Comparison of three office blood pressure measurement techniques and their effect on hypertension prevalence in the general population

Result code in IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00216208%3A11140%2F20%3A10410687" target="_blank" >RIV/00216208:11140/20:10410687 - isvavai.cz</a>

Alternative codes found

RIV/00669806:_____/20:10410687 RIV/00064190:_____/20:N0000018 RIV/00216208:11110/20:10410687

Result on the web

<a href="https://verso.is.cuni.cz/pub/verso.fpl?fname=obd_publikace_handle&handle=2MUfRyUnta" target="_blank" >https://verso.is.cuni.cz/pub/verso.fpl?fname=obd_publikace_handle&handle=2MUfRyUnta</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/HJH.0000000000002322" target="_blank" >10.1097/HJH.0000000000002322</a>

Result language

angličtina

Original language name

Comparison of three office blood pressure measurement techniques and their effect on hypertension prevalence in the general population

Original language description

Objectives: There is an ongoing controversy about the magnitude of the difference between unattended automated office blood pressure (AOBP) and conventional office blood pressure (BP). The aim of our study was to compare unattended AOBP with both auscultatory BP and oscillometric attended AOBP in an epidemiological setting. Methods: In 2588 participants of the Czech post-MoNItoring of CArdiovascular Disease study (a randomly selected 1% representative population sample aged 25-64 years, mean age 48 +/- 11 years, 47.5% males), BP was measured using an AOBP device unattended, auscultatory mercury sphygmomanometer and an oscillometric attended AOBP device. Results: On average, auscultatory BP was 10.6/5.6 mmHg higher than unattended AOBP. Similarly, oscillometric attended AOBP was 9.9/3.4 mmHg higher than unattended AOBP, while the mean difference between attended oscillometric AOBP and auscultatory BP was 0.8/2.1 mmHg. Unattended systolic AOBP of 127 mmHg corresponded to SBP of 140 mmHg measured by a conventional sphygmomanometer. The prevalence of hypertension varied depending on the measurement technique and ranged from 31.5 to 40.1%. Reasonable agreement in hypertension diagnosis was observed with unattended AOBP cut-off at least 130/85 mmHg when compared with both auscultatory (McNemar P = 0.07, kappa 0.819) and attended oscillometric AOBP (McNemar P = 0.46, kappa 0.852) thresholds of at least 140/90 mmHg. Conclusion: Unattended automated office SBP is on average 10 mmHg lower than the office auscultatory or attended AOBP values. In epidemiological settings, a threshold of unattended AOBP at least 130/85 mmHg should make comparison of hypertension prevalence possible with studies using auscultatory techniques and cut-off values of 140/90 mmHg.

Czech name

—

Czech description

—

Type

J_imp - Article in a specialist periodical, which is included in the Web of Science database

CEP classification

—

OECD FORD branch

30201 - Cardiac and Cardiovascular systems

Project

<a href="/en/project/NV15-27109A" target="_blank" >NV15-27109A: Longitudinal trends in major cardiovascular risk factors and their predictive value in a population random sample, Czech post-MONICA study</a><br>

Continuities

I - Institucionalni podpora na dlouhodoby koncepcni rozvoj vyzkumne organizace

Publication year

2020

Confidentiality

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Name of the periodical

Journal of Hypertension

ISSN

0263-6352

e-ISSN

—

Volume of the periodical

38

Issue of the periodical within the volume

4

Country of publishing house

GB - UNITED KINGDOM

Number of pages

7

Pages from-to

656-662

UT code for WoS article

000524501000016

EID of the result in the Scopus database

2-s2.0-85080131304