Table 3 Relationship between demographic data and BP measurement behaviour
Using AOBP screening (vs. using other methods) | using out-of-office BP for HT diagnosis (vs. using in-office methods) | Using AOBP during HT treatment (vs. not using AOBP for monitoring) | Using HBPM for HT treatment (vs. not using HBPM for monitoring) | Taking multiple readings in single clinic visit | Taking ≥12 HBPM readings | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
age < 60 | OR 2.7 (95% CI: 1.7–4.1; p < 0.001) | RR 0.95 (p = 0.78) | OR 3.2 (95%CI: 1.9–5.4; p < 0.001) | RR 1.06 (p = 0.45) | OR 0.39 (95%CI:0.24–0.63;p < 0.001) | RR 0.81 (p = 0.086) |
sex = female | OR 1.4 (95%CI: 0.85–2.47; p = 0.173) | RR 1.37 (p = 0.16) | OR 1.44 (95%CI: 0.85–2.4; p = 0.18) | RR 1.04 (p = 0.71) | RR 0.93 (p = 0.45) | RR 0.60 (p = 0.43) |
work = private | RR 1.18 (p = 0.66) | RR 1.69 (p = 0.39) | RR 0.58 (p = 0.14) | RR 1.15 (p = 0.52) | RR 0.92 (p = 0.63) | RR 1.38 (p = 0.57) |
FM specialist | OR 2.1 (95%CI: 1.3–3.5; p = 0.003) | RR 1.20 (p = 0.41) | RR 1.35 (p = 0.16) | RR 0.95 (p = 0.63) | OR 2.3 (95%CI:1.2–4.5;p = 0.017) | RR 1.00 (p = 0.99) |