| Literature DB >> 30403006 |
Olive Tang1,2, Stephen P Juraschek3,4, Lawrence J Appel1,2,5, Lisa A Cooper1,2,5, Jeanne Charleston2, Romsai T Boonyasai1, Kathryn A Carson2,5, Hsin-Chieh Yeh1,2,5, Edgar R Miller1,2,5.
Abstract
Discrepancies between clinic and research blood pressure (BP) measurements lead to uncertainties in translating hypertension management guidelines into practice. We assessed the concordance between standardized automated clinic BP, from a primary care clinic, and research BP, from a randomized trial conducted at the same site. Mean single-visit clinic BP was higher by 4.4/3.8 mm Hg (P = 0.007/<0.001). Concordance in systolic BP (SBP) improved with closer proximity of measurements (difference = 2.5 mm Hg, P = 0.21 for visits within 7 days), but not averaging across multiple visits (difference =5.1(9.2) mm Hg; P < 0.001). This discrepancy was greater among female participants. Clinic-based difference in SBP between two visits was more variable than research-based change (SD = 19.6 vs 14.0; P = 0.002); a 2-arm trial using clinic measurements would need 95% more participants to achieve comparable power. Implementation of a bundled standardization intervention decreased discrepancies between clinic and research BP, compared to prior reports. However, clinic measurements remained higher and more variable, suggesting treatment to research-based targets may lead to overtreatment and using clinic BP approximately halves power in trials. ©2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.Entities:
Keywords: blood pressure measurement; clinical trials; electronic health record; hypertension; standardized blood pressure protocol
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30403006 PMCID: PMC6289771 DOI: 10.1111/jch.13412
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich) ISSN: 1524-6175 Impact factor: 3.738