Omvik Per, Gerhardsen Gerhard
Institute of Internal Medicine, Department of Cardiology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway.
Blood Press. 2003;12(4):211-9. doi: 10.1080/08037050310015863.
To evaluate the use of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in comparison with home and office blood pressure in every-day general practice.
In a multicenter survey sixty-two practitioners previously unfamiliar with ambulatory blood pressure monitoring performed a total of 1162 (mean 18 +/- 16; range 3-94) 24-h ambulatory- and home blood pressure measurements in normotensive subjects or patients with untreated or treated hypertension.
In subjects with office blood pressure <140/90 mmHg average 24-h ambulatory blood pressure (Tenso 24 monitors) was 126/79 mmHg, home blood pressure (Tenso Plus semiautomatic sphygmomanometers) was 128/ 84 mmHg, and office blood pressure (standard sphygmomanometer) was 130/82 mmHg. Patients with office blood pressure > or = 140/90 mmHg had 24-h ambulatory blood pressure averaging 141/88 mmHg, home blood pressure 149/93 mmHg, and office blood pressure 157/95 mmHg. The difference between office-, home-, and ambulatory blood pressure increased with age. Expected differences were found between the three blood pressure modalities according to indication of examination (borderline -, "white-coat" -, and therapy refractory hypertension). Indices of hypertension related end-organ damage were positively correlated with home and ambulatory blood pressure but not with office blood pressure. Overall the performance of home- and ambulatory blood pressure in this general practice setting was similar to that seen by specialized blood pressure units.
This study demonstrates the practical utility of home- and ambulatory blood pressure measurement in every-day general practice. Both methods are easy to introduce and the quality of blood pressure data obtained in every-day general practice are comparable to those obtained in hypertension clinics and trial centers.
在日常全科医疗中，评估动态血压监测与家庭血压和诊室血压相比的应用情况。
在一项多中心调查中，62名此前不熟悉动态血压监测的从业者，对血压正常的受试者或未经治疗或已接受治疗的高血压患者进行了总计1162次（平均18±16次；范围3 - 94次）24小时动态血压和家庭血压测量。
诊室血压<140/90 mmHg的受试者，24小时平均动态血压（Tenso 24监测仪）为126/79 mmHg，家庭血压（Tenso Plus半自动血压计）为128/84 mmHg，诊室血压（标准血压计）为130/82 mmHg。诊室血压≥140/90 mmHg的患者，24小时动态血压平均为141/88 mmHg，家庭血压为149/93 mmHg，诊室血压为157/95 mmHg。诊室血压、家庭血压和动态血压之间的差异随年龄增加。根据检查指征（临界性、“白大衣”性和治疗抵抗性高血压），三种血压测量方式之间发现了预期差异。高血压相关靶器官损害指标与家庭血压和动态血压呈正相关，但与诊室血压无关。总体而言，在这种全科医疗环境中，家庭血压和动态血压的表现与专业血压单位所见相似。
本研究证明了家庭血压测量和动态血压测量在日常全科医疗中的实际效用。这两种方法都易于引入，且在日常全科医疗中获得的血压数据质量与在高血压诊所和试验中心获得的数据相当。
