OBJECTIVE: To determine whether ambulatory blood pressure monitoring affects objective and subjective sleep quality in patients tested at home. METHODS: Seventy consecutive patients (40 women and 30 men, aged 53+/-15 years), having ambulatory blood pressure monitoring to monitor the efficacy of antihypertensive treatment or to distinguish between hypertension or white-coat hypertension had an evaluation of their sleep quality on a first night with ambulatory blood pressure monitoring and the three following nights without ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring was performed with an auscultatory device with a measure every 15 min during 24 h. Sleep evaluation criteria were both subjective (sleep quality score and sleep questionnaire) and objective (wrist actigraphy monitoring). Sleep parameters during night 1 with ambulatory blood pressure monitoring were compared with those during night 4 without ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. Usual quality of sleep of the patients was assessed by the mean sleep quality score over 7 consecutive days. RESULTS: The sleep quality score was significantly higher for night 4 than for night 1 (7.3+/-2.1 vs. 5.3+/-2.3; P<0.0001). In contrast, actigraphy parameters (actual sleep time, mean activity score, and fragmentation index) were similar on night 1 and night 4 (6.7+/-1.2 vs. 6.9+/-1.2, 13.2+/-9.8 vs. 12.1+/-8.4, and 31.0+/-14.5 vs. 29.9+/-14.3, respectively). Subjective sleep quality was significantly altered by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in good sleepers (mean sleep quality score > or =7, 73% of patients) but not in poor sleepers. The effect of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring on subjective sleep quality did not differ between dippers and nondippers. CONCLUSIONS: Objective sleep quality as assessed by wrist actigraphy is not significantly altered by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring, whereas subjective sleep quality is adversely affected in good sleepers.
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether ambulatory blood pressure monitoring affects objective and subjective sleep quality in patients tested at home. METHODS: Seventy consecutive patients (40 women and 30 men, aged 53+/-15 years), having ambulatory blood pressure monitoring to monitor the efficacy of antihypertensive treatment or to distinguish between hypertension or white-coat hypertension had an evaluation of their sleep quality on a first night with ambulatory blood pressure monitoring and the three following nights without ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring was performed with an auscultatory device with a measure every 15 min during 24 h. Sleep evaluation criteria were both subjective (sleep quality score and sleep questionnaire) and objective (wrist actigraphy monitoring). Sleep parameters during night 1 with ambulatory blood pressure monitoring were compared with those during night 4 without ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. Usual quality of sleep of the patients was assessed by the mean sleep quality score over 7 consecutive days. RESULTS: The sleep quality score was significantly higher for night 4 than for night 1 (7.3+/-2.1 vs. 5.3+/-2.3; P<0.0001). In contrast, actigraphy parameters (actual sleep time, mean activity score, and fragmentation index) were similar on night 1 and night 4 (6.7+/-1.2 vs. 6.9+/-1.2, 13.2+/-9.8 vs. 12.1+/-8.4, and 31.0+/-14.5 vs. 29.9+/-14.3, respectively). Subjective sleep quality was significantly altered by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in good sleepers (mean sleep quality score > or =7, 73% of patients) but not in poor sleepers. The effect of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring on subjective sleep quality did not differ between dippers and nondippers. CONCLUSIONS: Objective sleep quality as assessed by wrist actigraphy is not significantly altered by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring, whereas subjective sleep quality is adversely affected in good sleepers.
Authors: Lianne Tomfohr; Denise C Cooper; Paul J Mills; Richard A Nelesen; Joel E Dimsdale Journal: Psychosom Med Date: 2010-02-02 Impact factor: 4.312
Authors: H Matthew Lehrer; Gehui Zhang; Karen A Matthews; Robert T Krafty; Marissa A Evans; Briana J Taylor; Martica H Hall Journal: Psychosom Med Date: 2022-06-24 Impact factor: 3.864
Authors: Marwah Abdalla; Swati Sakhuja; Oluwasegun P Akinyelure; S Justin Thomas; Joseph E Schwartz; Cora E Lewis; James M Shikany; Donald Lloyd-Jones; John N Booth; Daichi Shimbo; Martica H Hall; Paul Muntner Journal: J Hypertens Date: 2021-12-01 Impact factor: 4.776
Authors: Allison E Gaffey; Joseph E Schwartz; Kristie M Harris; Martica H Hall; Matthew M Burg Journal: Blood Press Monit Date: 2021-04-01 Impact factor: 1.430