Literature DB >> 33246327

Digit Preference in Office Blood Pressure Measurements, United States 2015-2019.

Kathryn E Foti1,2, Lawrence J Appel1,2, Kunihiro Matsushita1,2, Josef Coresh1,2, G Caleb Alexander1,3, Elizabeth Selvin1,2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Blood pressure (BP) measurement error may lead to under- or overtreatment of hypertension. One common source of error is terminal digit preference, most often a terminal digit of "0." The objective was to evaluate national trends in terminal digit preference in office BP measurements among adults with treated hypertension.
METHODS: Data were from IQVIA's National Disease and Therapeutic Index, a nationally representative, serial cross-sectional survey of office-based physicians. The analysis included office visits from 2015 to 2019 among adults aged ≥18 years receiving antihypertensive treatment. Annual trends were examined in the percent of systolic and diastolic BP measurements ending in zero by patient sex, age, and race/ethnicity, physician specialty, and first or subsequent hypertension treatment visit.
RESULTS: From 2015 to 2019, there were ~60 million hypertension treatment visits annually (unweighted N: 5,585-9,085). There was a decrease in the percent of visits with systolic (41.7%-37.7%) or diastolic (42.7%-37.8%) BP recordings ending in zero. Trends were similar by patient characteristics. However, a greater proportion of measurements ended in zero among patients aged ≥80 (vs. 15-59 or 60-79) years, first (vs. subsequent) treatment visits, visits to cardiologists (vs. primary care physicians), and visits with systolic BP ≥140 or diastolic BP ≥90 (vs. <140/90) mm Hg.
CONCLUSIONS: Despite modest improvement, terminal digit preference remains a common problem in office BP measurement in the United States. Without bias, 10%-20% of measurements are expected to end in zero. Reducing digit preference is a priority for improving BP measurement accuracy and hypertension management. © American Journal of Hypertension, Ltd 2020. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Entities:  

Keywords:  blood pressure; blood pressure measurement; hypertension; measurement error; terminal digit preference

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33246327      PMCID: PMC8628654          DOI: 10.1093/ajh/hpaa196

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Hypertens        ISSN: 0895-7061            Impact factor:   2.689


  29 in total

1.  Terminal digit preference and single-number preference in the Syst-Eur trial: influence of quality control.

Authors:  David Wingfield; Jonathan Cooke; Lut Thijs; Jan A Staessen; Astrid E Fletcher; Robert Fagard; Christopher J Bulpitt
Journal:  Blood Press Monit       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 1.444

2.  Hypertension Canada's 2018 Guidelines for Diagnosis, Risk Assessment, Prevention, and Treatment of Hypertension in Adults and Children.

Authors:  Kara A Nerenberg; Kelly B Zarnke; Alexander A Leung; Kaberi Dasgupta; Sonia Butalia; Kerry McBrien; Kevin C Harris; Meranda Nakhla; Lyne Cloutier; Mark Gelfer; Maxime Lamarre-Cliche; Alain Milot; Peter Bolli; Guy Tremblay; Donna McLean; Raj S Padwal; Karen C Tran; Steven Grover; Simon W Rabkin; Gordon W Moe; Jonathan G Howlett; Patrice Lindsay; Michael D Hill; Mike Sharma; Thalia Field; Theodore H Wein; Ashkan Shoamanesh; George K Dresser; Pavel Hamet; Robert J Herman; Ellen Burgess; Steven E Gryn; Jean C Grégoire; Richard Lewanczuk; Luc Poirier; Tavis S Campbell; Ross D Feldman; Kim L Lavoie; Ross T Tsuyuki; George Honos; Ally P H Prebtani; Gregory Kline; Ernesto L Schiffrin; Andrew Don-Wauchope; Sheldon W Tobe; Richard E Gilbert; Lawrence A Leiter; Charlotte Jones; Vincent Woo; Robert A Hegele; Peter Selby; Andrew Pipe; Philip A McFarlane; Paul Oh; Milan Gupta; Simon L Bacon; Janusz Kaczorowski; Luc Trudeau; Norman R C Campbell; Swapnil Hiremath; Michael Roerecke; Joanne Arcand; Marcel Ruzicka; G V Ramesh Prasad; Michel Vallée; Cedric Edwards; Praveena Sivapalan; S Brian Penner; Anne Fournier; Geneviève Benoit; Janusz Feber; Janis Dionne; Laura A Magee; Alexander G Logan; Anne-Marie Côté; Evelyne Rey; Tabassum Firoz; Laura M Kuyper; Jonathan Y Gabor; Raymond R Townsend; Doreen M Rabi; Stella S Daskalopoulou
Journal:  Can J Cardiol       Date:  2018-03-01       Impact factor: 5.223

3.  Blood pressure recording bias during a period when the Quality and Outcomes Framework was introduced.

Authors:  I M Carey; C M Nightingale; S DeWilde; T Harris; P H Whincup; D G Cook
Journal:  J Hum Hypertens       Date:  2009-03-12       Impact factor: 3.012

4.  The impact of observer and patient factors on the occurrence of digit preference for zero in blood pressure measurement in a hypertension specialty clinic: evidence for the need of continued observation.

Authors:  John W Graves; Kent R Bailey; Brandon R Grossardt; Rachel E Gullerud; Ryan A Meverden; Diane E Grill; Sheldon G Sheps
Journal:  Am J Hypertens       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 2.689

Review 5.  Blood Pressure Assessment in Adults in Clinical Practice and Clinic-Based Research: JACC Scientific Expert Panel.

Authors:  Paul Muntner; Paula T Einhorn; William C Cushman; Paul K Whelton; Natalie A Bello; Paul E Drawz; Beverly B Green; Daniel W Jones; Stephen P Juraschek; Karen L Margolis; Edgar R Miller; Ann Marie Navar; Yechiam Ostchega; Michael K Rakotz; Bernard Rosner; Joseph E Schwartz; Daichi Shimbo; George S Stergiou; Raymond R Townsend; Jeff D Williamson; Jackson T Wright; Lawrence J Appel
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2019-01-29       Impact factor: 24.094

6.  National trends in treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus, 1994-2007.

Authors:  G Caleb Alexander; Niraj L Sehgal; Rachael M Moloney; Randall S Stafford
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  2008-10-27

7.  Does changing from mercury to electronic blood pressure measurement influence recorded blood pressure? An observational study.

Authors:  Richard J McManus; Jonathan Mant; Martyn R P Hull; F D Richard Hobbs
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 5.386

8.  Trends in end digit preference for blood pressure and associations with cardiovascular outcomes in Canadian and UK primary care: a retrospective observational study.

Authors:  Michelle Greiver; Sumeet Kalia; Teja Voruganti; Babak Aliarzadeh; Rahim Moineddin; William Hinton; Martin Dawes; Frank Sullivan; Saddaf Syed; John Williams; Simon de Lusignan
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2019-01-24       Impact factor: 2.692

9.  A Short History of Automated Office Blood Pressure - 15 Years to SPRINT.

Authors:  Martin G Myers
Journal:  J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich)       Date:  2016-04-01       Impact factor: 3.738

10.  Concordance Between Blood Pressure in the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial and in Routine Clinical Practice.

Authors:  Paul E Drawz; Anil Agarwal; Jamie P Dwyer; Edward Horwitz; James Lash; Kristin Lenoir; Andrew McWilliams; Suzanne Oparil; Frederic Rahbari-Oskoui; Mahboob Rahman; Mark A Parkulo; Priscilla Pemu; Dominic S Raj; Michael Rocco; Sandeep Soman; George Thomas; Delphine S Tuot; Paul K Whelton; Nicholas M Pajewski
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2020-12-01       Impact factor: 21.873

View more
  2 in total

1.  Height-based equations as screening tools for high blood pressure in pediatric practice, the GENOBOX study.

Authors:  Gloria Pérez-Gimeno; Azahara I Ruperez; Mercedes Gil-Campos; Concepción M Aguilera; Augusto Anguita; Rocío Vázquez-Cobela; Estela Skapino; Luis A Moreno; Rosaura Leis; Gloria Bueno-Lozano
Journal:  J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich)       Date:  2022-05-21       Impact factor: 2.885

2.  Association of an Automated Blood Pressure Measurement Quality Improvement Program With Terminal Digit Preference and Recorded Mean Blood Pressure in 11 Clinics.

Authors:  Thomas E Kottke; Jeffrey P Anderson; Jacob D Zillhardt; JoAnn M Sperl-Hillen; Patrick J O'Connor; Beverly B Green; Rae Ann Williams; Beth M Averbeck; Michael N Stiffman; MarySue Beran; Michael Rakotz; Karen L Margolis
Journal:  JAMA Netw Open       Date:  2022-08-01
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.