Marco Cossio-Bolaños1, Rubén Vidal-Espinoza2, Felipe Castelli Correia de Campos3, José Sulla-Torres4, Wilbert Cossio-Bolaños5, Cynthia Lee Andruske6, Camilo Urra Albornoz7, Rossana Gómez Campos8. 1. Universidad Católica del Maule, Av San Miguel 3605, Talca, Chile. 2. Universidad Católica Silva Henríquez, Santiago, Chile. 3. Universidad del Bío Bío, Chillán, Chile. 4. Universidad Nacional de San Agustín de Arequipa, Arequipa, Perú. 5. Universidad Privada San Juan Bautista, Lima, Perú. 6. Centro de Investigación CINEMAROS, Arequipa, Perú. 7. Escuela de Kinesiología, Facultad de Salud, Universidad Santo Tomás, Talca, Chile. 8. Universidad Católica del Maule, Av San Miguel 3605, Talca, Chile. rossaunicamp@gmail.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Evaluating blood pressure (BP) is one element for diagnosing and preventing disease in student populations. The objectives of this research were to (a) identify the range of height for measuring BP adjusted for student populations and (b) propose percentiles for evaluating BP based on height. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was carried out with 3,013 students. Weight, height, and diastolic (DBP) and systolic (SBP) blood pressure were evaluated. Body Mass Index (BMI) was calculated. Height ranges of 5 and 10 cm were generated. RESULTS: R2 values for height ranges of 5 cm consisted of [normotensive: DBP (R2 = 10 to 13%) and SBP (R2 = 14 to 20%), and for hypertensive: DBP (R2 = 0.07 to 15%) and for SBP (R2 = 29 to 32%)]. For height ranges of 10 cm, values included: [normotensive: DBP (R2 = 10 to 15%), and SBP (R2 = 15 to 21%) and for hypertensive: DBP (R2 = 0.07 to 16%) and SBP (R2 = 29 to 35%)]. For 5 cm height ranges, diferences occurred between both sexes for DBP (in 5 height ranges from 123 to 148 cm and 158 to 168 cm) and for the SBP (in 6 height ranges from 128 to 148 cm and from 158 to 168 cm). In the 10 cm categories, diferences appeared in DBP (from 138 to 148 cm) and in the SBP (from 158 to 168 cm). CONCLUSIONS: Height is a determinant for evaluating blood pressure, and height ranges of 10 cm are more suitable for children and adolescents. The proposed percentiles based on height ranges allowed assessment of the DBP and SBP suggest their use in epidemiological and educational contexts.
BACKGROUND: Evaluating blood pressure (BP) is one element for diagnosing and preventing disease in student populations. The objectives of this research were to (a) identify the range of height for measuring BP adjusted for student populations and (b) propose percentiles for evaluating BP based on height. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was carried out with 3,013 students. Weight, height, and diastolic (DBP) and systolic (SBP) blood pressure were evaluated. Body Mass Index (BMI) was calculated. Height ranges of 5 and 10 cm were generated. RESULTS: R2 values for height ranges of 5 cm consisted of [normotensive: DBP (R2 = 10 to 13%) and SBP (R2 = 14 to 20%), and for hypertensive: DBP (R2 = 0.07 to 15%) and for SBP (R2 = 29 to 32%)]. For height ranges of 10 cm, values included: [normotensive: DBP (R2 = 10 to 15%), and SBP (R2 = 15 to 21%) and for hypertensive: DBP (R2 = 0.07 to 16%) and SBP (R2 = 29 to 35%)]. For 5 cm height ranges, diferences occurred between both sexes for DBP (in 5 height ranges from 123 to 148 cm and 158 to 168 cm) and for the SBP (in 6 height ranges from 128 to 148 cm and from 158 to 168 cm). In the 10 cm categories, diferences appeared in DBP (from 138 to 148 cm) and in the SBP (from 158 to 168 cm). CONCLUSIONS: Height is a determinant for evaluating blood pressure, and height ranges of 10 cm are more suitable for children and adolescents. The proposed percentiles based on height ranges allowed assessment of the DBP and SBP suggest their use in epidemiological and educational contexts.
Authors: Joseph T Flynn; David C Kaelber; Carissa M Baker-Smith; Douglas Blowey; Aaron E Carroll; Stephen R Daniels; Sarah D de Ferranti; Janis M Dionne; Bonita Falkner; Susan K Flinn; Samuel S Gidding; Celeste Goodwin; Michael G Leu; Makia E Powers; Corinna Rea; Joshua Samuels; Madeline Simasek; Vidhu V Thaker; Elaine M Urbina Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2017-08-21 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Empar Lurbe; Renata Cifkova; J Kennedy Cruickshank; Michael J Dillon; Isabel Ferreira; Cecilia Invitti; Tatiana Kuznetsova; Stephane Laurent; Giuseppe Mancia; Francisco Morales-Olivas; Wolfgang Rascher; Josep Redon; Franz Schaefer; Tomas Seeman; George Stergiou; Elke Wühl; Alberto Zanchetti Journal: J Hypertens Date: 2009-09 Impact factor: 4.844
Authors: Abdullah A Al Salloum; Mohammad I El Mouzan; Abdullah S Al Herbish; Ahmad A Al Omar; Mansour M Qurashi Journal: Ann Saudi Med Date: 2009 May-Jun Impact factor: 1.526