We have located links that may give you full text access.
Office blood pressure measurement alone often misclassifies treatment status in children with primary hypertension.
Blood Pressure Monitoring 2017 December
OBJECTIVE: Clinicians frequently rely on office blood pressure (BP) measurements alone to assess hypertension control, despite widespread acceptance of 24-h ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) as the reference standard in the initial diagnosis of hypertension. This study was designed to investigate how often the hypertensive status differed between concurrent office BP versus ABPM measurements, and whether any patient-specific characteristics predict the risk for misclassification by office BP.
PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS: This study evaluated 42 children with primary hypertension who underwent repeated ambulatory monitoring (190 total recordings) with concurrent office BP measurement as part of their participation in n-of-1 trials.
RESULTS: In nearly 40% of the visits, the treatment status by office measurement was opposite to the status by ambulatory monitoring. Office BP underestimated the ambulatory hypertensive status (masked uncontrolled hypertension) in 25% of visits and overestimated ambulatory BP (white coat effect) in 14% of visits. The difference between office BP and ambulatory monitoring was consistent within patients across repeated visits. Patients whose office measurement underestimated or overestimated the ambulatory BP at the first visit were more likely to show persistent discrepancy at subsequent visits.
CONCLUSION: The underuse of ambulatory monitoring in management decisions of children treated for primary hypertension may result in systematic misclassification of hypertension control.
PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS: This study evaluated 42 children with primary hypertension who underwent repeated ambulatory monitoring (190 total recordings) with concurrent office BP measurement as part of their participation in n-of-1 trials.
RESULTS: In nearly 40% of the visits, the treatment status by office measurement was opposite to the status by ambulatory monitoring. Office BP underestimated the ambulatory hypertensive status (masked uncontrolled hypertension) in 25% of visits and overestimated ambulatory BP (white coat effect) in 14% of visits. The difference between office BP and ambulatory monitoring was consistent within patients across repeated visits. Patients whose office measurement underestimated or overestimated the ambulatory BP at the first visit were more likely to show persistent discrepancy at subsequent visits.
CONCLUSION: The underuse of ambulatory monitoring in management decisions of children treated for primary hypertension may result in systematic misclassification of hypertension control.
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