to self-measure their BP free of charge at automated kiosks. PharmaSmart PS-2000 (PharmaSmart Canada Corporation, Vancouver, BC) BP kiosks are validated devices3 measuring seated BP at the brachial artery. These kiosks also have Internet connectivity, allowing collection of anonymized results obtained at these kiosks. However, until now there were no data on the range of readings acquired at these kiosks and their potential role in identifying undetected hypertension in the community. We obtained data from PharmaSmart on readings obtained from 341 locations of a Canadian chain pharmacy between January 2010 and November 2011. Because these results are collected anonymously with no ability to trace results to individual users, we assumed that each result corresponded to a unique individual. We classified readings consistent with North American hypertension guidelines4, 5 as optimal (<130/80 mm Hg), prehypertensive (130–139/80–89 mm Hg), uncontrolled (140–159/90–109 mm Hg), or very high (≥160/110 mm Hg). Age, sex, and comorbidity status of users was unknown, so classifications for patients without complicating factors were applied. When systolic and diastolic values from the same reading fell into 2 different categories, the higher category was utilized. A total of 8,457,552 readings were taken in the observation period, with an average usage across all pharmacies of 964±26.8 measurements monthly. Mean BP was 131/78 mm Hg (standard deviation, 13.7/13.4) with mean pulse of 76 beats per minute (standard deviation 5.6). Since BP kiosks are freely available for public use, the potential for improper technique must be considered. To estimate the potential impact of improper technique such as lack of rest or consumption of cigarettes or caffeine, coefficients of determination (R2) were calculated to assess the potential association between heart rate and BP. These showed that any association between BP result and heart rate were very weak (R2=0.17 for systolic BP, R2=0.04 for diastolic BP). Because these kiosks are frequently used and approximately two thirds of results obtained are elevated, this may present a unique and important opportunity for the early detection of hypertension (or poorly controlled hypertension) in the community, particularly among individuals who do not regularly present to a physician. To ensure accurate results, patient education on proper measurement is critical. While the PS-2000 has been well-validated, the freely accessible nature of these machines requires health professionals to be vigilant in ensuring users receive training in self-monitoring technique. This research identifies public-use BP kiosks as a potentially valuable tool in the early detection of undetected or uncontrolled BP. Given the accessibility and frequent use of kiosks by the public, future research on individuals' motivation to measure their BP at these kiosks and how we can utilize the results is warranted. The authors wish to thank Josh Sarkis and Lisa Goodwin at PharmaSmart for providing data access on BP readings obtained at their PS-2000 kiosks. Ms Houle receives funding for her PhD studies from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Hypertension Canada and the Interdisciplinary Chronic Disease Collaboration (funded by Alberta Innovates – Health Solutions). Dr Tsuyuki was previously a consultant for PharmaSmart Inc; however, no funding was received by PharmaSmart for this study, nor did they play any role in data analysis or interpretation.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,006
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,009
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMétarecherche, Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict), Intégrité de la recherche
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,258
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0060,009
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0030,001
Bibliométrie0,0010,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,006
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,312
Tête enseignante GPT0,396
Écart entre enseignants0,084 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations10
Publié2013
Routes d'admission3
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJournal of Clinical HypertensionMême sujetBlood Pressure and Hypertension StudiesTravaux en français237 207