Hypertension is the leading risk factor for death globally. Undiagnosed hypertension is common, but the incidence in hospitalised patients is unclear. There are calls for universal facility-based screening for hypertension among all attending patients. The hospital inpatient setting, where blood pressure (BP) is measured routinely and repeatedly, presents an ideal opportunity. However, international hypertension guidelines do not include inpatient BP thresholds for diagnostic or treatment purposes. We investigated the performance of current UK community BP thresholds for diagnosing hypertension in the hospital setting.

Investigate the diagnostic performance of the current UK ambulatory BP diagnostic thresholds for systolic and diastolic hypertension in the hospital setting against the reference test of community-based ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM).

A prospective diagnostic accuracy study.

Hospital inpatients admitted to three UK centres were approached. Follow-up ABPM was delivered in the community.

Eligible patients were aged between 18 and 80 years, with no prior diagnosis of, or prescription for hypertension, and whose mean cumulative daytime BP was 120 mm Hg to 179 mm Hg systolic and ≤109 mm Hg diastolic from the 24th hour of their hospital admission.

Participants received 24-hour ABPM 4–26 weeks post-discharge, as the reference test for hypertension, with UK diagnostic thresholds of an average daytime BP of ≥135 mm Hg systolic and ≥85 mm Hg diastolic applied. Participants found to be severely hypertensive at the ABPM fitting appointment were also considered reference-test positive but did not proceed with ABPM.

The diagnostic performance of a mean daytime in-hospital BP of ≥135 mm Hg systolic or ≥85 mm Hg diastolic (index test) for the prediction of hypertension diagnosed on ABPM (reference test) was assessed using sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) as primary outcome measures. Additionally, we explored the accuracy of a range of alternative in-hospital systolic and diastolic BP thresholds against the same reference test.

351 participants were enrolled and 206 completed the study protocol. The average age of the 206 participants was 53 years, 55% were male, and 91 (44%) had daytime community hypertension on ABPM reference testing. Of 107 participants with raised in-hospital daytime BP, 59 (55%) had daytime community hypertension. When assessing the performance of the index test for detecting daytime community hypertension, sensitivity was 65% (59/91, 54% to 75%) and specificity was 58% (67/115, 49% to 67%). The PPV was 55% (59/107, 45% to 65%) and NPV was 68% (67/99, 58% to 77%), respectively. A further 45/206 participants (23%) had night-time community hypertension when assessed using European diagnostic thresholds for nocturnal hypertension (120 mm Hg systolic or 70 mm Hg diastolic), while 25/107 of those with raised in-hospital daytime BP (23%) had night-time community hypertension. When assessing the performance of the index test for detecting either day or night-time community hypertension, sensitivity was 62% (84/135, 53% to 70%) and specificity was 68% (48/71, 55% to 78%). The PPV was 79% (84/107, 70% to 86%) and NPV was 48% (48/99, 38% to 59%).

Undiagnosed hypertension is common in hospitalised patients, particularly those with raised in-hospital BP. While in-hospital BP alone is an imperfect predictor and should not be used as a stand-alone diagnostic test, this could serve as a trigger for further assessment of BP in the community after discharge.

The study protocol was registered with the ISCTRN Registry (ISRCTN80586284).

Spinal cord injury (SCI) results in debilitating sensory, functional deficits and paralysis requiring neurorehabilitation solutions. In this regard, focal muscle vibration (FMV) is an emerging neuro-rehabilitation tool that uses mechanical vibration on muscles/tendons to stimulate underlying nerves and consequently modulate neural pathways. We conducted a systematic review to understand the exact effectiveness of FMVs on the sensorimotor function and mobility/strength in the SCI population.

Systematic review using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) approach.

PEDro, Springer, PubMed, Science Direct, Cochrane Library and Google Scholar were searched through 15 February 2025.

We included studies adhering to the following population–intervention–comparison–outcomes (PICO) elements. Population: SCI, intervention: FMV, comparison: unexposed controls, outcome: either of sensorimotor function or mobility and strength.

Two independent reviewers used standardised methods to search, screen and code included studies. Risk of bias was assessed using the Risk Of Bias In Non-randomised Studies - of Interventions (ROBINS-I) scale. Findings were summarised and a narrative synthesis is provided.

25 studies were included. 9 studies used FMV in the upper limb and 14 in the lower limb. The analysis includes 427 patients with SCI, with a focus on male, chronic SCI cases and a prevalence of North American studies.

Our systematic review of 25 studies, with 21 (84%) reporting positive outcomes, suggests that FMV may improve sensory perception, motor function, mobility and strength in individuals with SCIs, with benefits observed in both limbs. However, substantial heterogeneity in FMV parameters, study designs, participant characteristics and the high prevalence of serious/critical risk of bias (13/25 studies, 52%) limit definitive conclusions. Further research with optimised protocols, larger sample sizes and longitudinal designs is needed to confirm efficacy and establish clinical guidelines.

To explore how pre-existing conditions affect the diagnostic process for potential cancer in primary care patients.

Qualitative interview study using thematic analysis underpinned by a critical realist approach.

Primary care practices recruited through four Clinical Research Networks and UK health charities across England.

Interviews were conducted with 75 patients with one or more pre-existing conditions (anxiety/depression, diabetes, obesity, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, Parkinson’s disease or multiple long-term conditions (four or more)) and 28 primary care professionals (general practitioners and nurses).

The study identified legitimacy as a central theme influencing patient trajectories in the health system while trying to receive a diagnosis for symptoms with which they presented to primary care. Patients engaged in self-triage to determine whether symptoms were ‘legitimate’ enough to seek care. Subsequent triaging steps (by receptionists, nurses and online systems) acted as gatekeepers, with decisions influenced by effectiveness of describing the symptom and subjective impressions. During consultations, clinicians relied on a mix of symptom narrative clarity, medical history and objective ‘metrics’ (eg, blood results, family history) to determine legitimacy for further investigations. Pre-existing conditions could either lower the threshold for referrals or obscure potential cancer symptoms. The stigma associated with mental health diagnoses often undermined perceived legitimacy and contributed to delays.

Legitimacy is continuously negotiated throughout the diagnostic pathway. It is shaped by social, moral and biomedical judgements. To promote early cancer diagnosis for patients with pre-existing conditions, clinicians must make legitimacy assessments explicit, reduce stigma especially around mental health and standardise triage processes.