Home Blood Pressure Compared With Office Blood Pressure in Relation to Dysglycemia.
HbA1c
blood pressure
cardiovascular disease
diabetes
dysglycemia
home blood pressure monitoring
hypertension
white coat effect
Journal
American journal of hypertension
ISSN: 1941-7225
Titre abrégé: Am J Hypertens
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8803676
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 09 2022
01 09 2022
Historique:
received:
04
04
2022
revised:
01
06
2022
accepted:
28
06
2022
pubmed:
19
7
2022
medline:
9
9
2022
entrez:
18
7
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Masked hypertension is more common in individuals with type 2 diabetes than in individuals with normoglycemia. We aimed to explore if there is a discrepancy between office blood pressure (office BP) and home blood pressure monitoring (HBPM) in relation to HbA1c as well as glycemic status in 5,029 middle-aged individuals. HBPM was measured in a subsample of 5,029 participants in The Swedish CardioPulmonary BioImage Study (SCAPIS), a population-based cohort of 50-64 years old participants. Both office BP and HBPM were obtained after 5 minutes' rest using the semiautomatic Omron M10-IT oscillometric device. White coat effect was calculated by subtracting systolic HBPM from systolic office BP. Participants were classified according to glycemic status: Normoglycemia, prediabetes, or diabetes based on fasting glucose, HbA1c value, and self-reported diabetes diagnosis. Of the included 5,025 participants, 947 (18.8%) had sustained hypertension, 907 (18.0%) reported taking antihypertensive treatment, and 370 (7.4%) had diabetes mellitus. Both systolic office BP and HBPM increased according to worsened glycemic status (P for trend 0.002 and 0.002, respectively). Masked hypertension was more prevalent in participants with dysglycemia compared with normoglycemia (P = 0.036). The systolic white coat effect was reversely associated with HbA1c (P = 0.012). The systolic white coat effect was reversely associated with HbA1c, and the prevalence of masked hypertension increased with dysglycemia.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Masked hypertension is more common in individuals with type 2 diabetes than in individuals with normoglycemia. We aimed to explore if there is a discrepancy between office blood pressure (office BP) and home blood pressure monitoring (HBPM) in relation to HbA1c as well as glycemic status in 5,029 middle-aged individuals.
METHODS
HBPM was measured in a subsample of 5,029 participants in The Swedish CardioPulmonary BioImage Study (SCAPIS), a population-based cohort of 50-64 years old participants. Both office BP and HBPM were obtained after 5 minutes' rest using the semiautomatic Omron M10-IT oscillometric device. White coat effect was calculated by subtracting systolic HBPM from systolic office BP. Participants were classified according to glycemic status: Normoglycemia, prediabetes, or diabetes based on fasting glucose, HbA1c value, and self-reported diabetes diagnosis.
RESULTS
Of the included 5,025 participants, 947 (18.8%) had sustained hypertension, 907 (18.0%) reported taking antihypertensive treatment, and 370 (7.4%) had diabetes mellitus. Both systolic office BP and HBPM increased according to worsened glycemic status (P for trend 0.002 and 0.002, respectively). Masked hypertension was more prevalent in participants with dysglycemia compared with normoglycemia (P = 0.036). The systolic white coat effect was reversely associated with HbA1c (P = 0.012).
CONCLUSIONS
The systolic white coat effect was reversely associated with HbA1c, and the prevalence of masked hypertension increased with dysglycemia.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35849046
pii: 6645154
doi: 10.1093/ajh/hpac082
pmc: PMC9434242
doi:
Substances chimiques
Glycated Hemoglobin A
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
810-819Informations de copyright
© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of American Journal of Hypertension, Ltd.
Références
Can J Diabetes. 2018 Apr;42 Suppl 1:S10-S15
pubmed: 29650080
Lancet. 2021 Sep 11;398(10304):957-980
pubmed: 34450083
Hypertens Res. 2018 Aug;41(8):553-569
pubmed: 29808034
Curr Med Res Opin. 2019 Sep;35(9):1529-1534
pubmed: 30935247
Ann Intern Med. 2009 May 5;150(9):604-12
pubmed: 19414839
J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2019 Apr 1;104(4):1131-1140
pubmed: 30445509
Chronobiol Int. 2013 Mar;30(1-2):315-27
pubmed: 23181712
Medicine (Baltimore). 2018 Aug;97(31):e11603
pubmed: 30075533
Hypertension. 2018 Jun;71(6):1269-1324
pubmed: 29133354
Lancet. 2018 Mar 10;391(10124):949-959
pubmed: 29499873
J Hypertens. 2021 Sep 1;39(9):1742-1767
pubmed: 34269334
Diabetes Care. 2009 Jul;32(7):1327-34
pubmed: 19502545
J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2018 Jul;20(7):1116-1121
pubmed: 30003694
Circ Res. 2020 Dec 4;127(12):1499-1501
pubmed: 33270547
Eur Heart J. 2020 Jan 7;41(2):255-323
pubmed: 31497854
BMC Fam Pract. 2020 Jul 28;21(1):151
pubmed: 32718313
J Hypertens. 2007 Apr;25(4):827-31
pubmed: 17351375
Hypertension. 2013 Oct;62(4):e22
pubmed: 23940197
Hypertension. 2013 May;61(5):964-71
pubmed: 23478096
J Hypertens. 2012 Mar;30(3):445-8
pubmed: 22278144
N Engl J Med. 2019 Jul 18;381(3):243-251
pubmed: 31314968
Diabetes Care. 2021 Jan;44(Suppl 1):S15-S33
pubmed: 33298413
Hypertension. 2015 Jan;65(1):16-20
pubmed: 25287401
Int J Nephrol. 2020 Jul 18;2020:2141038
pubmed: 32733708
J Intern Med. 2015 Dec;278(6):645-59
pubmed: 26096600
Hypertension. 2020 Jun;75(6):1334-1357
pubmed: 32370572
Diabet Med. 2012 Nov;29(11):1350-7
pubmed: 22957983
Respir Med. 2021 Aug-Sep;185:106504
pubmed: 34139577
J Hypertens. 2018 Oct;36(10):1953-2041
pubmed: 30234752
Atherosclerosis. 2015 Feb;238(2):370-9
pubmed: 25558032
Atherosclerosis. 2020 Nov;313:70-75
pubmed: 33032235
J Hypertens. 2021 Oct 1;39(10):2009-2014
pubmed: 33973957