Literature DB >> 27528062

Cardiovascular Risk in Hypertension in Relation to Achieved Blood Pressure Using Automated Office Blood Pressure Measurement.

Martin G Myers1, Janusz Kaczorowski2, Lisa Dolovich2, Karen Tu2, J Michael Paterson2.   

Abstract

The SPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial) reported that some older, higher risk patients might benefit from a target systolic blood pressure (BP) of <120 versus <140 mm Hg. However, it is not yet known how the BP target and measurement methods used in SPRINT relate to cardiovascular outcomes in real-world practice. SPRINT used the automated office BP technique, which requires the patient to be resting quietly and alone, with multiple readings being recorded automatically using an electronic oscillometric sphygmomanometer. We studied the relationship between achieved automated office BP at baseline and cardiovascular events in 6183 community-dwelling residents of Ontario aged ≥66 years who were receiving antihypertensive therapy and followed for a mean of 4.6 years. Adjusted hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) were computed for 10 mm Hg increments in achieved automated office BP at baseline using Cox proportional hazards regression and the BP category with the lowest event rate as the reference category. Based on 904 fatal and nonfatal cardiovascular events, the nadir of cardiovascular events was at the systolic pressure category of 110 to 119 mm Hg, which was lower than the next highest category of 120 to 129 mm Hg (hazard ratio 1.30 [1.01, 1.66]). The hazard ratio for diastolic pressure was relatively unchanged above 60 mm Hg. Pulse pressure exhibited an increase in hazard ratio (1.33 [1.02, 1.72]) at ≥80 mm Hg. These results using automated office BP measurement in a usual treatment setting extend the finding in SPRINT of an optimum target systolic BP of <120 mm Hg to routine clinical practice.
© 2016 American Heart Association, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  antihypertensive therapy; automated blood pressure measurement; cardiovascular complications; cardiovascular risk; hypertension

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27528062     DOI: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.116.07721

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hypertension        ISSN: 0194-911X            Impact factor:   10.190


  16 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

Review 2.  Observational study and participant-level meta-analysis on antihypertensive drug treatment-related cardiovascular risk.

Authors:  Kei Asayama
Journal:  Hypertens Res       Date:  2017-04-27       Impact factor: 3.872

3.  White-Coat Effect Is Uncommon in Patients With Refractory Hypertension.

Authors:  Mohammed Siddiqui; Eric K Judd; Suzanne Oparil; David A Calhoun
Journal:  Hypertension       Date:  2017-07-10       Impact factor: 10.190

Review 4.  Implementing Automated Office Blood Pressure Measurement.

Authors:  Daniel W Jones
Journal:  Hypertension       Date:  2019-07-29       Impact factor: 10.190

5.  Mean Blood Pressure of the General Population with the Mean of Three Measurements Versus the Mean of the Second and Third Measurements. Ricarto Study.

Authors:  Alejandro Villarín Castro; Antonio Segura Fragoso; Francisco Javier Alonso Moreno; Marta Sánchez Pérez; Luis Rodríguez Padial; Gustavo Cristóbal Rodríguez Roca
Journal:  High Blood Press Cardiovasc Prev       Date:  2019-08-26

6.  Experts Provide a Glimpse of the New Post-SPRINT Era of Hypertension.

Authors:  Susan L Worley
Journal:  P T       Date:  2017-02

7.  Effect of repeat manual blood pressure measurement on blood pressure and stage of hypertension.

Authors:  Bryce C Rhodehouse; Jerry Fan; Wencong Chen; Michael J McNeal; Charis G Durham; John P Erwin
Journal:  Proc (Bayl Univ Med Cent)       Date:  2019-07-22

8.  Determination of optimal on-treatment diastolic blood pressure range using automated measurements in subjects with cardiovascular disease-Analysis of a SPRINT trial subpopulation.

Authors:  Piotr Sobieraj; Jacek Lewandowski; Maciej Siński; Zbigniew Gaciong
Journal:  J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich)       Date:  2019-06-06       Impact factor: 3.738

9.  Comparison of blood pressure values-self-measured at home, measured at an unattended office, and measured at a conventional attended office.

Authors:  Kei Asayama; Takayoshi Ohkubo; Hiromi Rakugi; Masaaki Miyakawa; Hisao Mori; Tomohiro Katsuya; Yumi Ikehara; Shinichiro Ueda; Yusuke Ohya; Takuya Tsuchihashi; Kazuomi Kario; Katsuyuki Miura; Naoyuki Hasebe; Sadayoshi Ito; Satoshi Umemura
Journal:  Hypertens Res       Date:  2019-06-21       Impact factor: 3.872

10.  Unattended automated office blood pressure measurement: Time efficiency and barriers to implementation/utilization.

Authors:  John Doane; Michael Flynn; Marcus Archibald; Dominick Ramirez; Molly B Conroy; Barry Stults
Journal:  J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich)       Date:  2020-03-09       Impact factor: 3.738

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.