Emma P Bray
University of Birmingham
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Emma P Bray.
JAMA | 2014
Richard J McManus; Jonathan Mant; M Sayeed Haque; Emma P Bray; Stirling Bryan; Sheila Greenfield; Miren I Jones; Sue Jowett; Paul Little; Cristina Penaloza; Claire Schwartz; Helen Shackleford; Claire Shovelton; Jinu Varghese; Bryan Williams; Fd Richard Hobbs
IMPORTANCE Self-monitoring of blood pressure with self-titration of antihypertensives (self-management) results in lower blood pressure in patients with hypertension, but there are no data about patients in high-risk groups. OBJECTIVE To determine the effect of self-monitoring with self-titration of antihypertensive medication compared with usual care on systolic blood pressure among patients with cardiovascular disease, diabetes, or chronic kidney disease. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS A primary care, unblinded, randomized clinical trial involving 552 patients who were aged at least 35 years with a history of stroke, coronary heart disease, diabetes, or chronic kidney disease and with baseline blood pressure of at least 130/80 mm Hg being treated at 59 UK primary care practices was conducted between March 2011 and January 2013. INTERVENTIONS Self-monitoring of blood pressure combined with an individualized self-titration algorithm. During the study period, the office visit blood pressure measurement target was 130/80 mm Hg and the home measurement target was 120/75 mm Hg. Control patients received usual care consisting of seeing their health care clinician for routine blood pressure measurement and adjustment of medication if necessary. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was the difference in systolic blood pressure between intervention and control groups at the 12-month office visit. RESULTS Primary outcome data were available from 450 patients (81%). The mean baseline blood pressure was 143.1/80.5 mm Hg in the intervention group and 143.6/79.5 mm Hg in the control group. After 12 months, the mean blood pressure had decreased to 128.2/73.8 mm Hg in the intervention group and to 137.8/76.3 mm Hg in the control group, a difference of 9.2 mm Hg (95% CI, 5.7-12.7) in systolic and 3.4 mm Hg (95% CI, 1.8-5.0) in diastolic blood pressure following correction for baseline blood pressure. Multiple imputation for missing values gave similar results: the mean baseline was 143.5/80.2 mm Hg in the intervention group vs 144.2/79.9 mm Hg in the control group, and at 12 months, the mean was 128.6/73.6 mm Hg in the intervention group vs 138.2/76.4 mm Hg in the control group, with a difference of 8.8 mm Hg (95% CI, 4.9-12.7) for systolic and 3.1 mm Hg (95% CI, 0.7-5.5) for diastolic blood pressure between groups. These results were comparable in all subgroups, without excessive adverse events. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Among patients with hypertension at high risk of cardiovascular disease, self-monitoring with self-titration of antihypertensive medication compared with usual care resulted in lower systolic blood pressure at 12 months. TRIAL REGISTRATION isrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN87171227.
Annals of Medicine | 2010
Emma P Bray; Roger Holder; Jonathan Mant; Richard McManus
Abstract Introduction. Self-monitoring of blood pressure (BP) is an increasingly common part of hypertension management. The objectives of this systematic review were to evaluate the systolic and diastolic BP reduction, and achievement of target BP, associated with self-monitoring. Methods. MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane database of systematic reviews, database of abstracts of clinical effectiveness, the health technology assessment database, the NHS economic evaluation database, and the TRIP database were searched for studies where the intervention included self-monitoring of BP and the outcome was change in office/ambulatory BP or proportion with controlled BP. Two reviewers independently extracted data. Meta-analysis using a random effects model was combined with meta-regression to investigate heterogeneity in effect sizes. Results. A total of 25 eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (27 comparisons) were identified. Office systolic BP (20 RCTs, 21 comparisons, 5,898 patients) and diastolic BP (23 RCTs, 25 comparisons, 6,038 patients) were significantly reduced in those who self-monitored compared to usual care (weighted mean difference (WMD) systolic −3.82 mmHg (95% confidence interval −5.61 to −2.03), diastolic −1.45 mmHg (−1.95 to −0.94)). Self-monitoring increased the chance of meeting office BP targets (12 RCTs, 13 comparisons, 2,260 patients, relative risk = 1.09 (1.02 to 1.16)). There was significant heterogeneity between studies for all three comparisons, which could be partially accounted for by the use of additional co-interventions. Conclusion. Self-monitoring reduces blood pressure by a small but significant amount. Meta-regression could only account for part of the observed heterogeneity.
BMJ | 2008
Richard McManus; Paul Glasziou; Andrew Hayen; Jonathan Mant; Paul L. Padfield; John F. Potter; Emma P Bray; David Mant
#### Summary points Self measurement of blood pressure was introduced in the 1930s and is now practised by almost 10% of the general population of the United Kingdom.1 2 Because blood pressure monitors are now readily available and cheap (as little as £10;
European Journal of Preventive Cardiology | 2014
Billingsley Kaambwa; Stirling Bryan; Sue Jowett; Jonathan Mant; Emma P Bray; Fd Richard Hobbs; Roger Holder; Miren I Jones; Paul Little; Bryan Williams; Richard J McManus
15; €11.8), self monitoring is likely to increase—in the United States and Europe up to two thirds of people with hypertension self monitor.3 At present we have insufficient evidence to make use of multiple blood pressure readings generated from home monitoring in clinical care. This review—which is based on available evidence from randomised trials, systematic reviews, and expert consensus—discusses the clinical importance of self measurement of blood pressure in establishing the diagnosis of hypertension, in subsequent titration of drugs, and in longer term monitoring. #### Sources and selection criteria We extracted key studies from a Medline search for randomised controlled trials and systematic reviews to the end of 2007. These were supplemented by data from the personal references of study group members. After an open conference in early July 2008, at which the main data from the literature were presented, the group held a writing day to distil what was known and unknown for a series of questions for self monitoring of hypertension. Self monitoring of blood pressure is when a person (or carer) measures their own blood pressure outside the clinic—at home, in the workplace, or elsewhere.4 Self monitoring allows multiple measurements and therefore provides a more precise …
Journal of Hypertension | 2014
James P Sheppard; Roger Holder; Linda Nichols; Emma P Bray; Fd Richard Hobbs; Jonathan Mant; Paul Little; Bryan Williams; Sheila Greenfield; Richard J McManus
Aims: Self-monitoring and self-titration of antihypertensives (self-management) is a novel intervention which improves blood pressure control. However, little evidence exists regarding the cost-effectiveness of self-monitoring of blood pressure in general and self-management in particular. This study aimed to evaluate whether self-management of hypertension was cost-effective. Design and methods: A cohort Markov model-based probabilistic cost-effectiveness analysis was undertaken extrapolating to up to 35 years from cost and outcome data collected from the telemonitoring and self-management in hypertension trial (TASMINH2). Self-management of hypertension was compared with usual care in terms of lifetime costs, quality adjusted life years and cost-effectiveness using a UK Health Service perspective. Sensitivity analyses examined the effect of different time horizons and reduced effectiveness over time from self-management. Results: In the long-term, when compared with usual care, self-management was more effective by 0.24 and 0.12 quality adjusted life years (QALYs) gained per patient for men and women, respectively. The resultant incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for self-management was £1624 per QALY for men and £4923 per QALY for women. There was at least a 99% chance of the intervention being cost-effective for both sexes at a willingness to pay threshold of £20,000 per QALY gained. These results were robust to sensitivity analyses around the assumptions made, provided that the effects of self-management lasted at least two years for men and five years for women. Conclusion: Self-monitoring with self-titration of antihypertensives and telemonitoring of blood pressure measurements not only reduces blood pressure, compared with usual care, but also represents a cost-effective use of health care resources.
BMC Cardiovascular Disorders | 2009
Richard J McManus; Emma P Bray; Jonathan Mant; Roger Holder; Sheila Greenfield; Stirling Bryan; Miren I Jones; Paul Little; Bryan Williams; Fd Richard Hobbs
Objectives: Identification of people with lower (white-coat effect) or higher (masked effect) blood pressure at home compared to the clinic usually requires ambulatory or home monitoring. This study assessed whether changes in SBP with repeated measurement at a single clinic predict subsequent differences between clinic and home measurements. Methods: This study used an observational cohort design and included 220 individuals aged 35–84 years, receiving treatment for hypertension, but whose SBP was not controlled. The characteristics of change in SBP over six clinic readings were defined as the SBP drop, the slope and the quadratic coefficient using polynomial regression modelling. The predictive abilities of these characteristics for lower or higher home SBP readings were investigated with logistic regression and repeated operating characteristic analysis. Results: The single clinic SBP drop was predictive of the white-coat effect with a sensitivity of 90%, specificity of 50%, positive predictive value of 56% and negative predictive value of 88%. Predictive values for the masked effect and those of the slope and quadratic coefficient were slightly lower, but when the slope and quadratic variables were combined, the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values for the masked effect were improved to 91, 48, 24 and 97%, respectively. Conclusion: Characteristics obtainable from multiple SBP measurements in a single clinic in patients with treated hypertension appear to reasonably predict those unlikely to have a large white-coat or masked effect, potentially allowing better targeting of out-of-office monitoring in routine clinical practice.
Journal of Human Hypertension | 2014
Richard McManus; S Wood; Emma P Bray; Paul Glasziou; Andrew Hayen; C Heneghan; Jonathan Mant; Paul L. Padfield; John F. Potter; F D R Hobbs
BackgroundControlling blood pressure with drugs is a key aspect of cardiovascular disease prevention, but until recently has been the sole preserve of health professionals. Self-management of hypertension is an under researched area in which potential benefits for both patients and professionals are great.Methods and designThe telemonitoring and self-management in hypertension trial (TASMINH2) will be a primary care based randomised controlled trial with embedded economic and qualitative analyses in order to evaluate the costs and effects of increasing patient involvement in blood pressure management, specifically with respect to home monitoring and self titration of antihypertensive medication compared to usual care. Provision of remote monitoring results to participating practices will ensure that practice staff are able to engage with self management and provide assistance where required. 478 patients will be recruited from general practices in the West Midlands, which is sufficient to detect clinically significant differences in systolic blood pressure between self-management and usual care of 5 mmHg with 90% power. Patients will be excluded if they demonstrate an inability to self monitor, their blood pressure is below 140/90 or above 200/100, they are on three or more antihypertensive medications, have a terminal disease or their blood pressure is not managed by their general practitioner.The primary end point is change in mean systolic blood pressure (mmHg) between baseline and each follow up point (6 months and 12 months). Secondary outcomes will include change in mean diastolic blood pressure, costs, adverse events, health behaviours, illness perceptions, beliefs about medication, medication compliance and anxiety. Modelling will evaluate the impact of costs and effects on a system wide basis. The qualitative analysis will draw upon the views of users, informal carers and professionals regarding the acceptability of self-management and prerequisites for future widespread implementation should the trial show this approach to be efficacious.DiscussionThe TASMINH2 trial will provide important new evidence regarding the costs and effects of self monitoring with telemonitoring in a representative primary care hypertensive population.Trial RegistrationISRCTN17585681
BMC Cardiovascular Disorders | 2013
Claire O’Brien; Emma P Bray; Stirling Bryan; Sheila Greenfield; M Sayeed Haque; Fd Richard Hobbs; Miren I Jones; Sue Jowett; Billingsley Kaambwa; Paul Little; Jonathan Mant; Cristina Penaloza; Claire Schwartz; Helen Shackleford; Jinu Varghese; Bryan Williams; Richard J McManus
Although self-monitoring of blood pressure is common among people with hypertension, little is known about how general practitioners (GPs) use such readings. This survey aimed to ascertain current views and practice on self-monitoring of UK primary care physicians. An internet-based survey of UK GPs was undertaken using a provider of internet services to UK doctors. The hyperlink to the survey was opened by 928 doctors, and 625 (67%) GPs completed the questionnaire. Of them, 557 (90%) reported having patients who self-monitor, 191 (34%) had a monitor that they lend to patients, 171 (31%) provided training in self-monitoring for their patients and 52 (9%) offered training to other GPs. Three hundred and sixty-seven GPs (66%) recommended at least two readings per day, and 416 (75%) recommended at least 4 days of monitoring at a time. One hundred and eighty (32%) adjusted self-monitored readings to take account of lower pressures in out-of-office settings, and 10/5 mm Hg was the most common adjustment factor used. Self-monitoring of blood pressure was widespread among the patients of responding GPs. Although the majority used appropriate schedules of measurement, some GPs suggested much more frequent home measurements than usual. Further, interpretation of home blood pressure was suboptimal, with only a minority recognising that values for diagnosis and on-treatment target are lower than those for clinic measurement. Subsequent national guidance may improve this situation but will require adequate implementation.
European Journal of Preventive Cardiology | 2016
Maria Cristina Penaloza-Ramos; Sue Jowett; Jonathan Mant; Claire Schwartz; Emma P Bray; M Sayeed Haque; Fd Richard Hobbs; Paul Little; Stirling Bryan; Bryan Williams; Richard J McManus
BackgroundSelf-monitoring of hypertension with self-titration of antihypertensives (self-management) results in lower systolic blood pressure for at least one year. However, few people in high risk groups have been evaluated to date and previous work suggests a smaller effect size in these groups. This trial therefore aims to assess the added value of self-management in high risk groups over and above usual care.Methods/DesignThe targets and self-management for the control of blood pressure in stroke and at risk groups (TASMIN-SR) trial will be a pragmatic primary care based, unblinded, randomised controlled trial of self-management of blood pressure (BP) compared to usual care. Eligible patients will have a history of stroke, coronary heart disease, diabetes or chronic kidney disease and will be recruited from primary care. Participants will be individually randomised to either usual care or self-management. The primary outcome of the trial will be difference in office SBP between intervention and control groups at 12 months adjusted for baseline SBP and covariates. 540 patients will be sufficient to detect a difference in SBP between self-management and usual care of 5 mmHg with 90% power. Secondary outcomes will include self-efficacy, lifestyle behaviours, health-related quality of life and adverse events. An economic analysis will consider both within trial costs and a model extrapolating the results thereafter. A qualitative analysis will gain insights into patients’ views, experiences and decision making processes.DiscussionThe results of the trial will be directly applicable to primary care in the UK. If successful, self-management of blood pressure in people with stroke and other high risk conditions would be applicable to many hundreds of thousands of individuals in the UK and beyond.Trial RegistrationISRCTN87171227
Journal of Human Hypertension | 2015
Emma P Bray; Miren I Jones; M Banting; S Greenfield; F R Hobbs; Paul Little; Bryan Williams; Richard J McManus
Background A previous economic analysis of self-management, that is, self-monitoring with self-titration of antihypertensive medication evaluated cost-effectiveness among patients with uncomplicated hypertension. This study considered cost-effectiveness of self-management in those with raised blood pressure plus diabetes, chronic kidney disease and/or previous cardiovascular disease. Design and methods A Markov model-based economic evaluation was undertaken to estimate the long-term cost-effectiveness of self-management of blood pressure in a cohort of 70-year-old ‘high risk’ patients, compared with usual care. The model used the results of the TASMIN-SR trial. A cost–utility analysis was undertaken from a UK health and social care perspective, taking into account lifetime costs of treatment, cardiovascular events and quality adjusted life years. A subgroup analysis ran the model separately for men and women. Deterministic sensitivity analyses examined the effect of different time horizons and reduced effectiveness of self-management. Results Base-case results indicated that self-management was cost-effective compared with usual care, resulting in more quality adjusted life years (0.21) and cost savings (–£830) per patient. There was a 99% chance of the intervention being cost-effective at a willingness to pay threshold of £20,000 per quality adjusted life year gained. Similar results were found for separate cohorts of men and women. The results were robust to sensitivity analyses, provided that the blood pressure lowering effect of self-management was maintained for more than a year. Conclusion Self-management of blood pressure in high-risk people with poorly controlled hypertension not only reduces blood pressure, compared with usual care, but also represents a cost-effective use of healthcare resources.