• Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?

Long-term relationship between unattended automated blood pressure and auscultatory BP measurements in hypertensive patients

J. Seidlerová, J. Ceral, M. Mateřánková, P. König, I. Řiháček, P. Vysočanová, M. Souček, J. Filipovský,

. 2019 ; 28 (1) : 34-39. [pub] 20181125

Jazyk angličtina Země Anglie, Velká Británie

Typ dokumentu časopisecké články

Perzistentní odkaz   https://www.medvik.cz/link/bmc19028041

AIMS: Unattended automated office blood pressure (uAutoOBP) has attracted more attention since SPRINT trial had been published. However, its long-term relationship to attended office blood pressure (AuscOBP) is not known. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Stable treated hypertensive subjects were examined in four Czech academic hypertension centers. All subjects attended four clinical visits three months apart. uAutoOBP was measured with the BP Tru device; AuscOBP was measured three times with auscultatory method by the physician. 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) was performed within one week from the second clinical visit. RESULTS: Data on 112 subjects aged 65.6 ± 10.8 years with mean AuscOBP 128.2 ± 12.2/78.5 ± 10.3 mm Hg are reported. Across the four clinical visits, the uAutoOBP was by 10.1/3.7 mm Hg lower than AuscOBP and the mean difference was similar during all four visits (P≥.061). Both uAutoOBP and AuscOBP had similar intra-individual variability during study follow-up as demonstrated by similar intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC, for systolic ICC = 0.50, for diastolic ICC = 0.72). However, the intra-individual variability of the systolic AuscOBP and uAutoOBP difference was high as demonstrated by low ICCs for absolute (ICC = 0.17 [95%CI, 0.09 - 0.25]) and low κ coefficients for categorized differences (κ ≤ 0.16). The main determinant of AuscOBP-uAutoOBP difference was AuscOBP level. The AuscOBP-uAutoOBP difference was poor tool to identify hypertension control categories defined on the basis of AuscOBP and ABPM. CONCLUSIONS: Although mean AuscOBP-uAutoOBP differences were relatively similar across the four clinical visits, intra-individual variability of this difference was high. The AuscOBP-uAutoOBP difference was poor tool to identify hypertension control categories defined on the basis of AuscOBP and ABPM. Therefore, uAutoOBP cannot be used as a replacement for ABPM.

Citace poskytuje Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc19028041
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20200110075300.0
007      
ta
008      
190813s2019 enk f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.1080/08037051.2018.1540260 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)30474412
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a enk
100    1_
$a Seidlerová, Jitka $u a Internal Department II, Faculty of Medicine in Pilsen , Charles University , Prague , Czech Republic. b Biomedical Centre, Faculty of Medicine in Pilsen , Charles University , Prague , Czech Republic.
245    10
$a Long-term relationship between unattended automated blood pressure and auscultatory BP measurements in hypertensive patients / $c J. Seidlerová, J. Ceral, M. Mateřánková, P. König, I. Řiháček, P. Vysočanová, M. Souček, J. Filipovský,
520    9_
$a AIMS: Unattended automated office blood pressure (uAutoOBP) has attracted more attention since SPRINT trial had been published. However, its long-term relationship to attended office blood pressure (AuscOBP) is not known. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Stable treated hypertensive subjects were examined in four Czech academic hypertension centers. All subjects attended four clinical visits three months apart. uAutoOBP was measured with the BP Tru device; AuscOBP was measured three times with auscultatory method by the physician. 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) was performed within one week from the second clinical visit. RESULTS: Data on 112 subjects aged 65.6 ± 10.8 years with mean AuscOBP 128.2 ± 12.2/78.5 ± 10.3 mm Hg are reported. Across the four clinical visits, the uAutoOBP was by 10.1/3.7 mm Hg lower than AuscOBP and the mean difference was similar during all four visits (P≥.061). Both uAutoOBP and AuscOBP had similar intra-individual variability during study follow-up as demonstrated by similar intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC, for systolic ICC = 0.50, for diastolic ICC = 0.72). However, the intra-individual variability of the systolic AuscOBP and uAutoOBP difference was high as demonstrated by low ICCs for absolute (ICC = 0.17 [95%CI, 0.09 - 0.25]) and low κ coefficients for categorized differences (κ ≤ 0.16). The main determinant of AuscOBP-uAutoOBP difference was AuscOBP level. The AuscOBP-uAutoOBP difference was poor tool to identify hypertension control categories defined on the basis of AuscOBP and ABPM. CONCLUSIONS: Although mean AuscOBP-uAutoOBP differences were relatively similar across the four clinical visits, intra-individual variability of this difference was high. The AuscOBP-uAutoOBP difference was poor tool to identify hypertension control categories defined on the basis of AuscOBP and ABPM. Therefore, uAutoOBP cannot be used as a replacement for ABPM.
650    _2
$a senioři $7 D000368
650    _2
$a automatizace $7 D001331
650    _2
$a měření krevního tlaku $x přístrojové vybavení $x metody $x normy $7 D001795
650    _2
$a ambulantní monitorování krevního tlaku $7 D018660
650    _2
$a ženské pohlaví $7 D005260
650    _2
$a lidé $7 D006801
650    _2
$a hypertenze $x diagnóza $7 D006973
650    _2
$a mužské pohlaví $7 D008297
650    _2
$a lidé středního věku $7 D008875
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
700    1_
$a Ceral, Jiří $u c Department of Cardiology , Faculty Hospital Hradec Králové , Hradec Králové , Czech Republic.
700    1_
$a Mateřánková, Markéta $u a Internal Department II, Faculty of Medicine in Pilsen , Charles University , Prague , Czech Republic.
700    1_
$a König, Petr $7 xx0243659 $u a Internal Department II, Faculty of Medicine in Pilsen , Charles University , Prague , Czech Republic.
700    1_
$a Řiháček, Ivan $u d Faculty of Medicine, 2nd Department of Internal Medicine , St. Anne's University Hospital Brno, Masaryk University , Brno , Czech Republic.
700    1_
$a Vysočanová, Petra $u e Department of Cardiology , Faculty Hospital Bohunice , Brno , Czech Republic.
700    1_
$a Souček, Miroslav $u d Faculty of Medicine, 2nd Department of Internal Medicine , St. Anne's University Hospital Brno, Masaryk University , Brno , Czech Republic.
700    1_
$a Filipovský, Jan $u a Internal Department II, Faculty of Medicine in Pilsen , Charles University , Prague , Czech Republic. b Biomedical Centre, Faculty of Medicine in Pilsen , Charles University , Prague , Czech Republic.
773    0_
$w MED00000810 $t Blood pressure $x 1651-1999 $g Roč. 28, č. 1 (2019), s. 34-39
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30474412 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y a $z 0
990    __
$a 20190813 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20200110075630 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 1433190 $s 1066501
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC
BMC    __
$a 2019 $b 28 $c 1 $d 34-39 $e 20181125 $i 1651-1999 $m Blood pressure $n Blood Press $x MED00000810
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20190813

Najít záznam

Citační ukazatele

Nahrávání dat ...

    Možnosti archivace