Blood pressure variability and prevalence of hypertension using automated readings from multiple visits to a pharmacy-based community-wide programme.

Blood pressure (BP) measurements taken outside the routine office context may be a useful adjunct strategy to monitor BP. Community-based BP data can also provide estimates of the prevalence of elevated BP. We compared multiple readings taken on different days in pharmacies using an automated BpTRU device during a cardiovascular health programme targeting community-dwelling older adults. Mean systolic (S) and diastolic (D) BP values were compared over time using repeated measures analysis of variance for all participants with at least three separate sets of readings (n=317). BP variability was then examined among four subgroups based on report of antihypertensive medication or no treatment, and normal or elevated SBP at the initial visit (< or >or=140, or 130 if diabetes reported). Prevalence of elevated BP was compared across visits. Overall, mean SBP decreased between visits 1 and 2 (140.4 vs 137.1 mm Hg; P<0.001). Among participants with normal SBP at the initial visit, SBP did not vary significantly, whether or not antihypertensive treatment was reported. Those with initially elevated SBP experienced a significant decrease between visits 1 and 2, also regardless of treatment status. Prevalence of elevated BP decreased from visits 1 to 2 (55.8 vs 48.9%; P=0.026) and from visits 1 to 3 (55.8 vs 42.9%; P<0.001). Analyses of BP data from a community-based programme using an accurate device showed that initial readings may inflate the population estimate of elevated BP. Findings suggest that more than one set of BP readings measured on different occasions are needed, particularly if the first set is elevated.

Vaginal self sampling versus physician cervical sampling for HPV among younger and older women.

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the agreement between self collected vaginal swabs and physician collected cervical brush samples for detection of oncogenic human papillomavirus infection (HPV) by the hybrid capture 2 (HC-2) test among women younger and older than 50 years, and to assess women's preference for sample collection method based on age. METHODS: Consecutive women aged 15-49 years due for a 1 year visit in a prevalence study of carcinogenic HPV and a new sample of women aged 50 years and older attending their family physicians for cervical screening, in Ontario, Canada, performed vaginal self sampling and underwent physician cervical sampling and cervical cytology. Women completed a self administered questionnaire on demographics and preference for sampling method. RESULTS: Among the 307 women aged 15-49 years, the prevalence of HPV was 20.8% (64/307) and 17.6% (54/307) in the vaginal and cervical specimens, respectively. Among the women aged 50 years and older, prevalence was 9.9% (15/152) and 8.6% (13/152), respectively. Kappa for agreement between sample collection methods was 0.54 for the younger and 0.37 for the older women (both p< 0.001). Nearly half of the women preferred self sampling or had no preference. CONCLUSIONS: There was fair agreement between self collected vaginal and physician collected cervical specimens for detecting carcinogenic HPV in younger and older women. Vaginal sampling for HPV appears to be promising as a primary screening strategy for cervical cancer prevention programmes in low resource settings in developed and developing countries.