MbrlCatalogueTitleDetail

Do you wish to reserve the book?
Comparison of patients’ acceptance of cuff-based vs wearable 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring devices: A multi-method study
Comparison of patients’ acceptance of cuff-based vs wearable 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring devices: A multi-method study
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
You are currently in the queue to collect this book. You will be notified once it is your turn to collect the book.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Comparison of patients’ acceptance of cuff-based vs wearable 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring devices: A multi-method study
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Title added to your shelf!
Title added to your shelf!
View what I already have on My Shelf.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to add the title to your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Do you wish to request the book?
Comparison of patients’ acceptance of cuff-based vs wearable 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring devices: A multi-method study
Comparison of patients’ acceptance of cuff-based vs wearable 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring devices: A multi-method study

Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
How would you like to get it?
We have requested the book for you! Sorry the robot delivery is not available at the moment
We have requested the book for you!
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Comparison of patients’ acceptance of cuff-based vs wearable 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring devices: A multi-method study
Comparison of patients’ acceptance of cuff-based vs wearable 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring devices: A multi-method study
Journal Article

Comparison of patients’ acceptance of cuff-based vs wearable 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring devices: A multi-method study

2025
Request Book From Autostore and Choose the Collection Method
Overview
Recent hypertension guidelines recommend ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) for accurate diagnosis and monitoring. However, patients' experiences with cuff and wearable ABPM devices in primary care remain unclear. This study compared the acceptance of three devices (oscillometry cuff, tonometry wrist, and photoplethysmography chest devices) among patients with hypertension in primary care. A multi-method study was conducted. Thirty-five participants with hypertension were recruited from two public primary care clinics in Singapore. All participants used cuff-based and either wrist or chest wearable devices for 24 hours. Structured surveys and in-depth audio-recorded interviews were used to gather feedback on their views, experiences, and challenges using the devices. The interviews were thematically analysed, and the surveys were analysed using descriptive statistics. All participants used the cuff (n = 35) device, while the wrist and chest devices were used by two-thirds (n = 22) and a third (n = 11) of the participants, respectively. The device usability questionnaire found that most participants were satisfied with the chest device, which did not disrupt their daily activities. Conversely, cuff arm devices interfered with daily activities (48%) and sleep (26%), were cumbersome (32%), and caused embarrassment (26%). The wrist device was uncomfortable (33%) and painful (22%) for some participants. The qualitative data were categorised into five themes: comfort, convenience, perceived accuracy, and impact on routine and sleep. Participants found the chest device more comfortable and convenient than the cuff and wrist devices. The cuff device was perceived as the most accurate due to its inflation-based BP measurement. All devices minimally affected routines and sleep, though participants expressed safety concerns about the cuff device, particularly while driving. While wearable ABPM devices offer increased comfort, convenience and reduced impact on patient's daily activities, concerns regarding their accuracy must be addressed before the widespread adoption of these devices in routine clinical practice.