OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the distribution, reference values and day-to-day variation of blood pressure of untreated subjects measured at home. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study of a cohort. SETTING: General community in northern Japan. SUBJECTS: Blood pressure was measured in 871 subjects (mean +/- SD age 46.0 +/- 19.5 years, range 7-98, constituting 38.7% of the local population of Uchikawama region, Ohasama) who were not receiving antihypertensive medication. METHODS: Subjects measured their own blood pressure at home at least three times (mean +/- SD 19.7 +/- 8.4) each morning using a semi-automatic oscillometric blood pressure measuring device. Screening blood pressure was measured once. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Distribution of home blood pressure in the study population as a whole and with respect to age and sex, and the distribution of day-to-day variation of home blood pressure were determined. RESULTS: Mean home blood pressure was 117.3 +/- 13.4/69.3 +/- 9.7 mmHg (95% confidence interval 116.4-118.2/68.7-70.0). The 95th centile value was 143/85 mmHg, mean+SD 131/79 mmHg and mean + 2SD 144/89 mmHg. Mean screening blood pressure was 126.2 +/- 18.9/72.1 +/- 11.7 mmHg (95th centile 159/92 mmHg). Age- and sex-specific 95th centile values as well as mean +/- SD were obtained. Mean+SD, mean + 2SD and the 95th centile values obtained as reference upper limits of home blood pressure from subjects identified as normotensive by screening blood pressure (n = 707) were 125/77, 137/86 and 134/83 mmHg, respectively. Home blood pressure increased gradually with increasing age in both men and women, although blood pressure was significantly higher in men until 50 years of age. Day-to-day variation of home systolic blood pressure also increased with age. CONCLUSION: Since the distribution of home blood pressure values was affected by age and sex, age- and sex-matched reference values for home blood pressure should be established. Home blood pressure values in elderly subjects should be evaluated carefully, since these exhibit greater day-to-day variation.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the distribution, reference values and day-to-day variation of blood pressure of untreated subjects measured at home. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study of a cohort. SETTING: General community in northern Japan. SUBJECTS: Blood pressure was measured in 871 subjects (mean +/- SD age 46.0 +/- 19.5 years, range 7-98, constituting 38.7% of the local population of Uchikawama region, Ohasama) who were not receiving antihypertensive medication. METHODS: Subjects measured their own blood pressure at home at least three times (mean +/- SD 19.7 +/- 8.4) each morning using a semi-automatic oscillometric blood pressure measuring device. Screening blood pressure was measured once. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Distribution of home blood pressure in the study population as a whole and with respect to age and sex, and the distribution of day-to-day variation of home blood pressure were determined. RESULTS: Mean home blood pressure was 117.3 +/- 13.4/69.3 +/- 9.7 mmHg (95% confidence interval 116.4-118.2/68.7-70.0). The 95th centile value was 143/85 mmHg, mean+SD 131/79 mmHg and mean + 2SD 144/89 mmHg. Mean screening blood pressure was 126.2 +/- 18.9/72.1 +/- 11.7 mmHg (95th centile 159/92 mmHg). Age- and sex-specific 95th centile values as well as mean +/- SD were obtained. Mean+SD, mean + 2SD and the 95th centile values obtained as reference upper limits of home blood pressure from subjects identified as normotensive by screening blood pressure (n = 707) were 125/77, 137/86 and 134/83 mmHg, respectively. Home blood pressure increased gradually with increasing age in both men and women, although blood pressure was significantly higher in men until 50 years of age. Day-to-day variation of home systolic blood pressure also increased with age. CONCLUSION: Since the distribution of home blood pressure values was affected by age and sex, age- and sex-matched reference values for home blood pressure should be established. Home blood pressure values in elderly subjects should be evaluated carefully, since these exhibit greater day-to-day variation.
Authors: R D Feldman; N Campbell; P Larochelle; P Bolli; E D Burgess; S G Carruthers; J S Floras; R B Haynes; G Honos; F H Leenen; L A Leiter; A G Logan; M G Myers; J D Spence; K B Zarnke Journal: CMAJ Date: 1999 Impact factor: 8.262
Authors: J Divisón; A Puras; C Sanchis; L Artigao; J López Abril; E López De Coca; J Massó; B Rodríguez Paños Journal: Aten Primaria Date: 2001-03-31 Impact factor: 1.137
Authors: Thomas G Pickering; Nancy Houston Miller; Gbenga Ogedegbe; Lawrence R Krakoff; Nancy T Artinian; David Goff Journal: Hypertension Date: 2008-05-22 Impact factor: 10.190