Comparison of Office Blood Pressure, Automated Unattended Office Blood Pressure, Home Blood Pressure, and 24-Hour Ambulatory Blood Pressure Measurements.
Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring
Blood Pressure
Blood Pressure Monitoring, Self
Home Blood Pressure
Journal
Journal of Korean medical science
ISSN: 1598-6357
Titre abrégé: J Korean Med Sci
Pays: Korea (South)
ID NLM: 8703518
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
11 Dec 2023
11 Dec 2023
Historique:
received:
16
08
2023
accepted:
12
09
2023
medline:
12
12
2023
pubmed:
12
12
2023
entrez:
12
12
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Although previous studies have reported differences of blood pressure (BP) according to BP measurement methods, studies in Korean population were scarce. This study aimed to compare BP differences according to different BP measurement methods and assess hypertension phenotype. This prospective study recruited 183 individuals (mean 55.9 years; 51.4% males). The BP measurements included office BP (auscultatory attended office BP [ausAOBP], automated attended office BP [aAOBP], and automated unattended office BP [aUAOBP]) and out-of-office BP (home BP [HBP] and ambulatory BP [ABP]) measurements taken within one week of each other. The mean systolic/diastolic BP differences between ausAOBP and other BPs according to different BP measurement methods were 3.5/2.3 mmHg for aAOBP; 6.1/2.9 mmHg for aUAOBP; 15.0/7.3 mmHg for daytime ABP; and 10.6/3.4 mmHg for average HBP. The increasing disparity between ausAOBP and other BPs in multivariable regression analysis was significantly associated with increasing BP. The prevalence of white-coat hypertension and masked hypertension in 107 individuals not taking antihypertensive medication was 25.4-26.8% and 30.6-33.3% based on ausAOBP, daytime ABP, and average HBP, respectively. The prevalence of white-coat uncontrolled hypertension and masked uncontrolled hypertension in 76 of those taking antihypertensive medication was 31.7-34.1% and 17.1-37.1%, respectively. This study showed a large disparity between office BP and out-of-office BP which became more pronounced when office BP by auscultation increased, suggesting that various BP measurement methods should be used to more accurately assess BP status.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Although previous studies have reported differences of blood pressure (BP) according to BP measurement methods, studies in Korean population were scarce. This study aimed to compare BP differences according to different BP measurement methods and assess hypertension phenotype.
METHODS
METHODS
This prospective study recruited 183 individuals (mean 55.9 years; 51.4% males). The BP measurements included office BP (auscultatory attended office BP [ausAOBP], automated attended office BP [aAOBP], and automated unattended office BP [aUAOBP]) and out-of-office BP (home BP [HBP] and ambulatory BP [ABP]) measurements taken within one week of each other.
RESULTS
RESULTS
The mean systolic/diastolic BP differences between ausAOBP and other BPs according to different BP measurement methods were 3.5/2.3 mmHg for aAOBP; 6.1/2.9 mmHg for aUAOBP; 15.0/7.3 mmHg for daytime ABP; and 10.6/3.4 mmHg for average HBP. The increasing disparity between ausAOBP and other BPs in multivariable regression analysis was significantly associated with increasing BP. The prevalence of white-coat hypertension and masked hypertension in 107 individuals not taking antihypertensive medication was 25.4-26.8% and 30.6-33.3% based on ausAOBP, daytime ABP, and average HBP, respectively. The prevalence of white-coat uncontrolled hypertension and masked uncontrolled hypertension in 76 of those taking antihypertensive medication was 31.7-34.1% and 17.1-37.1%, respectively.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
This study showed a large disparity between office BP and out-of-office BP which became more pronounced when office BP by auscultation increased, suggesting that various BP measurement methods should be used to more accurately assess BP status.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38084029
pii: 38.e406
doi: 10.3346/jkms.2023.38.e406
pmc: PMC10713445
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e406Informations de copyright
© 2023 The Korean Academy of Medical Sciences.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have no potential conflicts of interest to disclose.
Références
Clin Hypertens. 2023 Feb 15;29(1):11
pubmed: 36788612
Korean J Intern Med. 2018 Jan;33(1):113-120
pubmed: 28602060
J Am Heart Assoc. 2018 Apr 7;7(8):
pubmed: 29627767
Clin Hypertens. 2019 Aug 1;25:20
pubmed: 31388453
Korean J Intern Med. 2021 Sep;36(5):1102-1114
pubmed: 34134467
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018 May 15;71(19):e127-e248
pubmed: 29146535
Eur Heart J. 2018 Sep 1;39(33):3021-3104
pubmed: 30165516
Blood Press Monit. 2023 Feb 1;28(1):59-66
pubmed: 36606481
Hypertension. 2019 Feb;73(2):481-490
pubmed: 30624994
Hypertension. 2018 Feb;71(2):243-249
pubmed: 29255074
JAMA Intern Med. 2019 Mar 1;179(3):351-362
pubmed: 30715088
BMC Cardiovasc Disord. 2020 Nov 23;20(1):491
pubmed: 33225900
Can J Cardiol. 2011 Jul-Aug;27(4):455-60
pubmed: 21801977
Perit Dial Int. 2013 Sep-Oct;33(5):544-51
pubmed: 23547279
J Hypertens. 2019 Jan;37(1):42-49
pubmed: 30507862
J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2019 Feb;21(2):148-155
pubmed: 30585383
Hypertens Res. 2019 Nov;42(11):1726-1737
pubmed: 31222188
J Hypertens. 2011 Oct;29(10):1880-8
pubmed: 21841499
Clin Hypertens. 2021 Mar 15;27(1):8
pubmed: 33715619
Blood Press. 2018 Aug;27(4):188-193
pubmed: 29334262
Medicine (Baltimore). 2022 Dec 16;101(50):e32299
pubmed: 36550921
Blood Press Monit. 2010 Dec;15(6):300-4
pubmed: 20975533
Clin Hypertens. 2022 Oct 1;28(1):38
pubmed: 36180964
N Engl J Med. 2015 Nov 26;373(22):2103-16
pubmed: 26551272