Cargando…
Clinical Impact of after-consult clinic blood pressure: comparison with automated office blood pressure
BACKGROUND: It is most important to measure blood pressure (BP) exactly in treating hypertension. Recent recommendations for diagnosing hypertension clearly acknowledge that an increase in BP attributable to the “whitecoat response” is frequently associated with manual BP recordings performed in com...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8325846/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34332647 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40885-021-00171-5 |
_version_ | 1783731635064143872 |
---|---|
author | Lee, Cheol Ho Ahn, Ji Hun Ryu, Joon Ha Choi, Woong Gil |
author_facet | Lee, Cheol Ho Ahn, Ji Hun Ryu, Joon Ha Choi, Woong Gil |
author_sort | Lee, Cheol Ho |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: It is most important to measure blood pressure (BP) exactly in treating hypertension. Recent recommendations for diagnosing hypertension clearly acknowledge that an increase in BP attributable to the “whitecoat response” is frequently associated with manual BP recordings performed in community-based practice. However, there was no data about after-consult (AC) BP that could reduce whitecoat effect. So we evaluated before-consult (BC) and AC routine clinic BP and research based automated office blood pressure (AOBP) measured. METHODS: The study population consisted of 82 consecutive patients with hypertension between April 2019 and December 2019. We measured routine clinic BP and AOBP before and after see a doctor, respectively. Seated blood pressure and pulse are measured at each time after a rest period using an automated device as it offers reduced potential for observer biases. AOBP was measured and measuring BP 3 times un-observed. We compared each BP parameter for identifying exact resting BP state. RESULTS: There was significant difference between BC and AC systolic BP (135.37 ± 16.90 vs. 131.95 ± 16.40 mmHg, p = 0.015). However there was no difference in the BC and AC diastolic blood pressure (73.75 ± 11.85 vs. 74.42 ± 11.71 mmHg, p = 0.415). In the AOBP comparison, there was also significant difference (BC systolic AOBP vs. AC systolic AOBP, 125.17 ± 14.41 vs. 122.98 ± 14.09 mmHg, p = 0.006; BC diastolic ABOB vs. AC diastolic AOBP, 71.99 ± 10.49 vs. 70.99 ± 9.83, p = 0.038). CONCLUSIONS: In our study, AC AOBP was most lowest representing resting state. Although AC BP was higher than BC AOBP, it might be used as alternative measurement for reducing whitecoat effect in the routine clinical practice. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8325846 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-83258462021-08-02 Clinical Impact of after-consult clinic blood pressure: comparison with automated office blood pressure Lee, Cheol Ho Ahn, Ji Hun Ryu, Joon Ha Choi, Woong Gil Clin Hypertens Research BACKGROUND: It is most important to measure blood pressure (BP) exactly in treating hypertension. Recent recommendations for diagnosing hypertension clearly acknowledge that an increase in BP attributable to the “whitecoat response” is frequently associated with manual BP recordings performed in community-based practice. However, there was no data about after-consult (AC) BP that could reduce whitecoat effect. So we evaluated before-consult (BC) and AC routine clinic BP and research based automated office blood pressure (AOBP) measured. METHODS: The study population consisted of 82 consecutive patients with hypertension between April 2019 and December 2019. We measured routine clinic BP and AOBP before and after see a doctor, respectively. Seated blood pressure and pulse are measured at each time after a rest period using an automated device as it offers reduced potential for observer biases. AOBP was measured and measuring BP 3 times un-observed. We compared each BP parameter for identifying exact resting BP state. RESULTS: There was significant difference between BC and AC systolic BP (135.37 ± 16.90 vs. 131.95 ± 16.40 mmHg, p = 0.015). However there was no difference in the BC and AC diastolic blood pressure (73.75 ± 11.85 vs. 74.42 ± 11.71 mmHg, p = 0.415). In the AOBP comparison, there was also significant difference (BC systolic AOBP vs. AC systolic AOBP, 125.17 ± 14.41 vs. 122.98 ± 14.09 mmHg, p = 0.006; BC diastolic ABOB vs. AC diastolic AOBP, 71.99 ± 10.49 vs. 70.99 ± 9.83, p = 0.038). CONCLUSIONS: In our study, AC AOBP was most lowest representing resting state. Although AC BP was higher than BC AOBP, it might be used as alternative measurement for reducing whitecoat effect in the routine clinical practice. BioMed Central 2021-08-01 /pmc/articles/PMC8325846/ /pubmed/34332647 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40885-021-00171-5 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Lee, Cheol Ho Ahn, Ji Hun Ryu, Joon Ha Choi, Woong Gil Clinical Impact of after-consult clinic blood pressure: comparison with automated office blood pressure |
title | Clinical Impact of after-consult clinic blood pressure: comparison with automated office blood pressure |
title_full | Clinical Impact of after-consult clinic blood pressure: comparison with automated office blood pressure |
title_fullStr | Clinical Impact of after-consult clinic blood pressure: comparison with automated office blood pressure |
title_full_unstemmed | Clinical Impact of after-consult clinic blood pressure: comparison with automated office blood pressure |
title_short | Clinical Impact of after-consult clinic blood pressure: comparison with automated office blood pressure |
title_sort | clinical impact of after-consult clinic blood pressure: comparison with automated office blood pressure |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8325846/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34332647 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40885-021-00171-5 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT leecheolho clinicalimpactofafterconsultclinicbloodpressurecomparisonwithautomatedofficebloodpressure AT ahnjihun clinicalimpactofafterconsultclinicbloodpressurecomparisonwithautomatedofficebloodpressure AT ryujoonha clinicalimpactofafterconsultclinicbloodpressurecomparisonwithautomatedofficebloodpressure AT choiwoonggil clinicalimpactofafterconsultclinicbloodpressurecomparisonwithautomatedofficebloodpressure |