Self-measured versus ambulatory blood pressure in the diagnosis of hypertension.
Hond, Elly Den a; Celis, Hilde a; Fagard, Robert a; Keary, Louis c; Leeman, Marc d; O'Brien, Eoin c; Vandenhoven, Guy b; Staessen, Jan A a; on behalf of the THOP investigators
Journal of Hypertension.
21(4):717-722, April 2003.
(Format: HTML, PDF)
Objective: We examined to what extent self-measurement of blood pressure at home (HBP) can be an alternative to ambulatory monitoring (ABP) to diagnose white-coat hypertension.
Methods: In 247 untreated patients, we compared the white-coat effects obtained by HBP and ABP. The thresholds to diagnose hypertension were >= 140/>= 90 mmHg for conventional blood pressure (CBP) and >= 135/>= 85 mmHg for daytime ABP and HBP.
Results: Mean systolic/diastolic CBP, HBP and ABP were 155.4/100.0, 143.1/91.5 and 148.1/95.0 mmHg, respectively. The white-coat effect was 5.0/3.5 mmHg larger on HBP compared with ABP (12.3/8.6 versus 7.2/5.0 mmHg; P < 0.001). The correlation coefficients between the white-coat effects based on HBP and ABP were 0.74 systolic and 0.60 diastolic (P < 0.001). With ABP as a reference, the specificity of HBP to detect white-coat hypertension was 88.6%, and the sensitivity was 68.4%.
Conclusion: Our findings are in line with the recommendations of the ASH Ad Hoc Panel that recommends HBP for screening while ABP has a better prognostic accuracy.
(C) 2003 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Inc.