***TASK*** the task is to summarize an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***INPUT*** the input is a biomedical literature 
    ***OUTPUT*** the output is the summary of an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***DOCUMENTATION*** 
    ***EXAMPLES*** 
    Input: Background —Hypertension is a leading mortality risk factor yet inadequately controlled in most affected subjects . Effective programs to address this problem are lacking . We hypothesized that an information technology – supported management program could help improve blood pressure ( BP ) control . Methods and Results —This r and omized controlled trial included 223 primary care hypertensive subjects with mean 24-hour BP > 130/80 and daytime BP > 135/85 mm Hg measured with ambulatory monitoring ( ABPM ) . Intervention subjects received a BP monitor and access to an information technology – supported adherence and BP monitoring system providing nurses , pharmacists , and physicians with monthly reports . Control subjects received usual care . The mean ( ±SD ) follow-up was 348 ( ±78 ) and 349 ( ±84 ) days in the intervention and control group , respectively . The primary end point of the change in the mean 24-hour ambulatory BP was consistently greater in intervention subjects for both systolic ( −11.9 versus −7.1 mm Hg ; P<0.001 ) and diastolic BP ( −6.6 versus −4.5 mm Hg ; P=0.007 ) . The proportion of subjects that achieved Canadian Guideline target BP ( 46.0 % versus 28.6 % ) was also greater in the intervention group ( P=0.006 ) . We observed similar BP declines for ABPM and self-recorded home BP suggesting the latter could be an alternative for confirming BP control . The intervention was associated with more physician-driven antihypertensive dose adjustments or changes in agents ( P=0.03 ) , more antihypertensive classes at study end ( P=0.007 ) , and a trend toward improved adherence measured by prescription refills ( P=0.07 ) . Conclusions —This multidisciplinary information technology – supported program that provided feedback to patients and healthcare providers significantly improved blood pressure levels in a primary care setting BACKGROUND St and ard office-based approaches to controlling hypertension show limited success . Such suboptimal hypertension control reflects in part the absence of both an infrastructure for patient education and frequent , regular blood pressure ( BP ) monitoring . We tested the efficacy of a physician-directed , nurse-managed , home-based system for hypertension management with st and ardized algorithms to modulate drug therapy , based on patients ' reports of home BP . METHODS We r and omized out patients requiring drug therapy for hypertension according to the Joint National Committee on Prevention , Detection , Evaluation , and Treatment of High Blood Pressure ( JNC VI ) criteria to receive usual medical care only ( UC , n = 76 ) or usual care plus nurse care management intervention ( INT , n = 74 ) over a 6-month period . RESULTS Patients receiving INT achieved greater reductions in office BP values at 6 months than those receiving UC : 14.2 + /- 18.1 versus 5.7 + /- 18.7 mm Hg systolic ( P < .01 ) and 6.5 + /- 10.0 versus 3.4 + /- 7.9 mm Hg diastolic , respectively ( P < .05 ) . At 6 months , we observed one or more changes in drug therapy in 97 % of INT patients versus 43 % of UC patients , and 70 % of INT patients received two or more drugs versus 46 % of UC . Average daily adherence to medication , measured by electronic drug event monitors , was superior among INT subjects ( mean + /- SD , 80.5 % + /- 23.0 % ) than among UC subjects ( 69.2 + /- 31.1 % ; t(113 ) = 2.199 , P = .03 ) . There were no significant adverse drug reactions in either group . CONCLUSIONS Telephone-mediated nurse management can successfully address many of the systems-related and patient-related issues that limit pharmacotherapeutic effectiveness for hypertension BACKGROUND Although beta-blockers and angiotensin-converting enzyme ( ACE ) inhibitors are often used together , there is a lack of quantitative evidence for the efficacy of this combination in reducing  blood pressure ( BP ) .  OBJECTIVE The aim of this r and omized , double-blind , placebo-controlled , crossover study was to quantify the combined effect of a beta-blocker ( atenolol ) and an ACE inhibitor ( lisinopril ) in lowering BP . METHODS Participants who were > or = 40 years of age and enrolled in the hypertension or anticoagulation clinics at St. Bartholomew 's Hospital , London , United Kingdom , were r and omized to 3 consecutive 4-week treatments consisting of atenolol 25 mg plus placebo , lisinopril 5 mg plus placebo , and atenolol 25 mg plus lisinopril 5 mg , plus a period of 2 placebos . At the end of each period , seated BP was measured in the right arm using electronic monitors . RESULTS The mean  placebo-adjusted peak BP reductions among the 47 participants ( mean age , 62 [ range 42 - 82 ] years ; 75 % male ; 70 % white/30 % Asian ; mean baseline BP , 145/82 mm Hg ) who completed all 4 periods were significantly greater with the combination of both drugs than with either drug alone ( P < 0.001 ) . The systolic reductions were 22.9 mm Hg with combination treatment , 16.1 mm Hg with atenolol treatment , and 12.5 mm Hg with lisinopril treatment , and the diastolic reductions were 13.9 , 9.8 , and 6.8 mm Hg , respectively . The BP-lowering effect of the 2 drugs together was similar to that expected from the sum of each alone , allowing for the reduced effect of 1 drug given the lower pretreatment BP due to the other . The incremental systolic BP reduction from the 2 drugs together compared with 1 alone was 79 % ( 95 % CI , 54%-126 % ) of the expected additive effect , 88 % ( 95 % CI , 58%-130 % ) for diastolic BP , and 84 % ( 95 % CI , 65%-118 % ) for the mean of systolic and diastolic BP . CONCLUSIONS The combination of the beta-blocker atenolol 25 mg plus the ACE inhibitor lisinopril 5 mg was associated with a significantly greater decrease in BP compared with either alone . The BP reduction with the combination treatment was similar to and statistically consistent with the 2 drugs having additive effects . Clinical Trials Identification Number : IS RCT N97280940 Background —Hypertension is a leading risk factor for cardiovascular disease . Although control rates have improved over time , racial/ethnic disparities in hypertension control persist . Self-blood pressure monitoring , by itself , has been shown to be an effective tool in predominantly white population s , but less studied in minority , urban communities . These types of minimally intensive approaches are important to test in all population s , especially those experiencing related health disparities , for broad implementation with limited re sources . Methods and Results —The New York City Health Department in partnership with community clinic networks implemented a r and omized clinical trial ( n=900 , 450 per arm ) to investigate the effectiveness of self-blood pressure monitoring in medically underserved and largely black and Hispanic participants . Intervention participants received a home blood pressure monitor and training on use , whereas control participants received usual care . After 9 months , systolic blood pressure decreased ( intervention , 14.7 mm Hg ; control , 14.1 mm Hg ; P=0.70 ) . Similar results were observed when incorporating longitudinal data and calculating a mean slope over time . Control was achieved in 38.9 % of intervention and 39.1 % of control participants at the end of follow-up ; the time-to-event experience of achieving blood pressure control in the intervention versus control groups were not different from each other ( logrank P value = 0.91 ) . Conclusions —Self-blood pressure monitoring was not shown to improve control over usual care in this largely minority , urban population . The patient population in this study , which included a high proportion of Hispanics and uninsured persons , is understudied . Results indicate these groups may have additional meaningful barriers to achieving blood pressure control beyond access to the monitor itself . Clinical Trial Registration : http:// clinical trials.gov . Unique Identifier : BACKGROUND Out-of-office blood pressure ( BP ) measurement using home BP ( HBP ) or ambulatory BP ( ABP ) monitoring is often necessary for the accurate evaluation of hypertension . These methods have several similarities but also have major differences . Therefore , they are regarded as complementary , and there is uncertainty on how they should be applied in clinical practice . This study compared hypertension management based on clinic and ABP measurements or on HBP measurements alone . METHODS Untreated subjects with elevated BP were r and omized to treatment initiation and titration based on clinic and ABP measurements or on HBP measurements alone . Target organ damage was assessed at baseline and after 1 year of treatment with echocardiographic left ventricular mass index ( primary endpoint ) , pulse wave velocity , and urinary albumin excretion . RESULTS A total of 145 subjects were r and omized , and 116 completed the study ( mean age = 50.7±10.5 years ; 69 men ( 59 % ) ; mean follow-up = 13.4±1.4 months ) . There was no difference between the 2 arms in treatment-induced change in left ventricular mass index ( mean difference = 0.50±1.11 g/m2 ; 95 % confidence interval ( CI ) = -1.70 to 2.70 ) . Moreover , there was no difference between the 2 arms in treatment-induced changes in pulse wave velocity ( mean difference = -0.16±0.42 m/s ; 95 % CI = -0.99 to 0.66 ) , urinary albumin excretion ( mean difference = -0.85±4.28 mg/dl ; 95 % CI = -9.37 to 7.66 ) , HBP and ABP levels , and hypertension control rates . CONCLUSIONS These data suggest that HBP monitoring alone is as reliable as combined clinic and ABP measurements in monitoring the effects of antihypertensive drug treatment on BP and pre clinical target organ damage IMPORTANCE Only about half of patients with high blood pressure ( BP ) in the United States have their BP controlled . Practical , robust , and sustainable models are needed to improve BP control in patients with uncontrolled hypertension . OBJECTIVES To determine whether an intervention combining home BP telemonitoring with pharmacist case management improves BP control compared with usual care and to determine whether BP control is maintained after the intervention is stopped . DESIGN , SETTING , AND PATIENTS A cluster r and omized clinical trial of 450 adults with uncontrolled BP recruited from 14,692 patients with electronic medical records across 16 primary care clinics in an integrated health system in Minneapolis-St Paul , Minnesota , with 12 months of intervention and 6 months of postintervention follow-up . INTERVENTIONS Eight clinics were r and omized to provide usual care to patients ( n = 222 ) and 8 clinics were r and omized to provide a telemonitoring intervention ( n = 228 ) . Intervention patients received home BP telemonitors and transmitted BP data to pharmacists who adjusted antihypertensive therapy accordingly . MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Control of systolic BP to less than 140 mm Hg and diastolic BP to less than 90 mm Hg ( < 130/80 mm Hg in patients with diabetes or chronic kidney disease ) at 6 and 12 months . Secondary outcomes were change in BP , patient satisfaction , and BP control at 18 months ( 6 months after intervention stopped ) . RESULTS At baseline , enrollees were 45 % women , 82 % white , mean ( SD ) age was 61.1 ( 12.0 ) years , and mean systolic BP was 148 mm Hg and diastolic BP was 85 mm Hg .  Blood pressure was controlled at both 6 and 12 months in 57.2 % ( 95 % CI , 44.8 % to 68.7 % ) of patients in the telemonitoring intervention group vs 30.0 % ( 95 % CI , 23.2 % to 37.8 % ) of patients in the usual care group ( P = .001 ) . At 18 months ( 6 months of postintervention follow-up ) , BP was controlled in 71.8 % ( 95 % CI , 65.0 % to 77.8 % ) of patients in the telemonitoring intervention group vs 57.1 % ( 95 % CI , 51.5 % to 62.6 % ) of patients in the usual care group ( P = .003 ) . Compared with the usual care group , systolic BP decreased more from baseline among patients in the telemonitoring intervention group at 6 months ( -10.7 mm Hg [ 95 % CI , -14.3 to -7.3 mm Hg ] ; P<.001 ) , at 12 months ( -9.7 mm Hg [ 95 % CI , -13.4 to -6.0 mm Hg ] ; P<.001 ) , and at 18 months ( -6.6 mm Hg [ 95 % CI , -10.7 to -2.5 mm Hg ] ; P = .004 ) . Compared with the usual 
    Output:
    
Self-monitoring was most effective in those with fewer antihypertensive medications and higher baseline sBP up to 170 mmHg .
No differences in efficacy were seen by sex or by most comorbidities .
Self-monitoring alone is not associated with lower BP or better control , but in conjunction with co- interventions ( including systematic medication titration by doctors , pharmacists , or patients ; education ; or lifestyle counselling ) leads to clinical ly significant BP reduction which persists for at least 12 months .