scholarly journals Comparison of a self-automated blood pressure measurement according to the American Heart Association recommendation versus a routine practice, a randomized-controlled trial

2021 ◽  
Vol 42 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
N Suntornlekha ◽  
C Chai-Adisaksopha ◽  
P Jesadaporn ◽  
W Mekara ◽  
S Kuanprasert

Abstract Background Home blood pressure monitoring is currently a gold standard for guiding an adjustment of antihypertensive medications. According to the American Heart Association (AHA), the self-automated blood pressure (BP) measurement may represent accurate home BP. However, there is a limited data in real-world practice Objective To explore the accuracy of a self-automated BP measurement in representing the actual home BP monitoring, in comparison with a single spot-arm automated BP measurement, which is routinely used in the clinical setting. Methods We conducted a single center, randomized cross-over trial. At the Cardiology clinic, hypertensive patients aged between 18 and 80 years, who were able to perform self-automated BP measurement, were included in the study. The patients were categorized into two groups using different BP measurement methods: a self-automated BP measurement according to the AHA Recommendation 2017 and a single spot-arm automated BP measurement, and then crossed over to alternative methods. All participants were instructed to rest at least 5 minutes prior to undergo BP measurement in both methods. The data of BP measurements were subsequently compared with the standard home BP monitoring. Results Overall, 190 patients underwent randomization. Mean differences of systolic blood pressure (SBP) in the self-automated AHA measurement and the single spot-arm measurement, compared with the standard home BP monitoring, were 3.57 mmHg (95% confidence interval (CI); 1.39 to 5.74 mmHg) and 9.44 mmHg (95% CI; 7.03 to11.86 mmHg), respectively (P<0.001) (table1). Mean differences of diastolic blood pressure (DBP) in the self-automated AHA and the single spot-arm measurements, compared with the standard home BP were −1.51 mmHg (95% CI; −2.76 to −0.25) and 2.69 mmHg (95% CI; 1.07–4.31), respectively (P<0.001) (table 1). White coat hypertension was detected in 7 (3.72%) of patients by AHA measurement and 17 (9.04%) by the single-spot arm measurement (P=0.008). Conclusion The self-automated BP measurement according to the AHA Recommendation 2017 was more accurate than the single spot-arm automated BP measurement in representing the actual home BP monitoring and reduced the possibility of the white coat effect. FUNDunding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: None. Table 1

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Eun Sun Yu ◽  
Kwan Hong ◽  
Byung Chul Chun

Abstract Background The study aimed to estimate the incidence of and period of progression to stage 2 hypertension from normal blood pressure. Methods We selected a total of 21,172 normotensive individuals between 2003 and 2004 from the National Health Insurance Service-Health Screening and followed them up until 2015. The criteria for blood pressure were based on the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association 2017 guideline (normal BP: SBP < 120 and DBP < 80 mmHg, elevated BP: SBP 120–129 and DBP < 80 mmHg, stage 1 hypertension: SBP 130–139 or DBP 80–89 mmHg, stage 2 hypertension: SBP ≥140 or DBP ≥ 90 mmHg). We classified the participants into four courses (Course A: normal BP → elevated BP → stage 1 hypertension→ stage 2 hypertension, Course B: normal BP → elevated BP → stage 2 hypertension, Course C: normal BP → stage 1 hypertension → stage 2 hypertension, Course D: normal BP → stage 2 hypertension) according to their progression from normal blood pressure to stage 2 hypertension. Results During the median 12.23 years of follow-up period, 52.8% (n= 11,168) and 23.6% (n=5004) of the participants had stage 1 and stage 2 hypertension, respectively. In particular, over 60 years old had a 2.8-fold higher incidence of stage 2 hypertension than 40–49 years old. After the follow-up period, 77.5% (n=3879) of participants with stage 2 hypertension were found to be course C (n= 2378) and D (n=1501). After the follow-up period, 77.5% (n=3879) of participants with stage 2 hypertension were found to be course C (n= 2378) and D (n=1501). The mean years of progression from normal blood pressure to stage 2 hypertension were 8.7±2.6 years (course A), 6.1±2.9 years (course B), 7.5±2.8 years (course C) and 3.2±2.0 years, respectively. Conclusions This study found that the incidence of hypertension is associated with the progression at each stage. We suggest that the strategies necessary to prevent progression to stage 2 hypertension need to be set differently for each target course.


Cureus ◽  
2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Asad Ali ◽  
Muhammad Abu Zar ◽  
Ahmad Kamal ◽  
Amber E Faquih ◽  
Chandur Bhan ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document