Connect
MJA
MJA

Cardiovascular risk perception and evidence–practice gaps in Australian general practice

Mark R Nelson
Med J Aust 2010; 193 (5): 311-312.
Published online: 6 September 2010

To the Editor: In his letter1 regarding Heeley et al’s article on cardiovascular risk perception and evidence–practice gaps in Australian general practice,2 Radford quotes, “no [automated blood pressure-measuring machines] were accurate enough to ... replac[e] a manual sphygmomanometer”. The citation dates from 1973, when oscillometric blood pressure monitors such as the Omron HEM-907 — distributed by the High Blood Pressure Research Council of Australia (HBPRCA) with support from the Servier Foundation — did not exist. In defence of digital blood pressure devices, a cluster randomised controlled trial conducted in Australian general practice has demonstrated their superiority compared with existing manual devices.3

  • Mark R Nelson


Correspondence: Mark.Nelson@utas.edu.au

Competing interests:

I have received grants from the Servier Foundation through an educational grant to the HBPRCA for the cluster randomised controlled trial of oscillometric versus manual sphygmomanometer for blood pressure management in primary care (CRAB) study, and from the HBPRCA for two qualitative studies on use of hypertensive medications in general practice.

Author

remove_circle_outline Delete Author
add_circle_outline Add Author

Comment
Do you have any competing interests to declare? *

I/we agree to assign copyright to the Medical Journal of Australia and agree to the Conditions of publication *
I/we agree to the Terms of use of the Medical Journal of Australia *
Email me when people comment on this article

Responses are now closed for this article.