How reliable are stroke patients' reports of their numbers of general practice consultations over 12 months?

BACKGROUND: Data on primary health care use are frequently used in economic evaluations. However, it is unclear how patient self-reports of their number of consultations with their general practitioner (GP) relate to actual consultations in the electronic records. These data are crucial if self-reports are used to conduct economic evaluations. OBJECTIVES: To report the accuracy of stroke patients' self-reports of their number of primary care consultations over a 12-month period by comparison with practice-held electronic records. We also recorded the number of contacts required to collect service use data from the practices. METHODS: We contacted 65 practices requesting electronic consultation records over 12 months for 115 stroke patients who took part in a trial of home blood pressure monitoring. Consultation rates from the electronic records were compared with patients' self-reported number of consultations from a questionnaire covering the same period. RESULTS: Fifty-one practices (78%) responded. Patients' questionnaires (n = 83) reported a mean of 5.7 consultations with their GP per year compared with 7.2 in the electronic records (difference 1.6, 95% confidence interval 0.5-2.7, P < 0.01). The mean time taken to obtain records from practices was 6 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: Patients modestly under-reported the number of consultations they had with a GP. Obtaining patient records from practices required more effort than obtaining information from patient questionnaires at the same time as assessing main trial outcomes. If patient self-reports of health care usage are used in economic evaluations in primary care, researchers should consider validating a sample against electronic records.

Home blood pressure monitoring with nurse-led telephone support among patients with hypertension and a history of stroke: a community-based randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Adequate control of blood pressure reduces the risk of recurrent stroke. We conducted a randomized controlled study to determine whether home blood pressure monitoring with nurse-led telephone support would reduce blood pressure in patients with hypertension and a history of stroke. METHODS: We recruited 381 participants (mean age 72 years) from outpatient and inpatient stroke clinics between Mar. 1, 2007, and Aug. 31, 2009. Nearly half (45%, 170) of the participants had some disability due to stroke. Participants were visited at home for a baseline assessment and randomly allocated to home blood pressure monitoring (n = 187) or usual care (n = 194). Those in the intervention group were given a monitor, brief training and telephone support. Participants who had home blood pressure readings consistently over target (target < 130/80 mm Hg) were advised to consult their family physician. The main outcome measure was a fall in systolic blood pressure after 12 months, measured by an independent researcher unaware of group allocation. RESULTS: Despite more patients in the intervention group than in the control group having changes to antihypertensive treatment during the trial period (60.1% [98/163] v. 47.6% [78/164], p = 0.02), the fall in systolic blood pressure from baseline did not differ significantly between the groups (adjusted mean difference 0.3 mm Hg, 95% confidence interval -3.6 to 4.2 mm Hg). Subgroup analysis showed significant interaction with disability due to stroke (p = 0.03 at 6 months) and baseline blood pressure (p = 0.03 at 12 months). INTERPRETATION: Overall, home monitoring did not improve blood pressure control in patients with hypertension and a history of stroke. It was associated with a fall in systolic pressure in patients who had uncontrolled blood pressure at baseline and those without disability due to stroke. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov registration NCT00514800.

Are stroke patients' reports of home blood pressure readings reliable? Cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Home blood pressure (BP) monitoring is gaining increasing popularity among patients and may be useful in hypertension management. Little is known about the reliability of stroke patients' records of home BP monitoring. OBJECTIVE: To assess the reliability of home BP recording in hypertensive patients who had suffered a recent stroke or transient ischaemic attack. METHODS: Thirty-nine stroke patients (mean age 73 years) randomized to the intervention arm of a trial of home BP monitoring were included. Following instruction by a research nurse, patients recorded their BPs at home and documented them in a booklet over the next year. The booklet readings over a month were compared with the actual readings downloaded from the BP monitor and were checked for errors or selective bias in recording. RESULTS: A total of 1027 monitor and 716 booklet readings were recorded. Ninety per cent of booklet recordings were exactly the same as the BP monitor readings. Average booklet readings were 0.6 mmHg systolic [95% confidence interval (95% CI) -0.6 to 1.8] and 0.3 mmHg diastolic (95% CI -0.3 to 0.8) lower than those on the monitor. CONCLUSIONS: This group of elderly stroke patients were able to record their BPs reliably at home. Any bias was small and would be unlikely to affect management. Since BP readings in a GP surgery are often a poor indication of true BP, GPs might consider using hypertensive patients' records of home BP monitoring to help guide treatment decisions.