Literature DB >> 27789511

Prevalence of systolic inter-arm differences in blood pressure for different primary care populations: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Christopher E Clark1, Rod S Taylor1, Angela C Shore2, John L Campbell1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Various prevalence figures have been reported for inter-arm differences in blood pressure (IAD); variation may be explained by differing population vascular risk and by measurement method. AIM: To review the literature to derive robust estimates of IAD prevalence relevant to community populations. DESIGN AND
SETTING: Systematic review and meta-analysis.
METHOD: MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL were searched for cross-sectional studies likely to represent general or primary care populations, reporting prevalence of IAD and employing a simultaneous method of measurement. Using study-level data, pooled estimates of mean prevalence of systolic IADs were calculated and compared using a random effects model.
RESULTS: Eighty IAD studies were identified. Sixteen met inclusion criteria: pooled estimates of prevalence for systolic IAD ≥10 mmHg were 11.2% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 9.1 to 13.6) in hypertension, 7.4% (95% CI = 5.8 to 9.2) in diabetes, and 3.6% (95% CI = 2.3 to 5.0) for a general adult population (P<0.001 for subgroup differences). Differences persisted for higher cut-off values. Prevalences were lower for East Asian than for Western populations and were overestimated by sequential measurement where this could be compared with simultaneous measurement within studies (relative risk for IAD: 2.9 [95% CI = 2.1 to 4.1]). Studies with higher mean absolute systolic pressures had higher prevalences for a systolic IAD ≥10 mmHg (P = 0.04).
CONCLUSION: Prevalences of IADs rise in relation to underlying cardiovascular comorbidities of the population studied, and are overestimated threefold when sequential measurement is used. Population-specific variation in prevalences of IAD should be taken into account in delivering clinical care and in planning future studies. © British Journal of General Practice 2016.

Entities:  

Keywords:  blood pressure determination; hypertension; inter-arm difference; prevalence; primary care

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27789511      PMCID: PMC5072922          DOI: 10.3399/bjgp16X687553

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Gen Pract        ISSN: 0960-1643            Impact factor:   5.386


  58 in total

1.  The inter-arm blood pressure difference and peripheral vascular disease: cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Christopher E Clark; John L Campbell; Roy J Powell; John F Thompson
Journal:  Fam Pract       Date:  2007-08-01       Impact factor: 2.267

2.  Interarm differences in blood pressure should be determined by measuring both arms simultaneously with an automatic oscillometric device.

Authors:  Friedrich W Lohmann; Siegfried Eckert; Willem J Verberk
Journal:  Blood Press Monit       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 1.444

3.  A difference in systolic blood pressure between arms and between lower limbs is a novel risk marker for diabetic nephropathy in patients with type 2 diabetes.

Authors:  Hiroshi Okada; Michiaki Fukui; Muhei Tanaka; Shinobu Matsumoto; Yusuke Mineoka; Naoko Nakanishi; Mai Asano; Masahiro Yamazaki; Goji Hasegawa; Naoto Nakamura
Journal:  Hypertens Res       Date:  2013-01-17       Impact factor: 3.872

4.  The detection rates of inter-arm systolic blood pressure difference vary with blood pressure levels in hypertensive patients under antihypertensive therapy.

Authors:  Hanjun Sun; Ping Li; Hai Su; Jiwei Wang; Weitong Hu; Juxiang Li; Yanna Liu; Xiaoshu Cheng
Journal:  Int J Cardiol       Date:  2014-01-10       Impact factor: 4.164

5.  Sixty seconds on . . . measuring blood pressure.

Authors:  Nigel Hawkes
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2016-05-10

Review 6.  Prevalence and clinical implications of the inter-arm blood pressure difference: A systematic review.

Authors:  C E Clark; J L Campbell; P H Evans; A Millward
Journal:  J Hum Hypertens       Date:  2006-10-12       Impact factor: 3.012

7.  The unilateral measurement of blood pressure may mask the diagnosis or delay the effective treatment of hypertension.

Authors:  Asterios Karagiannis; Konstantinos Tziomalos; Napoleon Krikis; Georgios Sfikas; Konstantina Dona; Chrysanthos Zamboulis
Journal:  Angiology       Date:  2005 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 3.619

8.  The vital prognosis of subclavian stenosis.

Authors:  Victor Aboyans; Michael H Criqui; Mary McGrae McDermott; Matthew A Allison; Julie O Denenberg; Ramin Shadman; Arnost Fronek
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2007-03-26       Impact factor: 24.094

9.  Hypertension guideline recommendations in general practice: awareness, agreement, adoption, and adherence.

Authors:  Carl Heneghan; Rafael Perera; David Mant; Paul Glasziou
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2007-12       Impact factor: 5.386

10.  Blood pressure measurement: one arm or both arm?

Authors:  Prasad K Kulkarni; Susheela Shekhar; B N Reddy; B C Nirmala
Journal:  Indian J Med Sci       Date:  2011-09
View more
  18 in total

1.  Inter-arm Systolic Blood Pressure Difference in Physically Active, Adult Subjects.

Authors:  Daniel Neunhäuserer; Andrea Gasperetti; Sara Ortolan; Francesca Battista; Pietro Pettenella; Marco Zaccaria; Marco Bergamin; Andrea Ermolao
Journal:  High Blood Press Cardiovasc Prev       Date:  2018-07-12

2.  Systolic inter-arm blood pressure difference and risk of cognitive decline in older people: a cohort study.

Authors:  Christopher E Clark; Daniel Thomas; David J Llewellyn; Luigi Ferrucci; Stefania Bandinelli; John L Campbell
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2020-06-25       Impact factor: 5.386

3.  Inter-arm systolic blood pressure difference: non-persistence and association with incident cardiovascular disease in the Multi-ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis.

Authors:  Daniel A Duprez; David R Jacobs; Leah I B Andrews; Lyndia C Brumback; Julie O Denenberg; Robyn L Mcclelland; Isac C Thomas; Michael H Criqui; Matthew A Allison
Journal:  J Hum Hypertens       Date:  2022-03-16       Impact factor: 2.877

4.  Association of interarm blood pressure difference with cardio-cerebral vascular disease: A community-based, cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Siyu Yu; Yi Zhou; Kang Wu; Xianfeng Zhou; Yi Yang; Hua Qiu; Xiaolin Liu; Juzhong Ke; Xiaonan Wang; Zhitao Li; Xiaodan Chen; Xiaonan Ruan
Journal:  J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich)       Date:  2019-07-14       Impact factor: 3.738

5.  The interarm blood pressure difference: Do we know enough yet?

Authors:  Christopher E Clark
Journal:  J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich)       Date:  2017-03-14       Impact factor: 3.738

6.  Blood pressure measurement: a call to arms.

Authors:  Christine A'Court; James Sheppard; Trisha Greenhalgh
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2016-11       Impact factor: 5.386

7.  Inter-arm difference in blood pressure in patients referred to tertiary hypertension center: Prevalence, risk factors, and relevance to physicians.

Authors:  Januvi Jegatheswaran; Swapnil Hiremath; Cedric Edwards; Marcel Ruzicka
Journal:  J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich)       Date:  2020-08-09       Impact factor: 3.738

8.  Interarm Difference in Systolic Blood Pressure in Different Ethnic Groups and Relationship to the "White Coat Effect": A Cross-Sectional Study.

Authors:  Claire Lorraine Schwartz; Christopher Clark; Constantinos Koshiaris; Paramjit S Gill; Shelia M Greenfield; Sayeed M Haque; Gurdip Heer; Amanpreet Johal; Ramandeep Kaur; Jonathan Mant; Una Martin; Mohamed A Mohammed; Sally Wood; Richard J McManus
Journal:  Am J Hypertens       Date:  2017-09-01       Impact factor: 2.689

9.  Epidemiological investigation into the prevalence of abnormal inter-arm blood pressure differences among different ethnicities in Xinjiang, China.

Authors:  Ling Sun; Ting Zou; Bao-Zhu Wang; Fen Liu; Qing-Hua Yuan; Yi-Tong Ma; Xiang Ma
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-01-18       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Associations between interarm differences in blood pressure and cardiovascular disease outcomes: protocol for an individual patient data meta-analysis and development of a prognostic algorithm.

Authors:  Christopher E Clark; Kate Boddy; Fiona C Warren; Rod S Taylor; Victor Aboyans; Lyne Cloutier; Richard J McManus; Angela C Shore; John L Campbell
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2017-07-02       Impact factor: 2.692

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.