BACKGROUND: Casual blood pressure (BP) measurement by healthcare professionals is subject to great variability and new methods are necessary to overcome this limitation. OBJECTIVE: To compare and assess the correlation between the BP levels obtained by self-measured BP (SMBP), casual BP measurement and ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM). METHODS: We assessed hypertensive individuals submitted to the three methods of BP measurement at an interval < 30 days; the BP means were used for comparison and correlation. The following devices were used: OMRON 705 CP (casual measurement), OMRON HEM 714 (SMBP) and SPACELABS 9002 (ABPM). RESULTS: A total of 32 patients were assessed, of which 50.09% were females, with a mean age of 59.7 (± 11.2), BMI mean of 26.04 (± 3.3) kg/m(2). Mean systolic (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) for SMBP were 134 (± 15.71) mmHg and 79.32 (± 12.38) mmHg. The casual measurement means of SBP and DBP were, respectively, 140.84 (± 16.15) mmHg and 85 (± 9.68) mmHg. The mean values of ABPM during the wakefulness period were 130.47 (± 13.26) mmHg and 79.84 (± 9.82) mmHg for SBP and DBP, respectively. At the comparative analysis, the SMBP had similar results to those obtained at ABPM (p > 0.05) and different from the casual measurement (p < 0.05). At the analysis of correlation, SMBP values were higher than the casual measurements, considering ABPM as the reference standard in BP measurements. CONCLUSION: SMBP showed a better correlation with ABPM than the casual measurement and was also better correlated with the latter, especially regarding the DBP and should be considered as a low-cost alternative for the follow-up of the hypertensive patient.
BACKGROUND: Casual blood pressure (BP) measurement by healthcare professionals is subject to great variability and new methods are necessary to overcome this limitation. OBJECTIVE: To compare and assess the correlation between the BP levels obtained by self-measured BP (SMBP), casual BP measurement and ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM). METHODS: We assessed hypertensive individuals submitted to the three methods of BP measurement at an interval < 30 days; the BP means were used for comparison and correlation. The following devices were used: OMRON 705 CP (casual measurement), OMRON HEM 714 (SMBP) and SPACELABS 9002 (ABPM). RESULTS: A total of 32 patients were assessed, of which 50.09% were females, with a mean age of 59.7 (± 11.2), BMI mean of 26.04 (± 3.3) kg/m(2). Mean systolic (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) for SMBP were 134 (± 15.71) mmHg and 79.32 (± 12.38) mmHg. The casual measurement means of SBP and DBP were, respectively, 140.84 (± 16.15) mmHg and 85 (± 9.68) mmHg. The mean values of ABPM during the wakefulness period were 130.47 (± 13.26) mmHg and 79.84 (± 9.82) mmHg for SBP and DBP, respectively. At the comparative analysis, the SMBP had similar results to those obtained at ABPM (p > 0.05) and different from the casual measurement (p < 0.05). At the analysis of correlation, SMBP values were higher than the casual measurements, considering ABPM as the reference standard in BP measurements. CONCLUSION:SMBP showed a better correlation with ABPM than the casual measurement and was also better correlated with the latter, especially regarding the DBP and should be considered as a low-cost alternative for the follow-up of the hypertensivepatient.
Authors: Juan Carlos Yugar-Toledo; Heitor Moreno Júnior; Miguel Gus; Guido Bernardo Aranha Rosito; Luiz César Nazário Scala; Elizabeth Silaid Muxfeldt; Alexandre Alessi; Andrea Araújo Brandão; Osni Moreira Filho; Audes Diógenes de Magalhães Feitosa; Oswaldo Passarelli Júnior; Dilma do Socorro Moraes de Souza; Celso Amodeo; Weimar Kunz Sebba Barroso; Marco Antônio Mota Gomes; Annelise Machado Gomes de Paiva; Eduardo Costa Duarte Barbosa; Roberto Dischinger Miranda; José Fernando Vilela-Martin; Wilson Nadruz Júnior; Cibele Isaac Saad Rodrigues; Luciano Ferreira Drager; Luiz Aparecido Bortolotto; Fernanda Marciano Consolim-Colombo; Márcio Gonçalves de Sousa; Flávio Antonio de Oliveira Borelli; Sérgio Emanuel Kaiser; Gil Fernando Salles; Maria de Fátima de Azevedo; Lucélia Batista Neves Cunha Magalhães; Rui Manoel Dos Santos Póvoa; Marcus Vinícius Bolívar Malachias; Armando da Rocha Nogueira; Paulo César Brandão Veiga Jardim; Thiago de Souza Veiga Jardim Journal: Arq Bras Cardiol Date: 2020 May-Jun Impact factor: 2.000
Authors: Glessiane de Oliveira Almeida; Felipe J Aidar; Dihogo Gama de Matos; Paulo Francisco de Almeida-Neto; Enaldo Vieira de Melo; José Augusto Soares Barreto Filho; Marcos Antonio Almeida-Santos; Victor Batista Oliveira; Rebeca Rocha de Almeida; Suelen Maiara Dos Santos; Larissa Monteiro Costa Pereira; Juliana Santos Barbosa; Antônio Carlos Sobral Sousa Journal: Medicina (Kaunas) Date: 2021-01-17 Impact factor: 2.430