Literature DB >> 12571616

Blood pressure measurement in an ambulatory setting: concordance between physician and patient self-measurement.

E Vinyoles1, X Blancafort, C López-Quiñones, M Arqué, A Brau, N Cerdán, M de la Figuera, F Díaz, E Pujol.   

Abstract

The aim of this study was to determine concordance between physician and patient blood pressure (BP) measurements in an ambulatory setting. A diagnostic intervention cross-sectional study using a convenience sample was employed. A total of 106 hypertensive patients were included in the study. Patients who were unable to perform their self-measurement or those with cardiac arrhythmia were excluded. BP was determined nine times in each subject in the medical office in a randomised order: BP was taken three times by the physician using a mercury sphygmomanometer (SPH-Hg), three times by the physician using a validated, automated oscillometer (Omron HEM 705 CP), and three times by the patient himself with the same device. The intraclass correlation coefficient was calculated. In all, 59 women and 47 men aged 65.7 (10) years were analysed. Mean BP measurements for the physician using the mercury sphygmomanometer, the physician using the Omron, and the patient using the same device were: 136 (15.8)/80 (11), 137 (17.9)/80 (10), and 139* (17.6)/80 (10) mmHg, respectively. BP control was 48.1, 48.1, and 36.8*% (*P < 0.05), respectively. Intraclass correlation coefficients for systolic/diastolic pressures were: 0.77/0.65 (physician-sphygmomanometer Hg, physician-Omron; P < 0.001), 0.75/0.64 (physician-sphygmomanometer Hg, patient-Omron, P < 0.001), and 0.83/0.83 (physician-Omron, patient-Omron; P < 0.001). In conclusion, the three types of measurement in the medical office were significantly concordant. Patient office self-measurement showed a tendency to increase systolic BP and worsen BP control.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12571616     DOI: 10.1038/sj.jhh.1001505

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Hum Hypertens        ISSN: 0950-9240            Impact factor:   3.012


  6 in total

Review 1.  Automated Office-Based Blood Pressure Measurement: an Overview and Guidance for Implementation in Primary Care.

Authors:  Romsai T Boonyasai; Erika L McCannon; Joseph E Landavaso
Journal:  Curr Hypertens Rep       Date:  2019-04-04       Impact factor: 5.369

2.  Evaluation of blood pressure measurement and agreement in an academic health sciences center.

Authors:  Deborah S Minor; Kenneth R Butler; Katherine L Artman; Cathy Adair; Wanmei Wang; Valerie McNair; Marion R Wofford; Michael Griswold
Journal:  J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich)       Date:  2012-03-05       Impact factor: 3.738

3.  Unattended versus attended automated office blood pressure: Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies using the same methodology for both methods.

Authors:  Anastasios Kollias; Emelina Stambolliu; Konstantinos G Kyriakoulis; Areti Gravvani; George S Stergiou
Journal:  J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich)       Date:  2018-12-25       Impact factor: 3.738

4.  A meta-analysis helps to clarify the use of automated office blood pressure in clinical practice.

Authors:  Anastasios Kollias; Emelina Stambolliu; Konstantinos G Kyriakoulis; Areti Gravvani; George S Stergiou
Journal:  J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich)       Date:  2019-03-04       Impact factor: 3.738

5.  A meta-analysis that helps clarify the use of automated office blood pressure in clinical practice.

Authors:  Martin G Myers
Journal:  J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich)       Date:  2019-03-04       Impact factor: 3.738

6.  Effect of Intensive and Standard Clinic-Based Hypertension Management on the Concordance Between Clinic and Ambulatory Blood Pressure and Blood Pressure Variability in SPRINT.

Authors:  Lama Ghazi; Nicholas M Pajewski; Dena E Rifkin; Jeffrey T Bates; Tara I Chang; William C Cushman; Stephen P Glasser; William E Haley; Karen C Johnson; William J Kostis; Vasilios Papademetriou; Mahboob Rahman; Debra L Simmons; Addison Taylor; Paul K Whelton; Jackson T Wright; Udayan Y Bhatt; Paul E Drawz
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2019-07-15       Impact factor: 5.501

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.