We have located links that may give you full text access.
Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Review
Association of night-time home blood pressure with night-time ambulatory blood pressure and target-organ damage: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Journal of Hypertension 2017 March
OBJECTIVE: Night-time ambulatory blood pressure (nABP) is the most important aspect of the blood pressure profile in terms of prognosis. Novel low-cost home monitors allow automated night-time blood pressure monitoring (nHBP). This study reviewed the evidence on the association of nHBP with nABP and preclinical organ damage.
METHODS: Systematic review and meta-analysis.
RESULTS: Analysis of six studies (n = 1404) showed pooled difference between nHBP and nABP (SBP/DBP) at 1.4, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.3, 2.6/-0.2, 95% CI -0.9, 0.6 mmHg, whereas the pooled correlation coefficient between nHBP and nABP (SBP/DBP) was r = 0.70, 95% CI 0.59, 0.81/r = 0.72, 95% CI 0.67, 0.77, respectively. Two studies (n = 212) investigated the agreement between nHBP and nABP in detecting nondippers with weighted agreement 77.3% (pooled kappa 0.27, 95% CI 0.08, 0.45). Three studies (n = 954) reported on the association of left ventricular mass index with systolic nHBP and nABP (pooled correlation coefficient r = 0.36, 95% CI 0.23, 0.50 and r = 0.32, 95% CI 0.10, 0.54, respectively, P = NS for comparison). Two studies (n = 950) reported on the association of urinary albumin excretion with systolic nHBP and nABP (pooled r = 0.39, 95% CI 0.21, 0.58 and r = 0.30, 95% CI 0.06, 0.55, respectively, P < 0.01 for comparison). Two studies (n = 350) reported on the association of common carotid intima-media thickness with systolic nHBP and nABP (pooled r = 0.31, 95% CI 0.16, 0.46 and r = 0.35, 95% CI 0.17, 0.53, respectively, P = NS for comparison).
CONCLUSION: The available evidence suggests that nHBP and nABP present similar values and comparable relationship with target-organ damage. Studies on the prognostic value of nHBP are needed.
METHODS: Systematic review and meta-analysis.
RESULTS: Analysis of six studies (n = 1404) showed pooled difference between nHBP and nABP (SBP/DBP) at 1.4, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.3, 2.6/-0.2, 95% CI -0.9, 0.6 mmHg, whereas the pooled correlation coefficient between nHBP and nABP (SBP/DBP) was r = 0.70, 95% CI 0.59, 0.81/r = 0.72, 95% CI 0.67, 0.77, respectively. Two studies (n = 212) investigated the agreement between nHBP and nABP in detecting nondippers with weighted agreement 77.3% (pooled kappa 0.27, 95% CI 0.08, 0.45). Three studies (n = 954) reported on the association of left ventricular mass index with systolic nHBP and nABP (pooled correlation coefficient r = 0.36, 95% CI 0.23, 0.50 and r = 0.32, 95% CI 0.10, 0.54, respectively, P = NS for comparison). Two studies (n = 950) reported on the association of urinary albumin excretion with systolic nHBP and nABP (pooled r = 0.39, 95% CI 0.21, 0.58 and r = 0.30, 95% CI 0.06, 0.55, respectively, P < 0.01 for comparison). Two studies (n = 350) reported on the association of common carotid intima-media thickness with systolic nHBP and nABP (pooled r = 0.31, 95% CI 0.16, 0.46 and r = 0.35, 95% CI 0.17, 0.53, respectively, P = NS for comparison).
CONCLUSION: The available evidence suggests that nHBP and nABP present similar values and comparable relationship with target-organ damage. Studies on the prognostic value of nHBP are needed.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app