Wireless Home Blood Pressure Monitoring With Health Coaching for Hypertension Management at a Federally Qualified Health Center: Pilot Randomized Controlled Feasibility and Acceptability Study.
Magalit N, Moran R, et al. • JMIR formative research • 2026
Among analyzed participants, wireless home BP monitoring was feasible and survey respondents reported high acceptability in a medically underserved, predominantly Hispanic FQHC population, while exploratory BP comparisons with standard monitoring were underpowered and hypothesis generating only.
Key Findings
Results
Wireless home BP monitoring was feasible among analyzed wireless-arm participants, with most transmitting multiple readings over 6 months.
86% (63/73) of analyzed wireless-arm participants transmitted multiple readings (mean 160.6, SD 129.1) over 6 months.
Transmitted readings corresponded to 76.2% (160/210) of expected readings among transmitting participants and 66% across all 73 analyzed wireless-arm participants.
Feasibility among all randomized participants could not be estimated because arm-level allocation counts were not retained.
Results
Return of data was far lower in the standard arm, where paper logs were rarely returned.
Only 5% (7/127) of standard-arm participants returned paper logs.
The standard arm used a home monitor with a paper log, whereas the wireless arm used a Bluetooth cuff and cellular hub with weekly transmitted summaries.
Results
Survey respondents in the wireless arm reported high acceptability of the device.
60 respondents completed the postintervention survey (82.2% response rate).
95% (n=57) agreed or strongly agreed that the device was easy to set up and use.
Results
Both study arms showed significant within-arm BP reductions at 6 months.
Within-arm reductions were significant in both arms (P<.001).
Both arms received standardized health coaching.
Exploratory analyses included participants with >2 BP measurements.
Results
Between-arm differences in achieving systolic BP <140 mm Hg at 6 months were not statistically significant.
63% (46/73) of the wireless arm and 74% (94/127) of the standard arm achieved systolic BP <140 mm Hg (P=.08).
Adjusted odds ratio, standard vs wireless, was 1.6 (95% CI 0.78-3.4; P=.19).
The authors state these comparisons were not powered and do not constitute evidence of equivalence.
Results
The analyzed sample was predominantly middle-aged to older, with a majority of women and about half Hispanic participants, and no significant baseline differences between arms.
Of 316 recruited, 290 (92%) were eligible and 200 (63%) were analyzed (wireless n=73, 23%; standard n=127, 40%).
Mean age was 61 years (SD 9.1); 57% (115/200) were women; 51% (n=102) self-identified as Hispanic.
Participants were enrolled across 3 FQHC networks within the San Diego: Heart Attack and Stroke Free Zone program and randomized 1:1 by unrestricted simple randomization.
Conclusions
Key design limitations constrain interpretation: arm-level allocation counts were not retained and the pilot was not powered for clinical effectiveness.
Feasibility could not be estimated among all randomized participants.
The absence of a between-arm difference in BP control is not evidence of equivalence.
BP findings are described as hypothesis generating.
What This Means
This pilot study tested whether giving home blood pressure monitors that automatically send readings to a care team could work for adults with high blood pressure at community health centers serving mostly low-income and Hispanic patients. About 200 people were analyzed over 6 months. Half-ish were given a wireless cuff that sent readings weekly to health coaches, and the others got a regular home monitor with a paper log. Everyone received health coaching.
The wireless system appeared practical: most people in that group (86%) sent in multiple readings, and about three-quarters of the expected readings came through among those who transmitted. In contrast, only 5% of people with paper logs returned them. Among the 60 people who answered the satisfaction survey, 95% said the device was easy to set up and use. Blood pressure improved significantly in both groups, and the share reaching a systolic reading under 140 was not statistically different between groups (63% wireless vs 74% standard).
This research suggests wireless home monitoring may be a workable option in community health centers, particularly for getting readings to care teams. However, the study was small, not designed to compare blood pressure effectiveness, and the researchers did not keep records of how many people were assigned to each group at the start, so the results for feasibility apply only to those analyzed. The blood pressure findings should be viewed as early ideas needing testing in larger studies, not proof that the approaches work equally well.
Magalit N, Moran R, Narezkina A, Patrick K, DeMaria A. (2026). Wireless Home Blood Pressure Monitoring With Health Coaching for Hypertension Management at a Federally Qualified Health Center: Pilot Randomized Controlled Feasibility and Acceptability Study.. JMIR formative research. https://doi.org/10.2196/100115