Blood Pressure Measurements Taken by Patients are Similar to Home and Ambulatory Blood Pressure Measurements

OBJECTIVE: To compare blood pressure measurements taken at home by physicians, nurses, and patients with office blood pressure measurement , ambulatory blood pressure monitoring and home blood pressure measurement. METHODS: A total of 44 patients seen by a home care program were studied. Protocol 1 a) blood pressure was measured by the patient, a physician and a nurse during a regular home visit (Home1); b) home blood pressure measurement was measured for 4 days (HBPM1); c) office blood pressure measurement was measured by a physician, a nurse, and the patient; and by 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. Protocol 2 blood pressure was measured by the patient, a physician, and a nurse during a special home visit in the presence of a physician and a nurse only (Home2); and b) home blood pressure measurement was taken for the second time (HBPM2). Echocardiography, guided by a two-dimensional echocardiograph, was performed. RESULTS: Protocol 1: a) office blood pressure measurement and Home1 were significantly higher than ambulatory blood pressure monitoring, except for systolic and diastolic office blood pressure measurement taken by the patient or a family member, systolic blood pressure taken by a nurse, and diastolic blood pressure taken by a physician. b) ambulatory blood pressure monitoring and HBPM1 were similar. Protocol 2: a) HBPM2 and Home2 were similar. b) Home2 was significantly lower than Home1, except for diastolic blood pressure taken by a nurse or the patient. There were significant relationships between: a) diastolic blood pressure measured by the patient and the thickness of the interventricular septum, posterior wall, and left ventricular mass; and b) ambulatory and HBPM2 diastolic and systolic blood pressure taken by a physician (home2) and left ventricular mass. Therefore, the data indicate that home blood pressure measurement and ambulatory blood pressure monitoring had good prognostic values relative to "office measurement." CONCLUSION: This study showed that the measurement most similar to home blood pressure measurement and ambulatory blood pressure monitoring was blood pressure measured by the patient, and that home blood pressure measurement and ambulatory blood pressure monitoring had good prognostic value relative to "office measurements"

Level of blood pressure control in a hypertensive population when measurements are performed outside the clinical setting

Background: To determine whether the number of optimally controlled hypertensive patients is higher using self-measurement of blood pressure at home and ambulatory monitoring, compared to using conventional blood pressure measurements at the doctor&#8217;s office. Method: An observational, cross-sectional, multicentre, descriptive study of a random sample of 237 primary health care patients, known to be hypertensive, from Badajoz (Spain). Blood pressure was measured at the doctor&#8217;s office and by self-measurement at home. Those patients showing good control by self-measurement were subjected to 24-hour ambulatory monitoring. Optimal control was understood as blood pressure < 140/90 mm Hg when measured at the doctor&#8217;s office, and < 135/85 mm Hg when self-measured at home and by daytime ambulatory monitoring. Results: Mean systolic/diastolic measurements at the doctor&#8217;s office and by self-measurement were 145.6/83.9 and 134.0/78.7 mm Hg, respectively (p < 0.000). In the population optimally controlled by self-measurement and who subsequently received ambulatory monitoring, the mean blood pressure was 121.8/73.4 and 125.6/76.2 mm Hg, respectively (p = 0.002; p < 0.000). When measured at the doctor&#8217;s office blood pressure was controlled in about 29.5% (95% CI 23.7-35.3%) of patients, in 38% when self-measured (95% CI 31.4-44.2%; p < 0.000), and in 24.5% when it was confirmed through ambulatory monitoring (95% CI 15.4-33.6%). Sensitivity and positive predictive values of the office measurements for the detection of patients who were well-controlled by self-measurement were 50% and 64.3%, respectively, and 53.4% and 73.8% as regards ambulatory monitoring. Conclusions: A higher level of control is achieved with self-measurement at home not confirmed by ambulatory monitoring. Therefore, the white coat effect does not seem to influence the percentage of well-controlled patients detected at the doctor&#8217;s office. Office blood pressure does not appear to be useful in distinguishing which individual patients are optimally controlled

Hypertension

Defining hypertension in pregnancy is challenging because blood pressure levels in pregnancy are dynamic, having a circadian rhythm and also changing with advancing gestational age. The accepted definition is a sustained systolic (sBP) of ≥140 mmHg or a sustained diastolic blood pressure (dBP) ≥90 mmHg, by office (or in-hospital) measurement. Measurement of blood pressure in pregnancy should follow standardised methods, as outside pregnancy. Blood pressure measurement may occur in three types of settings, which will dictate in part, which measurement device(s) will be used. The settings are (1) health care facility; and two types of settings outside the facility: (2) ‘ambulatory’ blood pressure measurement (ABPM); and (3) home blood pressure measurement (HBPM). Furthermore, blood pressure can be measured using auscultatory (mercury or aneroid devices) or automated methods. Factors to consider when selecting a blood pressure measurement device include validation, disease specificity, observer error and the need for regular recalibration. The accuracy of a device is repeatedly compared to two calibrated mercury sphygmomanometers (the gold standard), by trained observers, over a range of blood pressures and for women with different hypertensive disorders of pregnancy; only a few devices have been validated among women with pre-eclampsia. This chapter discusses the advantages and/or disadvantages of the various settings and devices. Low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) bear a disproportionate burden of maternal morbidity and mortality from the hypertensive disorders of pregnancy. While regular blood pressure monitoring can cost-effectively reduce this disparity, LMIC-health systems face unique challenges that reduce this capacity. Assessment of service gaps and programmatic responses to ensure access to blood pressure measurement are a priority, supported where appropriate by implementation research.Publisher PD

DEVELOPMENT OF CONTINUOUS REMOTE BLOOD PRESSURE MONITORING SYSTEM

The conventional method to measure blood pressure of human is either by using a manual measurement by qualified personal (doctors or nurses) using sphygmomanometers or an automatic measurement completed via blood pressure devices. Both of these methods however have a drawback that may lead to misidentification or fatalities. For manual measurement; there are many parameters that may lead to misreading patient's blood pressure such as the level of patient's nerve due to the environmental factor (doctors office), while the automated measurement that widely used in hospital has to be monitored manually at certain time intervals by a nurses

Automated office BP measurement : the new standard in HTN screening

Automated office BP measurement: The new standard in HTN screening. Obtain greater accuracy in blood pressure measurement with an automated office device. PRACTICE CHANGER: Measure patients' blood pressure (BP) using an oscillometric, fully automated office BP device, with the patient sitting alone in a quiet exam room, to accurately diagnose hypertension and eliminate the "white-coat" effect. STRENGTH OF RECOMMENDATION: B: Based on a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and cohort studies.Samuel Miguel Tiglao, DO, FAAP; Erica S. Meisenheimer, MD; Robert C. Marshall, MD, MPH, MISM, FAAFP, FAMIA (Madigan Family Medicine Residency, Joint Base , Lewis-McChord, WA)Includes bibliographical reference

Relationship of 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure and heart rate with markers of hepatic function in cirrhotic patients

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>There is evidence that in cirrhotic patients, certain hemodynamic parameters, such as blood pressure and heart rate, are related to the severity of liver disease. This study investigated whether non-invasive 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure and heart rate are more closely associated with markers of liver disease severity than conventional office measurements.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Ambulatory patients with cirrhosis underwent office blood pressure and heart rate measurements, 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring and blood laboratory tests.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Fifty-one patients (32 men, mean age 57.4 ± 11.3 years) completed the study. Twenty six patients had compensated liver cirrhosis (group A) and 25 patients had more advanced liver disease (group B). Group A and B patients differed significantly both in ambulatory asleep diastolic blood pressure (p < 0.05) and office diastolic blood pressure (p < 0.01), which were lower in more advanced liver disease. Office blood pressure and heart rate correlations were similar to or even stronger than ambulatory ones. Ambulatory blood pressure and heart rate awake-asleep variation (dipping) showed a relatively flat pattern as markers of liver dysfunction were deteriorating. The strongest correlations were found with both ambulatory and office heart rate, which increased as indicators of severity of liver disease were worsening.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Heart rate seems to be a more reliable marker of ongoing liver dysfunction than blood pressure. Evaluation of blood pressure and heart rate with 24-hour ambulatory measurement does not seem to offer more information than conventional office measurements.</p

Agreement between home and ambulatory blood pressure measurement in non-dialysed chronic kidney disease patients in Cameroon

Introduction: home blood pressure measurement (HBPM) is not entirely capable of replacing ambulatory blood pressure (BP) measurement (ABPM), but is superior to office blood pressure measurement (OBPM). Although availability, cost, energy and lack of training are potential limitations for a wide use of HBPM in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), the method may add value for assessing efficacy and compliance in specific populations. We assessed the agreement between HBPM and ABPM in chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients in Douala, Cameroon. Methods: from March to August 2014, we conducted a cross sectional study in non-dialyzed CKD patients with hypertension. Using the same devices and methods, the mean of nine office and eighteen home (during three consecutive days) blood pressure readings were recorded. Each patient similarly had a 24-hour ABPM. Kappa statistic was used to assess qualitative agreement between measurement techniques. Results: fortysix patients (mean age: 56.2 ± 11.4 years, 28 men) were included. The prevalence of optimal blood pressure control was 26, 28 and 32% for OBPM, HBPM and ABPM respectively. Compared with ABPM, HBPM was more effective than OBPM, for the detection of non-optimal BP control (Kappa statistic: 0.49 (95% CI: 0.36 - 0.62) vs. 0.22 (95%CI: 0.21 - 0.35); sensitivity: 60 vs 40%; specificity: 87 vs. 81%). Conclusion: HBPM potentially averts some proportion of BP misclassification in non-dialyzed hypertensive CKD patients in Cameroon

Proportion and characteristics of patients who measure their blood pressure at home: Nationwide survey in Slovenia

Introduction. Home blood pressure monitoring has several advantages over blood pressure monitoring at a physician's office, and has become a useful instrument in the management of hypertension. Objective. To explore the rate and characteristics of patients who measure their blood pressure at home. Methods. A sample of 2,752 patients with diagnosis of essential arterial hypertension was selected from 12596 consecutive office visitors. Data of 2,639 patients was appropriate for analysis. The data concerning home blood pressure measurement and patients' characteristics were obtained from the patients' case histories. Results 1,835 (69.5%) out of 2,639 patients measured their blood pressure at home. 1,284 (70.0%) of home blood pressure patients had their own blood pressure measurement device. There were some important differences between these two groups: home blood pressure patients were more frequently male, of younger age, better educated, from urban area, mostly non-smokers, more likely to have diabetes mellitus and ischemic heart disease and had higher number of co-morbidities and were on other drugs beside antihypertensive medication. Using the logistic regression analysis we found that the most powerful predictors of home blood pressure monitoring had higher education level than primary school OR=1.80 (95% CI 1.37-2.37), non-smoking OR=2.16 (95% CI 1.40-3.33) and having a physician in urban area OR=1.32 (95% CI 1.02-1.71). Conclusion. Home blood pressure monitoring is popular in Slovenia. Patients who measured blood pressure at home were different from patients who did not. Younger age, higher education, non-smoking, having a physician in urban area and longer duration of hypertension were predictors of home blood pressure monitoring

Mjerenje arterijskoga tlaka - ne mari za male stvari i ostat će male stvari?! Preporuke Hrvatskoga referalnog centra za hipertenziju centra izvrsnosti Europskog društva za hipertenziju [Blood pressure measurement - do not sweat the small stuff and it is all small stuff?! Position paper of the Croatian national referral center for hypertension, center of excellence of the European Society of Hypertension]

Office blood pressure measurement using mercury sphygmomanometer is the gold standard for making diagnoses of hypertension, evaluation of cardiovascular risk and estimation of obtained control of treated hypertensives. The vast majority of epidemiologic data are based on this method. However, the importance of blood pressure variability, white coat effect as well as availability of simple devices, home and ambulatory blood pressure measurements became routine parts in routine clinical work. As mercury will be soon forbidden in clinical work such devices and methodology will be even more important. In everyday clinical practice all three techniques should be implemented and in this paper advantages and drawbacks of all techniques are discussed. In the end, based on recent data and recommendations of international societies, diagnostic algorithm was proposed. Additionally, we described the technique of non-invasive central blood pressure measurement, determination of pulse wave velocity and calculation of augmentation index, new proposed risk factors

Joint statement for assessing and managing high blood pressure in children and adolescents: Chapter 1. How to correctly measure blood pressure in children and adolescents

The joint statement is a synergistic action between HyperChildNET and the European Academy of Pediatrics about the diagnosis and management of hypertension in youth, based on the European Society of Hypertension Guidelines published in 2016 with the aim to improve its implementation. The first and most important requirement for the diagnosis and management of hypertension is an accurate measurement of office blood pressure that is currently recommended for screening, diagnosis, and management of high blood pressure in children and adolescents. Blood pressure levels should be screened in all children starting from the age of 3 years. In those children with risk factors for high blood pressure, it should be measured at each medical visit and may start before the age of 3 years. Twenty-four-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring is increasingly recognized as an important source of information as it can detect alterations in circadian and short-term blood pressure variations and identify specific phenotypes such as nocturnal hypertension or non-dipping pattern, morning blood pressure surge, white coat and masked hypertension with prognostic significance. At present, home BP measurements are generally regarded as useful and complementary to office and 24-h ambulatory blood pressure for the evaluation of the effectiveness and safety of antihypertensive treatment and furthermore remains more accessible in primary care than 24-h ambulatory blood pressure. A grading system of the clinical evidence is included