Search

Objective: To determine the separate contribution of the physician and the hospital environment to differences between home (HBP) and office BP (OBP)., Methods: For 3 consecutive days, 65 hypertensive patients measured their HBP. OBP was determined with the same device by the physician. A higher OBP than HBP was regarded as white-coat effect (WCE), whereas lower OBP than HBP was regarded masked effect. OBP was measured automatically before, during and after the presence of the physician. The physician effect was the BP rise caused by the entrance of physician. The WCE minus the physician effect was regarded the hospital's contribution to the BP differences (hospital effect). We assessed the magnitudes of the hospital effect and the physician effect in determining the WCE. Furthermore, we assessed the correlation of these BP phenomena with each other, and with clinical variables., Results: The WCE consisted of 4.6/-1.7 ± 9.9/10.9 mmHg hospital effect and of 4.4/3.4 ± 6.6/3.3 mmHg PE. The masked effect consisted of a substantially larger hospital effect (19.6/9.4 ± 12.7/9.5 mmHg) than physician effect (4.6/3.0 ± 6.4/3.9 mmHg). Physician effect did not correlate with systolic or diastolic WCE or masked effect (r = -0.05 to 0.08, P > 0.39). In regression analysis, age, baseline mean arterial pressure and BMI were not significantly associated with WCE (all P values >0.4)., Conclusion: BP differences between home and office can largely be attributed to the hospital environment rather than to the entrance of the physician. The physician-related BP effect is not related to differences of HBP and OBP.

Objective: Studies directly comparing the associations of intima-media thickness with blood pressure (BP) on manual sphygmomanometric blood pressure measurement (SBPM) and 24-h ambulatory blood pressure measurement (ABPM) are scarce and have a cross-sectional design., Methods: At baseline, we measured systolic and diastolic blood pressures, pulse pressure, and mean arterial pressure in 532 randomly recruited patients (women, 48.3%; mean age, 38.9 years) by SBPM and ABPM. SBPM was the average of five consecutive readings obtained by trained observers at the patients' homes. We measured carotid intima-media thickness (CIMT) and femoral intima-media thickness (FIMT) by a wall-tracking ultrasound system, 26 months (median) after BP measurement (interquartile range, 21-29 months). We adjusted all analyses for observer, sex, age, BMI, smoking, and total/high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol ratio., Results: The multivariable-adjusted associations of CIMT and FIMT with all BP components on SBPM were not significant (P >or= 0.12). In multivariable-adjusted models, CIMT increased with 24-h systolic blood pressure (effect size per SD increase, +0.131 mm; P = 0.003) and 24-h pulse pressure (+0.139 mm; P = 0.001), whereas FIMT increased with 24-h diastolic blood pressure (+0.091 mm; P = 0.03) and 24-h mean arterial pressure (+0.090 mm; P = 0.04). Models including the ambulatory blood pressure components additionally adjusted for SBPM and more covariables than those listed above were confirmatory., Conclusion: In a general population, BP on ABPM predicts CIMT and FIMT over and beyond highly standardized SBPM. At the elastic carotid artery, CIMT increased predominantly with the pulsatile component of BP, whereas at the muscular femoral artery, FIMT increased with the steady component of BP.

Background: We studied the repeatability of the ambulatory arterial stiffness index (AASI), which can be computed from 24-h blood pressure (BP) recordings as unity minus the regression slope of diastolic on systolic BP., Methods: One hundred and fifty-two hypertensive outpatients recruited in Nijmegen (mean age = 46.2 years; 76.3% with systolic and diastolic hypertension) and 145 patients enrolled in the Systolic Hypertension in Europe (Syst-Eur) trial (71.0 years) underwent 24-h BP monitoring at a median interval of 8 and 31 days, respectively. We used the repeatability coefficient, which is twice the SD of the within-participant differences between repeat recordings, and expressed it as a percentage of four times the SD of the mean of the paired measurements., Results: Mean AASI (crude or derived by time-weighted or robust regression) and 24-h pulse pressure (PP) were similar on repeat recordings in both cohorts. In Nijmegen patients, repeatability coefficients of AASI and PP were approximately 50%. In Syst-Eur trial patients, repeatability coefficient was approximately 60% for AASI and approximately 40% for PP. For comparison, repeatability coefficients for 24-h systolic and diastolic BP were approximately 30%. Differences in AASI between paired recordings were correlated with differences in the goodness of fit (r2) of the AASI regression line as well as with differences in the night-to-day BP ratio. However, in sensitivity analyses stratified for type of hypertension, r2, or dipping status, repeatability coefficients for AASI did not widely depart from 50 to 60% range., Conclusion: Estimates of mean AASI were not different between repeat recordings, and repeatability coefficients were within the 50-60% range.

Objective: To determine which physiological mechanism is responsible for the blood pressure increase during leg crossing at knee-level in the sitting position., Methods: Finger blood pressure was measured with the Finometer in 102 participants (47 men) before and during leg crossing: 24 treated hypertensive patients, 50 diabetic individuals (25 with and 25 without antihypertensive medication) and 28 healthy volunteers. Mean age, 53 +/- 15 years (range 21-82 years). All participants crossed their legs at knee-level, with the upper part of the popliteal fossa on the suprapatellar bursa, in the sitting position. Differences in mean blood pressure, cardiac output, stroke volume, heart rate and total peripheral resistance were assessed with legs crossed versus legs uncrossed., Results: Mean blood pressure [+3.3 +/- 5.5 mmHg; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 2.7-3.8], stroke volume (+7.6 +/- 5.4 ml; 95% CI = 6.7-8.6) and cardiac output (+0.4 +/- 0.9 l/min; 95% CI = 0.3-0.5) were significantly higher with legs crossed than in the uncrossed position, while the heart rate (-1.8 +/- 3.9 beats/min; 95% CI = -2.2 to -1.4) was significantly lower. Total peripheral resistance did not differ significantly (-0.01 +/- 0.16 AU; 95% CI = -0.03 to 0.00). The largest differences occurred in the hypertensive diabetic individuals, the smallest in the healthy volunteers. The changes were similar in men and women. There were no significant correlations in the total group between the differences of the hemodynamic variables and sex, age, body mass index or leg circumference., Conclusion: The study shows that higher blood pressure with legs in the crossed position is due to higher cardiac output and not to a higher total peripheral resistance.

Objective: To investigate the prevalence and persistence of the white-coat effect (WCE) and white-coat hypertension (WCH) on multiple blood pressure measurement occasions in hypertensive patients with and without treatment., Design: Essential hypertensive patients in whom we took office blood pressure measurements (OBPM) at eight visits (three readings per visit) performed self blood pressure measurements (SBPM) for 1 week prior to each visit (42 readings per week) over a period of 1 year. All measurements were performed with the same automatic device (Omron 705CP). In addition, 24-h ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) was performed at the start and at the end of the study. At the start, patients did not use any medication but on subsequent visits they were treated on the basis of their SBPM values. WCH was defined as an OBPM-value > or = 140 and/or 90 mmHg and a SBPM or daytime ABPM value < 135/85 mmHg. This definition was used irrespective of treatment. We also determined the prevalence of a substantial WCE (OBPM 20 mmHg systolic or 10 mmHg diastolic higher than SBPM or daytime ABPM)., Setting: Patients were recruited at hospital or general practice., Patients: A total of 163 mild-to-moderate essential hypertensive patients with a mean age of 56 years (56% males)., Results: At eight blood pressure (BP) measurement occasions, 75% of all patients had a substantial WCE at least once, while 57% had WCH at least once. One-third of the patients consistently had a substantial WCE and 14% consistently had WCH on three or more occasions The magnitude of the WCE was significantly related to the height of blood pressure in treated but not in untreated patients., Conclusion: In some patients, WCH or a substantial WCE occurs consistently on multiple OBPM visits. Especially in untreated patients, the magnitude of the WCE varies widely among individuals. These results support the incorporation of SBPM and/or ABPM into optimal management of hypertension, not only to prevent misdiagnosis in untreated patients but also to determine the need for adjusting antihypertensive therapy in treated subjects.

Objective: To determine how many self-measurements of blood pressure (BP) should be taken at home in order to obtain a reliable estimate of a patient's BP., Design: Participants performed self blood pressure measurement (SBPM) for 7 days (triplicate morning and evening readings). In all of them, office blood pressure (three consecutive readings) and 24-h ambulatory blood pressure were obtained as well. Average SBPM values, obtained from several combinations of readings, were correlated with the results of ambulatory blood pressure measurement (ABPM). In addition, we assessed whether certain patient characteristics would influence such correlations., Setting: Patients were recruited at hospital or general practice., Patients: A total of 216 untreated hypertensive patients., Results: The average SBPM value calculated from day 3 to day 7, omitting the first measurement of each morning and evening session, gave the best correlation with 24-h ABPM (r = 0.70). However, similar results were obtained from a SBPM value averaged from day 3 until 5 without the first measurement of each triplicate session. Overall, younger patients had significantly better correlations than older ones. Women had significantly better correlations with ABPM than men for systolic morning and daytime SBPM, whereas men had significantly better correlations for daytime and evening diastolic SBPM (P < 0.001). In addition, all correlations increased with lower systolic office blood pressure measurement (OBPM) values., Conclusions: A minimum number of 5 days of measurement is recommended to obtain a reliable estimate of a patient's usual BP. On each day, three consecutive morning and evening measurements should be performed. For calculating the average SBPM, the first 2 days and the first measurement of each triplicate measurements should be discarded. Moreover, patient characteristics may have an impact on the number of necessary self-measurements. However, because adhering to these recommendations will make SBPM a time-consuming procedure, this type of measurement should be performed only when a decision about starting or changing antihypertensive therapy is needed or in the case of special patient groups.