Cappuccio Francesco P, Kerry Sally M, Forbes Lindsay, Donald Anna
Department of Community Health Sciences, St George's Hospital Medical School, London SW17 0RE.
BMJ. 2004 Jul 17;329(7458):145. doi: 10.1136/bmj.38121.684410.AE. Epub 2004 Jun 11.
To determine the effect of home blood pressure monitoring on blood pressure levels and proportion of people with essential hypertension achieving targets.
Meta-analysis of 18 randomised controlled trials.
1359 people with essential hypertension allocated to home blood pressure monitoring and 1355 allocated to the "control" group seen in the healthcare system for 2-36 months.
Differences in systolic (13 studies), diastolic (16 studies), or mean (3 studies) blood pressures, and proportion of patients achieving targets (6 studies), between intervention and control groups.
Systolic blood pressure was lower in people with hypertension who had home blood pressure monitoring than in those who had standard blood pressure monitoring in the healthcare system (standardised mean difference 4.2 (95% confidence interval 1.5 to 6.9) mm Hg), diastolic blood pressure was lower by 2.4 (1.2 to 3.5) mm Hg, and mean blood pressure was lower by 4.4 (2.0 to 6.8) mm Hg. The relative risk of blood pressure above predetermined targets was lower in people with home blood pressure monitoring (risk ratio 0.90, 0.80 to 1.00). When publication bias was allowed for, the differences were attenuated: 2.2 (-0.9 to 5.3) mm Hg for systolic blood pressure and 1.9 (0.6 to 3.2) mm Hg for diastolic blood pressure.
Blood pressure control in people with hypertension (assessed in the clinic) and the proportion achieving targets are increased when home blood pressure monitoring is used rather than standard blood pressure monitoring in the healthcare system. The reasons for this are not clear. The difference in blood pressure control between the two methods is small but likely to contribute to an important reduction in vascular complications in the hypertensive population.
确定家庭血压监测对血压水平以及原发性高血压患者达到目标血压的比例的影响。
对18项随机对照试验进行荟萃分析。
1359名原发性高血压患者被分配至家庭血压监测组,1355名被分配至“对照组”,在医疗保健系统中观察2至36个月。
干预组与对照组之间收缩压(13项研究)、舒张压(16项研究)或平均血压(3项研究)的差异,以及达到目标血压的患者比例(6项研究)。
进行家庭血压监测的高血压患者的收缩压低于在医疗保健系统中进行标准血压监测的患者(标准化均数差4.2(95%置信区间1.5至6.9)mmHg),舒张压低2.4(1.2至3.5)mmHg,平均血压低4.4(2.0至6.8)mmHg。进行家庭血压监测的患者血压高于预定目标的相对风险较低(风险比0.90,0.80至1.00)。考虑发表偏倚时,差异有所减弱:收缩压为2.2(-0.9至5.3)mmHg,舒张压为1.9(0.6至3.2)mmHg。
与医疗保健系统中的标准血压监测相比,采用家庭血压监测时,高血压患者(在诊所评估)的血压控制情况及达到目标血压的比例有所提高。原因尚不清楚。两种方法在血压控制方面的差异较小,但可能有助于显著降低高血压人群的血管并发症。