Manning Gillian, Brooks Andrew, Slinn Barbara, Millar-Craig Michael W, Donnelly Richard
School of Medical & Surgical Sciences, The University of Nottingham, Nottingham.
Br J Gen Pract. 2006 May;56(526):375-7.
We examined how different methods and definitions of blood pressure affect the achievement of targets in general practice. There was a wide range in the proportion of treated patients achieving the different target levels recommended by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, British Hypertension Society and the general medical services contract. Among non-diabetic patients this ranged from; 10-37% (average office), 15-39% (standardised nurse measurement), 11-49% (last recorded) and 31-56% (ambulatory blood pressure). Defining targets without a clear definition of how blood pressure should be measured is largely meaningless and ignoring ambulatory blood pressure results in many patients being classified incorrectly as failing to achieve targets.
我们研究了不同的血压测量方法和定义如何影响全科医疗中目标的达成情况。在实现由英国国家卫生与临床优化研究所、英国高血压学会及全科医疗服务合同所推荐的不同目标水平的已治疗患者比例方面,存在很大差异。在非糖尿病患者中,这一比例范围为:10 - 37%(平均诊室血压)、15 - 39%(标准化护士测量)、11 - 49%(上次记录值)以及31 - 56%(动态血压)。在没有明确血压测量方式定义的情况下设定目标,很大程度上是毫无意义的,而忽视动态血压会导致许多患者被错误地归类为未达成目标。