Stefano Omboni

Prof. Stefano Omboni

1. Clinical Research Unit, Italian Institute of Telemedicine, Solbiate Arno, Varese, Italy
+1
orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

38Years (1989-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 September 2013 in Journal Of Hypertension
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
EOEoin O’bRien
Eoin O’bRien
GPGianfranco Parati
Gianfranco Parati
GSGeorge Stergiou
George Stergiou
RARoland Asmar
Roland Asmar
LBLaurie Beilin
Laurie Beilin
YZYuqing Zhang
Yuqing Zhang
Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) is being used increasingly in both clinical practice and hypertension research. Although there are many guidelines that emphasize the indications for ABPM, there is no comprehensive guideline dealing with all aspects of the technique. It was agreed at a consensus meeting on ABPM in Milan in 2011 that the 34 attendees should prepare a comprehensive position paper on the scientific evidence for ABPM. This position paper considers the historical background, the advantages and limitations of ABPM, the threshold levels for practice, and the cost–effectiveness of the technique. It examines the need for selecting an appropriate device, the accuracy of devices, the additional information and indices that ABPM devices may provide, and the software requirements. At a practical level, the paper details the requirements for using ABPM in clinical practice, editing considerations, the number of measurements required, and the circumstances, such as obesity and arrhythmias, when particular care needs to be taken when using ABPM. The clinical indications for ABPM, among which white-coat phenomena, masked hypertension, and nocturnal hypertension appear to be prominent, are outlined in detail along with special considerations that apply in certain clinical circumstances, such as childhood, the elderly and pregnancy, and in cardiovascular illness, examples being stroke and chronic renal disease, and the place of home measurement of blood pressure in relation to ABPM is appraised. The role of ABPM in research circumstances, such as pharmacological trials and in the prediction of outcome in epidemiological studies is examined and finally the implementation of ABPM in practice is considered in relation to the issue of reimbursement in different countries, the provision of the technique by primary care practices, hospital clinics and pharmacies, and the growing role of registries of ABPM in many countries.

1 July 2014 in Journal Of Hypertension
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
GPGianfranco Parati
Gianfranco Parati
GSGeorge Stergiou
George Stergiou
EOEoin O'Brien
Eoin O'Brien
RARoland Asmar
Roland Asmar
LBLawrence Beilin
Lawrence Beilin
EVEuropean Society of Hypertension Working Group on Blood Pressure Monitoring and Cardiovascular Variability
European Society of Hypertension Working Group on Blood Pressure Monitoring and Cardiovascular Variability
Given the increasing use of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) in both clinical practice and hypertension research, a group of scientists, participating in the European Society of Hypertension Working Group on blood pressure monitoring and cardiovascular variability, in year 2013 published a comprehensive position paper dealing with all aspects of the technique, based on the available scientific evidence for ABPM. The present work represents an updated schematic summary of the most important aspects related to the use of ABPM in daily practice, and is aimed at providing recommendations for proper use of this technique in a clinical setting by both specialists and practicing physicians. The present article details the requirements and the methodological issues to be addressed for using ABPM in clinical practice, The clinical indications for ABPM suggested by the available studies, among which white-coat phenomena, masked hypertension, and nocturnal hypertension, are outlined in detail, and the place of home measurement of blood pressure in relation to ABPM is discussed. The role of ABPM in pharmacological, epidemiological, and clinical research is also briefly mentioned. Finally, the implementation of ABPM in practice is considered in relation to the situation of different countries with regard to the reimbursement and the availability of ABPM in primary care practices, hospital clinics, and pharmacies.

19 September 2017 in PLOS Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
KTKatherine L. Tucker
Katherine L. Tucker
JSJames P. Sheppard
James P. Sheppard
RSRichard Stevens
Richard Stevens
HBHayden B. Bosworth
Hayden B. Bosworth
ABAlfred Bove
Alfred Bove
RMRichard J McManus
Richard J McManus
Self-monitoring of blood pressure (BP) appears to reduce BP in hypertension but important questions remain regarding effective implementation and which groups may benefit most. This individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis was performed to better understand the effectiveness of BP self-monitoring to lower BP and control hypertension. Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched for randomised trials comparing self-monitoring to no self-monitoring in hypertensive patients (June 2016). Two reviewers independently assessed articles for eligibility and the authors of eligible trials were approached requesting IPD. Of 2,846 articles in the initial search, 36 were eligible. IPD were provided from 25 trials, including 1 unpublished study. Data for the primary outcomes—change in mean clinic or ambulatory BP and proportion controlled below target at 12 months—were available from 15/19 possible studies (7,138/8,292 [86%] of randomised participants). Overall, self-monitoring was associated with reduced clinic systolic blood pressure (sBP) compared to usual care at 12 months (−3.2 mmHg, [95% CI −4.9, −1.6 mmHg]). However, this effect was strongly influenced by the intensity of co-intervention ranging from no effect with self-monitoring alone (−1.0 mmHg [−3.3, 1.2]), to a 6.1 mmHg (−9.0, −3.2) reduction when monitoring was combined with intensive support. 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. Ambulatory BP data at 12 months were available from 4 trials (1,478 patients), which assessed self-monitoring with little or no co-intervention. There was no association between self-monitoring and either lower clinic or ambulatory sBP in this group (clinic −0.2 mmHg [−2.2, 1.8]; ambulatory 1.1 mmHg [−0.3, 2.5]). Results for diastolic blood pressure (dBP) were similar. The main limitation of this work was that significant heterogeneity remained. This was at least in part due to different inclusion criteria, self-monitoring regimes, and target BPs in included studies. 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 clinically significant BP reduction which persists for at least 12 months. The implementation of self-monitoring in hypertension should be accompanied by such co-interventions.

1 January 2022
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
Stefano OmboniStefano Omboni
Stefano Omboni
RPRaj S. Padwal
Raj S. Padwal
TATourkiah Alessa
Tourkiah Alessa
BBBéla Benczúr
Béla Benczúr
BGBeverly B. Green
Beverly B. Green
JWJiguang Wang
Jiguang Wang
During the COVID-19 pandemic, telemedicine has emerged worldwide as an indispensable resource to improve the surveillance of patients, curb the spread of disease, facilitate timely identification and management of ill people, but, most importantly, guarantee the continuity of care of frail patients with multiple chronic diseases. Although during COVID-19 telemedicine has thrived, and its adoption has moved forward in many countries, important gaps still remain. Major issues to be addressed to enable large scale implementation of telemedicine include: (1) establishing adequate policies to legislate telemedicine, license healthcare operators, protect patients’ privacy, and implement reimbursement plans; (2) creating and disseminating practical guidelines for the routine clinical use of telemedicine in different contexts; (3) increasing in the level of integration of telemedicine with traditional healthcare services; (4) improving healthcare professionals’ and patients’ awareness of and willingness to use telemedicine; and (5) overcoming inequalities among countries and population subgroups due to technological, infrastructural, and economic barriers. If all these requirements are met in the near future, remote management of patients will become an indispensable resource for the healthcare systems worldwide and will ultimately improve the management of patients and the quality of care.

1 November 2020 in Hypertension
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
Stefano OmboniStefano Omboni
Stefano Omboni
RMRichard J. McManus
Richard J. McManus
HBHayden B. Bosworth
Hayden B. Bosworth
LCLucy C. Chappell
Lucy C. Chappell
BGBeverly B. Green
Beverly B. Green
BWBonnie J. Wakefield
Bonnie J. Wakefield
Telemedicine allows the remote exchange of medical data between patients and healthcare professionals. It is used to increase patients’ access to care and provide effective healthcare services at a distance. During the recent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, telemedicine has thrived and emerged worldwide as an indispensable resource to improve the management of isolated patients due to lockdown or shielding, including those with hypertension. The best proposed healthcare model for telemedicine in hypertension management should include remote monitoring and transmission of vital signs (notably blood pressure) and medication adherence plus education on lifestyle and risk factors, with video consultation as an option. The use of mixed automated feedback services with supervision of a multidisciplinary clinical team (physician, nurse, or pharmacist) is the ideal approach. The indications include screening for suspected hypertension, management of older adults, medically underserved people, high-risk hypertensive patients, patients with multiple diseases, and those isolated due to pandemics or national emergencies.

1 March 2013 in Journal Of Hypertension
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
Stefano OmboniStefano Omboni
Stefano Omboni
TGTiziana Gazzola
Tiziana Gazzola
GCGiorgia Carabelli
Giorgia Carabelli
GPGianfranco Parati
Gianfranco Parati
To systematically review data from randomized controlled studies on the effectiveness of home blood pressure telemonitoring (HBPT) versus usual care with respect to improvement of BP control, healthcare resources utilization and costs, patient's quality of life and adverse events. Electronic databases were searched for publications in English. The benefit and relative risk (RR) were estimated applying a random-effect model. Twenty-three randomized controlled trials with a high level of heterogeneity were selected (7037 patients). Compared to usual care, HBPT improved office SBP by 4.71 mmHg [95% confidence interval (CI): 6.18, 3.24; P < 0.001] and DBP by 2.45 mmHg (3.33, 1.57; P < 0.001). A larger proportion of patients achieved office BP normalization (<140/90 mmHg nondiabetic patients and <130/80 mmHg diabetic patients) in the intervention group [RR: 1.16 (1.04, 1.29); P < 0.001]. HBPT led to a significantly larger prescription of antihypertensive medications [+0.40 (+0.17,+0.62), P < 0.001], but to therapeutic adherence and rate of office consultations similar to usual care. Healthcare costs were significantly (P < 0.001) larger in the HBPT group [+662.92 (+540.81, +785.04) euros per patient], but were similar to those of the usual care when only medical costs were considered [-12.4 (-930.52, +906.23) euros; P = 0.767]. Use of HBPT helped improving the physical component of quality of life [SF-12 or SF-36 questionnaire: +2.78 (+1.15, +4.41) P < 0.001]. No difference was observed in the risk of adverse events [RR: 1.22 (0.86, 1.71); P = 0.111]. HBPT may represent a useful tool to improve hypertension control and associated healthcare outcomes, although it is still more costly compared with usual care.