Urinary proteomics combined with home blood pressure telemonitoring for health care reform trial-First progress report.

High blood pressure (BP) and type-2 diabetes (T2DM) are forerunners of chronic kidney disease and left ventricular dysfunction. Home BP telemonitoring (HTM) and urinary peptidomic profiling (UPP) are technologies enabling risk stratification and personalized prevention. UPRIGHT-HTM (NCT04299529) is an investigator-initiated, multicenter, open-label, randomized trial with blinded endpoint evaluation designed to assess the efficacy of HTM plus UPP (experimental group) over HTM alone (control group) in guiding treatment in asymptomatic patients, aged 55-75 years, with ≥5 cardiovascular risk factors. From screening onwards, HTM data can be freely accessed by all patients and their caregivers; UPP results are communicated early during follow-up to patients and caregivers in the intervention group, but at trial closure in the control group. From May 2021 until January 2023, 235 patients were screened, of whom 53 were still progressing through the run-in period and 144 were randomized. Both groups had similar characteristics, including average age (62.0 years) and the proportions of African Blacks (81.9%), White Europeans (16.7%), women 56.2%, home (31.2%), and office (50.0%) hypertension, T2DM (36.4%), micro-albuminuria (29.4%), and ECG (9.7%) and echocardiographic (11.5%) left ventricular hypertrophy. Home and office BP were 128.8/79.2 mm Hg and 137.1/82.7 mm Hg, respectively, resulting in a prevalence of white-coat, masked and sustained hypertension of 40.3%, 11.1%, and 25.7%. HTM persisted after randomization (48 681 readings up to 15 January 2023). In conclusion, results predominantly from low-resource sub-Saharan centers proved the feasibility of this multi-ethnic trial. The COVID-19 pandemic caused delays and differential recruitment rates across centers.

[2022 Practice guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension of the Spanish Society of Hypertension]. / Guía práctica sobre el diagnóstico y tratamiento de la hipertensión arterial en España, 2022. Sociedad Española de Hipertensión - Liga Española para la Lucha contra la Hipertensión Arterial (SEH-LELHA).

Hypertension is the most important risk factor for global disease burden. Detection and management of hypertension are considered as key issues for individual and public health, as adequate control of blood pressure levels markedly reduces morbidity and mortality associated with hypertension. Aims of these practice guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension of the Spanish Society of Hypertension include offering simplified schemes for diagnosis and treatment for daily practice, and strategies for public health promotion. The Spanish Society of Hypertension assumes the 2018 European guidelines for management of arterial hypertension developed by the European Society of Cardiology and the European Society of Hypertension, although relevant aspects of the 2017 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines and the 2020 International Society of Hypertension guidelines are also commented. Hypertension is defined as a persistent elevation in office systolic blood pressure ≥ 140 and/or diastolic blood pressure ≥ 90 mmHg, and assessment of out-of-office blood pressure and global cardiovascular risk are considered of key importance for evaluation and management of hypertensive patients. The target for treated blood pressure should be < 130/80 for most patients. The treatment of hypertension involves lifestyle interventions and drug therapy. Most people with hypertension need more than one antihypertensive drug for adequate control, so initial therapy with two drugs, and single pill combinations are recommended for a wide majority of hypertensive patients.

Remote Cardiovascular Hypertension Program Enhanced Blood Pressure Control During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Background The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted traditional health care; one fallout was a drastic decrease in blood pressure (BP) assessment. We analyzed the pandemic's impact on our existing remote hypertension management program's effectiveness and adaptability. Methods and Results This retrospective observational analysis evaluated BP control in an entirely remote management program before and during the pandemic. A team of pharmacists, nurse practitioners, physicians, and nonlicensed navigators used an evidence-based clinical algorithm to optimize hypertensive treatment. The algorithm was adapted during the pandemic to simplify BP control. Overall, 1256 patients (605 enrolled in the 6 months before the pandemic shutdown in March 2020 and 651 in the 6 months after) were a median age of 63 years old, 57% female, and 38.2% non-White. Among enrolled patients with sustained hypertension, 51.1% reached BP goals. Within this group, rates of achieving goal BP improved to 94.6% during the pandemic from 75.8% prepandemic (P<0.0001). Mean baseline home BP was 141.7/81.9 mm Hg during the pandemic and 139.8/82.2 prepandemic, and fell ≈16/9 mm Hg in both periods (P<0.0001). Maintenance during the pandemic was achieved earlier (median 11.8 versus 19.6 weeks, P<0.0001), with more frequent monthly calls (8.2 versus 3.1, P<0.0001) and more monthly home BP recordings per patient (32.4 versus 18.9, P<0.0001), compared with the prepandemic period. Conclusions A remote clinical management program was successfully adapted and delivered significant improvements in BP control and increased home BP monitoring despite a nationally observed disruption of traditional hypertension care. Such programs have the potential to transform hypertension management and care delivery.

Recent Advances in Remote Pulmonary Artery Pressure Monitoring for Patients with Chronic Heart Failure: Current Evidence and Future Perspectives.

Chronic heart failure (HF) is associated with high hospital admission rates and has an enormous burden on hospital resources worldwide. Ideally, detection of worsening HF in an early phase would allow physicians to intervene timely and proactively in order to prevent HF-related hospitalizations, a concept better known as remote hemodynamic monitoring. After years of research, remote monitoring of pulmonary artery pressures (PAP) has emerged as the most successful technique for ambulatory hemodynamic monitoring in HF patients to date. Currently, the CardioMEMS and Cordella HF systems have been tested for pulmonary artery pressure monitoring and the body of evidence has been growing rapidly over the past years. However, several ongoing studies are aiming to fill the gap in evidence that is still very clinically relevant, especially for the European setting. In this comprehensive review, we provide an overview of all available evidence for PAP monitoring as well as a detailed discussion of currently ongoing studies and future perspectives for this promising technique that is likely to impact HF care worldwide.

Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in treated patients with hypertension in the COVID-19 pandemic - The study of European society of hypertension (ESH ABPM COVID-19 study).

PURPOSE: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and the subsequent lockdown profoundly affected almost all aspects of daily life including health services worldwide. The established risk factors for increased blood pressure (BP) and hypertension may also demonstrate significant changes during the pandemic. This study aims to determine the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on BP control and BP phenotypes as assessed with 24-hour ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a multi-centre, observational, retrospective and comparative study involving Excellence Centres of the European Society of Hypertension across Europe. Along with clinical data and office BP, ABPM recordings will be collected in adult patients with treated arterial hypertension. There will be two groups in the study: Group 1 will consist of participants who have undergone two ABPM recordings - the second one occurring during the COVID-19 pandemic, i.e. after March 2020, and the first one 9-15 months prior to the second. Participants in Group 2 will have two repeated ABPM recordings - both performed before the pandemic within a similar 9-15 month interval between the recordings. Within each group, we will analyse and compare BP variables and phenotypes (including averaged daytime and night-time BP, BP variability, dipper and non-dipper status, white-coat and masked hypertension) between the two respective ABPM recordings and compare these changes between the two groups. The target sample size will amount to least 590 participants in each of the study groups, which means a total of at least 2360 ABPM recordings overall. EXPECTED OUTCOMES: As a result, we expect to identify the impact of a COVID-19 pandemic on blood pressure control and the quality of medical care in order to develop the strategy to control cardiovascular risk factors during unpredictable global events.

What is the context?A wide range of daily activities, including health care worldwide, were deeply affected by the Coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic and the subsequent lockdown.What is new?Our multicenter study will examine the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on blood pressure control in hypertensive patients across Europe by analysing results of 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring.What is the impact?Optimising strategies for dealing with future unpredictable global situations will depend on understanding how the pandemic affected blood pressure control.

Wearable blood pressure measurement devices and new approaches in hypertension management: the digital era.

Out-of-office blood pressure (BP) measurement is considered an integral component of the diagnostic algorithm and management of hypertension. In the era of digitalization, a great deal of wearable BP measuring devices has been developed. These digital blood pressure monitors allow frequent BP measurements with minimal annoyance to the patient while they do promise radical changes regarding the diagnostic accuracy, as the importance of making an accurate diagnosis of hypertension has become evident. By increasing the number of BP measurements in different conditions, these monitors allow accurate identification of different clinical phenotypes, such as masked hypertension and pathological BP variability, that seem to have a negative impact on cardiovascular prognosis. Frequent measurements of BP and the incorporation of new features in BP variability, both enable well-rounded interpretation of BP data in the context of real-life settings. This article is a review of all different technologies and wearable BP monitoring devices.

AMBULATORY BLOOD PRESSURE VARIABILITY IN YOUNG ADULTS WITH LONG-COVID SYNDROME.

OBJECTIVE: The aim: To perform an overall assessment of BP and BP variability using ambulatory measurements in young adults with long COVID syndrome. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Materials and methods: We enrolled young patients with diagnosed long-COVID syndrome (n = 58, mean age 23.07 ± 1.54 years), compared with an age-matched healthy subjects who had not suffered from COVID-19 (n = 57, mean age 22.9 ± 1.83 years). Patients with long-COVID syndrome had recovered from mild/moderate illness and none had required hospitalization. Ambulatory 24 hours blood pressure (AMBP) parameters (mean BP, daytime BP, nighttime BP, pulse pressure, nocturnal systolic BP dipping, dipper status) were measured in all participants. The variability of systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP) values was assessed by the following common metrics, including the average real variability (ARV), the coefficient of variation (CV), the standard deviation (SD), and the weighed SD of SBP and DBP. RESULTS: Results: The average values of 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure, mean BP, daytime and nighttime systolic BP, diastolic BP and pulse pressure were found to be significantly different among patients with long COVID syndrome and control group. Group analyses showed that this difference was in SBP mean values (127.1 ± 6.65 mmHg and 115.93 ± 6.24 mmHg respectively) and DBP mean values (73.31 ± 5.30 mmHg and 68.79 ± 5.5 mmHg respectively) mainly at night. PP values at daytime were almost similar among groups, but PP values at nighttime were higher in patients with long-COVID syndrome (53.8 (52.44- 55.14) mmHg and 47.14 (46.45 - 47.88) mmHg respectively). Nocturnal SBP dipping was better in control group than in patients with long-COVID syndrome ( 5.3 ± 5.68 and 3.1 ± 3.79 mmHg respectively). Only 13 (22.4%) patients with long-COVID syndrome had normal dip-per status while more than half - 38 (66.7%) in healthy subjects. The values of ARV of SBP and DBP over 24-hour, awake, and asleep time frames were found to be greater in patients with long COVID syndrome than healthy controls (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Conclusions: Patients with long- COVID syndrome have higher BP mean values of 24-hour ABPM particularly at nightime, significant blood pressure BP variability, which increases the risk of cardiovascular events in future. Nevertheless, the further prospective investigations is warranted to investigate the potential mechanisms and causality associations.

Changes in Blood Pressure Outcomes Among Hypertensive Individuals During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Time Series Analysis in Three US Healthcare Organizations.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic may have negatively affected medical care for and self-management of chronic hypertension. We sought to examine the impact of the pandemic on blood pressure (BP) among individuals with hypertension. METHODS: Using an interrupted time series analysis, we compared the level and trend (slope) of BP outcomes before the public health emergency declaration (prepandemic period: August 2018 through January 2020) versus after the stay-at-home orders (pandemic period: April 2020 through November 2020) among adults with hypertension followed at 3 large health systems (n=137 593). Outcomes include systolic and diastolic BP recorded in electronic health records and the proportion of individuals with BP <140/90 mm Hg. RESULTS: The number of BP measurements substantially dropped early in the pandemic and then gradually increased. During the pandemic period, systolic and diastolic BP increased by 1.79 mm Hg (95% CI, 1.57-2.01; P<0.001) and 1.30 mm Hg (95% CI, 1.18-1.42; P<0.001), respectively, compared with the prepandemic period. Similarly, the proportion of patients with controlled BP decreased by 3.43 percentage points (95% CI, -3.97 to -2.90; P<0.001). A trend showing increasing control in the prepandemic period (+3.19 percentage points per year [95% CI, +2.96 to +3.42]; P<0.001) flattened during the pandemic period (+0.27 percentage points per year [95% CI, -0.81 to -1.37]; P=0.62). CONCLUSIONS: The first 8 months of the pandemic were associated with worsening BP outcomes among individuals with hypertension. Opportunities to ensure ongoing access to health care with telemedicine and home BP monitoring may mitigate adverse impacts on BP control for future disasters/emergencies.

Twenty-Four-Hour Central Hemodynamic Load in Adults With and Without a History of COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Although hypertension is a risk factor for severe Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) illness, little is known about the effects of COVID-19 on blood pressure (BP). Central BP measures taken over a 24-hour period using ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) adds prognostic value in assessing cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk compared with brachial BP measures from a single time point. We assessed CVD risk between adults with and without a history of COVID-19 via appraisal of 24-hour brachial and central hemodynamic load from ABPM. METHODS: Cross-sectional analysis was performed on 32 adults who tested positive for COVID-19 (29 ± 13 years, 22 females) and 43 controls (28 ± 12 years, 26 females). Measures of 24-hour hemodynamic load included brachial and central systolic and diastolic BP, pulse pressure, augmentation index (AIx), pulse wave velocity (PWV), nocturnal BP dipping, the ambulatory arterial stiffness index (AASI), and the blood pressure variability ratio (BPVR). RESULTS: Participants who tested positive for COVID-19 experienced 6 ± 4 COVID-19 symptoms, were studied 122 ± 123 days after testing positive, and had mild-to-moderate COVID-19 illness. The results from independent samples t-tests showed no significant differences in 24-hour, daytime, or nighttime measures of central or peripheral hemodynamic load across those with and without a history of COVID-19 (P > 0.05 for all). CONCLUSIONS: No differences in 24-hour brachial or central ABPM measures were detected between adults recovering from mild-to-moderate COVID-19 and controls without a history of COVID-19. Adults recovering from mild-to-moderate COVID-19 do not have increased 24-hour central hemodynamic load.

Mild Left Ventricular Hypertrophy in Middle-Age Male Athletes as a Sign of Masked Arterial Hypertension.

Mild left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) has been considered as one of the possible structural, physiological adaptations to regular, intensive physical activity. However, it may also appear as one of the subclinical complications of hypertension. In athletes, the differential diagnosis between these two entities may be complicated as regular physical activity may potentially mask the presence of arterial hypertension. We sought to determine the relation between LVH in middle-age athletes and the presence of hypertension. The study included 71 healthy, male long-time amateur athletes (mean age 41 ± 6 years, 83% endurance and 17% power sports) without known hypertension or any other cardiovascular diseases and with normal self-measured and office blood pressure. All subjects underwent resting electrocardiogram, transthoracic echocardiography, maximal exercise test on a treadmill and ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. LVH was diagnosed as left ventricular wall diameter >11 mm. Hypertension was defined as mean 24 h systolic blood pressure (SBP) ≥ 130 mmHg and/or diastolic blood pressure (DBP) ≥ 80 mmHg. Exaggerated blood pressure response (EBPR) to exercise was defined as SBP ≥ 210 mmHg. LVH (range > 11 to 14 mm) was found in 20 subjects (28%) and hypertension was diagnosed in 33 subjects (46%). Athletes with LVH were more likely to have hypertension than those without LVH (70% vs. 37%, p = 0.01). EBPR to exercise was found equally common in athletes with and without LVH (35% vs. 29%, p = 0.68), but more often in subjects with hypertension (51% vs. 13%, p < 0.001). Presence of LVH and hypertension was equally common in the studied endurance and power sport athletes (p = 0.66 and p = 0.79, respectively). In comparison to athletes without LVH, those with LVH had larger left atrial size (26 ± 6 vs. 21 ± 4 cm2, p < 0.001) and a tendency for lower left ventricular diastolic function (E/A 1.2 ± 0.4 vs. 1.5 ± 0.4, p = 0.05) and a larger ascending aorta diameter (34 ± 3 vs. 32 ± 3, p = 0.05), but a similar left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (51 ± 3 vs. 51 ± 4, p = 0.71). The presence of mild left ventricular hypertrophy in middle-age male amateur athletes with normal home and office blood pressure may be considered as a potential sign of masked hypertension. It should not be overlooked as an element of a physiological adaptation to exercise and may warrant further medical evaluation with ambulatory blood pressure monitoring.

Effect of Empagliflozin and Dapagliflozin on Ambulatory Arterial Stiffness in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and Cardiovascular Co-Morbidities: A Prospective, Observational Study.

Background and Objectives: Individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) have an increased risk of cardiovascular disease. Arterial stiffness is an independent prognostic marker for cardiovascular disease development. We aimed at determining the effect of two different sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors on ambulatory arterial stiffness in individuals with T2DM. Materials and Methods: In this single-center, single-arm, prospective study performed from January 2020 to August 2021, we planned to enroll adult subjects with T2DM and stable antidiabetic and antihypertensive treatment, assigned either to empagliflozin or dapagliflozin for 6 months. All eligible subjects underwent ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. We set as the primary efficacy outcome the change in ambulatory pulse wave velocity (PWV) from baseline to week 24. Results: We finally enrolled 46 diabetic subjects, with a mean age of 62.89 (8.53) years and mean T2DM duration of 9.72 (6.37) years. Thirty patients received dapagliflozin, while sixteen patients received empagliflozin. Due to COVID-19 pandemic restrictive measures during the study, the mean follow-up period extended from 6 months to 9.98 (3.27) months. Regarding the prespecified primary efficacy outcome, we found that the SGLT-2 inhibitor treatment did not have a significant effect on PWV (p = 0.65). Prior history of cardiovascular disease did not significantly affect the observed effects. Other indices of arterial stiffness, such as augmentation index and central pulse pressure, were not significantly affected, neither by empagliflozin nor by dapagliflozin. Conclusions: SGLT-2 inhibitor treatment with empagliflozin or dapagliflozin in subjects with T2DM failed to improve ambulatory PWV over a mean follow-up of 10 months. Registration number: ISRCTN88851713.

Autonomic dysfunction and metabolic disorders as the possible sequelae of COVID-19 infection.

OBJECTIVE: The Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection is associated with autonomic dysfunction. Data on the long-term relationship between COVID-19 infection, heart rate recovery (HRR), and exaggerated blood pressure response to exercise (EBPR) are very limited. In our study, we aimed at investigating the long-term association between COVID-19, HRR, EBPR, metabolic, and echocardiographic parameters. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study included 65 patients in the study group (33 female, median age 46) and 57 in the control group (30 female, 39 median age) between 1 April 2020 and 1 January 2021. Office blood pressure measurement, 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring, treadmill test, echocardiography, and metabolic parameters were evaluated. RESULTS: The frequency of blunted HRR (25 subjects, 38.5%, p < 0.001) and EBPR (7 subjects, 10.8%, p = 0.014) were significantly higher in study group. The study group had higher levels of white blood cell (p = 0.002), neutrophil, c-reactive protein, and uric acid (p < 0.001). Diameters of left atrium, aortic root, and ascending aorta were significantly higher in study group (p < 0.05). Age adjusted multiple logistic regression analysis showed that neutrophil levels (odds ratio (OR), 9.21; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.52-55.75, p = 0.016), glomerular filtration rate (OR, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.13-1.59, p = 0.001), basal heart rate (OR, 1.58; 95% CI, 1.17-2.12, p = 0.003), and mean heart rate (OR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.03-1.45, p = 0.0021) were independently associated with COVID-19 infection. CONCLUSIONS: The frequency of blunted HRR and EBPR, and uric acid levels were significantly higher in the study group compared to the control group, suggesting autonomic dysfunction as the possible sequelae of the COVID-19 infection and increased risk of cardiovascular events in the future.

Telemonitoring and protocolized case management for hypertensive community dwelling older adults (TECHNOMED): a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Home blood pressure (BP) telemonitoring combined with case management leads to BP reductions in individuals with hypertension. However, its benefits are less clear in older (age ≥ 65 years) adults. METHODS: Twelve-month, open-label, randomized trial of community-dwelling older adults comparing the combination of home BP telemonitoring (HBPM) and pharmacist-led case management, vs. enhanced usual care with HBPM alone. The primary outcome was the proportion achieving systolic BP targets on 24-h ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM). Changes in HBPM were also examined. Logistic and linear regressions were used for analyses, adjusted for baseline BP. RESULTS: Enrollment was stopped early due to coronavirus disease 2019. Participants randomized to intervention (n = 61) and control (n = 59) groups were mostly female (77%), with mean age 79.5 years. The adjusted odds ratio for ABPM BP target achievement was 1.48 (95% confidence interval 0.87-2.52, P = 0.15). At 12 months, the mean difference in BP changes between intervention and control groups was -1.6/-1.1 for ABPM (P-value 0.26 for systolic BP and 0.10 for diastolic BP), and -4.9/-3.1 for HBPM (P-value 0.04 for systolic BP and 0.01 for diastolic BP), favoring the intervention. Intervention group participants had hypotension (systolic BP < 110) more frequently (21% vs. 5%, P = 0.009), but no differences in orthostatic symptoms, syncope, non-mechanical falls, or emergency department visits. CONCLUSIONS: Home BP telemonitoring and pharmacist case management did not improve achievement of target range ambulatory BP, but did reduce home BP. It did not result in major adverse consequences.

Self-monitoring of blood pressure in pregnancy: A mixed methods evaluation of a national roll-out in the context of a pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate how English maternity units implemented self-monitoring of blood pressure (SMBP) in pregnancy in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. DESIGN: Mixed methods including surveys, anonymised patient data and in-depth interviews with women. SETTING: Maternity units across England. PARTICIPANTS: 45 maternity units completed a survey about the implementation of SMBP (supported by the provision of guidance and blood pressure monitors) during the pandemic, 166 women completed a survey about their experiences of SMBP, and 23 women took part in in-depth interviews. Clinical data from 627 women undertaking SMBP were available from 13 maternity units. RESULTS: SMBP was predominantly used to provide additional BP monitoring for hypertensive or high-risk pregnant women. Overall maternity units and women were positive about its use in terms of reducing the need for additional face-to-face contacts and giving women more control and insight into their own BP. However, there were challenges in setting up SMBP services rapidly and embedding them within existing care pathways, particularly around interpreting readings and managing the provision of monitors. CONCLUSIONS: A considerable proportion of maternity units in England commenced a SMBP service for hypertensive or high-risk women from March 2020. There is a need for further research into appropriate care pathways, including guidance around white coat or masked hypertension and the use of SMBP postnatally.

Self-monitoring of blood pressure among women with hypertensive disorders of pregnancy: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends self-monitoring of blood pressure (SMBP) for hypertension management. In addition, during the COVID-19 response, WHO guidance also recommends SMBP supported by health workers although more evidence is needed on whether SMBP of pregnant individuals with hypertension (gestational hypertension, chronic hypertension, or pre-eclampsia) may assist in early detection of pre-eclampsia, increase end-user autonomy and empowerment, and reduce health system burden. To expand the evidence base for WHO guideline on self-care interventions, we conducted a systematic review of SMBP during pregnancy on maternal and neonatal outcomes. METHODS: We searched for publications that compared SMBP with clinic-based monitoring during antenatal care. We included studies measuring any of the following outcomes: maternal mortality, pre-eclampsia, long-term risk and complications, autonomy, HELLP syndrome, C-section, antenatal hospital admission, adverse pregnancy outcomes, device-related issues, follow-up care with appropriate management, mental health and well-being, social harms, stillbirth or perinatal death, birthweight/size for gestational age, and Apgar score. After abstract screening and full-text review, we extracted data using standardized forms and summarized findings. We also reviewed studies assessing values and preferences as well as costs of SMBP. RESULTS: We identified 6 studies meeting inclusion criteria for the effectiveness of SMBP, 6 studies on values and preferences, and 1 study on costs. All were from high-income countries. Overall, when comparing SMBP with clinic-monitoring, there was no difference in the risks for most of the outcomes for which data were available, though there was some evidence of increased risk of C-section among pregnant women with chronic hypertension. Most end-users and providers supported SMBP, motivated by ease of use, convenience, self-empowerment and reduced anxiety. One study found SMBP would lower health sector costs. CONCLUSION: Limited evidence suggests that SMBP during pregnancy is feasible and acceptable, and generally associated with maternal and neonatal health outcomes similar to clinic-based monitoring. However, more research is needed in resource-limited settings. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42021233839 .

Hypertension: The most common chronic health problem in Spain. A call to action.

Hypertension (HYP) is the first cause of death and disability worldwide. In Spain, one in 3 adults was hypertensive in 2010 (62% in those >65 years in 2017). Despite improvement in HYP management over time, only half of treated hypertensive patients are adequately controlled, which translates in 30,000 annual cardiovascular deaths attributable to HYP. Among modifiable determinants of lack of blood pressure (BP) control in Spain are: (a) the white-coat phenomenon (accounting for 20-50% of apparent lack of control) due to not using ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM, use ≈20%) or self-measurement of home BP (HBPM, use ≈60%) for confirming HYP diagnosis; (b) insufficient patients adherence to BP-lowering lifestyles (e.g., only 40% of hypertensive patients have a sodium intake <2.4g/day, or follow a weight reduction advice), and (c) use of drug monotherapy (≈50% currently), usually insufficient to achieve an optimal control. It is necessary to implement strategies to monitor the evolution of the proportion of subjects with HYP with reasonable national update, to promote population's knowledge of their BP figures and of other cardiovascular risk factors, to improve the degree of HYP control and vascular risk in Spain.

Digital Therapeutics in Hypertension: Evidence and Perspectives.

Digital therapeutics refers to the use of evidence-based therapeutic interventions driven by high-quality software programs to treat, manage, or prevent a medical condition. This approach is being increasingly investigated for the management of hypertension, a common condition that is the leading preventable cardiovascular disease risk factor worldwide. Digital interventions can help facilitate uptake of important guideline-recommended lifestyle modifications, reinforce home blood pressure monitoring, decrease therapeutic inertia, and improve medication adherence. However, current studies are only of moderate quality, and are highly heterogeneous in the interventions evaluated, comparator used, and results obtained. Therefore, additional studies are needed, focusing on the development of universally applicable and consistent digital therapeutic strategies designed with health care professional input and evaluation of these interventions in robust clinical trials with objective end points. Hopefully, the momentum for digital therapeutics triggered by the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic can be utilized to maximize advancements in this field and drive widespread implementation.