scholarly journals Comparison Between Automated Office Blood Pressure Measurements and Manual Office Blood Pressure Measurements—Implications in Individual Patients: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yacong Bo ◽  
Kin-On Kwok ◽  
Kareen Ka-Yin Chu ◽  
Eppie Yu-Han Leung ◽  
Chun Pong Yu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Blood Pressure ◽  
Blood Pressure Measurement ◽  
Office Blood Pressure ◽  
White Coat ◽  
Accurate Estimation ◽  
Masked Hypertension ◽  
Pressure Measurements ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Automated Office Blood Pressure

Abstract Purpose of Review Automated office blood pressure (AOBP) measurements may provide more accurate estimation of blood pressure (BP) than manual office blood pressure (MOBP) measurements. This systematic review investigated the diagnostic performance of AOBP and MOBP using ambulatory blood pressure measurement (ABPM) as reference. Several databases including MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and China Academic Journals were searched. Data were extracted, double-checked by two investigators, and were analysed using a random effects model. Recent Findings A total of 26 observational studies were included. The mean systolic/diastolic BP obtained by AOBP was not significantly different from that obtained by ABPM. The sensitivity and specificity of AOBP to detect elevated BP were approximately 70%. Fewer participants had white-coat hypertension on AOBP measurement than on MOBP measurement (7% versus 14%); however, about 13% had masked hypertension on AOBP measurement. The width of the limit of agreement comparing (i) AOBP and ABPM and (ii) MOBP and ABPM was comparable. Summary AOBP may reduce the rate of the observed white-coat effect but undermine masked hypertension. The current recommendation, however, is limited by the absence of high-quality studies and the high heterogeneity of our results. More high-quality studies using different AOBP machines and in different population are therefore needed.

P0149PREVALENCE OF MASKED HYPERTENSION IN HEMODIALYSIS PATIENTS

2020 ◽  
Vol 35 (Supplement_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ekaterina Borodulina ◽  
Alexander M Shutov
Keyword(s):  
Blood Pressure ◽  
Arterial Hypertension ◽  
Hemodialysis Patients ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Home Blood Pressure ◽  
Office Blood Pressure ◽  
White Coat ◽  
White Coat Hypertension ◽  
Masked Hypertension ◽  
Pressure Measurements

Abstract Background and Aims Arterial hypertension is main cause of left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) in hemodialysis patients. Masked hypertension is associated with asymptomatic organ damage, including the development of LVH. The aim of this study was to investigate the prevalence of white-coat hypertension and masked hypertension in hemodialysis patients. Method Hemodialysis patients (n=88; 42 males, 46 females, mean age was 51.7±13.3 years) were studied. Office blood pressure measurements were performed before and after hemodialysis within 30 days. Home Blood Pressure Measurements (HBPM) was collected in the morning and in the evening during 4 weeks including hemodialysis session days. 24 hours blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) was performed in the next day after hemodialysis. Systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), pulse pressure (PP) were analyzed. White-coat hypertension was diagnosed when blood pressure elevated in the office, but was normal when was measured by ABPM, HBPM, or both. Masked hypertension was determined when blood pressure was normal in the office, but increased when was measured by HBPM or ABPM. The definitions of the European Society of Cardiology (2018 ESC/ESH Guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension) were used for the diagnosis of hypertension according to office, ambulatory, and home blood pressure levels. Echocardiographic evaluation was performed on the day after dialysis and left ventricular mass index (LVMI) was calculated. Results Arterial hypertension was diagnosed by office blood pressure measurements in 39 (44.3%) patients. Arterial hypertension was defined by ABPM (mean 24h BP > or = 130 and 80 mmHg) in 48 (54.5%) patients. The number of non-dipper patients was 59 (67.0%). According to HBPM arterial hypertension was observed in 61 (69.3%) patients. Left ventricular hypertrophy was detected in 71 (80.7%) patients. Mean LVMI was 140.5±43.0 g/m2. According to the results of three methods of blood pressure measuring arterial hypertension was diagnosed in 53 (60.2%) patients, white-coat hypertension was observed in 5 (5.7%) patients, masked hypertension – in 19 (21.6%) patients. Conclusion According to office blood pressure measurements arterial hypertension was diagnosed in 44.3% hemodialysis patients. Masked hypertension was often observed in hemodialysis patients and when using not only ABPM, but also HBPM was detected in 21.6% of patients. The results indicate the importance of using not only ABPM, but also HBPM in hemodialysis patients.

The Gap Between Manual and Automated Office Blood Pressure Measurements Results at a Hypertension Clinic

2017 ◽  
Vol 33 (5) ◽  
pp. 653-657 ◽  
Author(s):  
Félix Rinfret ◽  
Lyne Cloutier ◽  
Hélène L'Archevêque ◽  
Martine Gauthier ◽  
Mikhael Laskine ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Blood Pressure ◽  
Office Blood Pressure ◽  
Pressure Measurements ◽  
Hypertension Clinic ◽  
Automated Office Blood Pressure

Validity and reliability of 1-h automated office blood pressure measurement for the diagnosis of hypertension

2021 ◽  
Vol Publish Ahead of Print ◽  
Author(s):  
Antoni Sisó-Almirall ◽  
Belchin Kostov ◽  
Esther Blat ◽  
Noemí García ◽  
Berta de Andres ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Blood Pressure ◽  
Pressure Measurement ◽  
Blood Pressure Measurement ◽  
Office Blood Pressure ◽  
Validity And Reliability ◽  
Automated Office Blood Pressure ◽  
Diagnosis Of Hypertension
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document