Banegas José R, Segura Julián, Sobrino Javier, Rodríguez-Artalejo Fernando, de la Sierra Alejandro, de la Cruz Juan J, Gorostidi Manuel, Sarría Antonio, Ruilope Luis M
Department of Preventive Medicine and Public Health, Autonomous University of Madrid, Madrid, Spain.
Hypertension. 2007 Jan;49(1):62-8. doi: 10.1161/01.HYP.0000250557.63490.55. Epub 2006 Oct 30.
We studied the effectiveness of blood pressure (BP) control outside the clinic by using ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) among a large number of hypertensive subjects treated in primary care centers across Spain. The sample consisted of 12 897 treated hypertensive subjects who had indications for ABPM. Office-based BP was calculated as the average of 2 readings. Twenty-four-hour ABPM was then performed using a SpaceLabs 90207 monitor under standardized conditions. A total of 3047 patients (23.6%) had their office BP controlled, and 6657 (51.6%) were controlled according to daytime ABPM. The proportion of office resistance or underestimation of patients' BP control by physicians in the office (office BP >or=140/90 mm Hg and average daytime ambulatory BP <135/85 mm Hg) was 33.4%, and the proportion of isolated office control or overestimation of control (office BP <140/90 mm Hg and average daytime ambulatory BP >or=135/85 mm Hg) was 5.4%. BP control was more frequently underestimated in patients who were older, female, obese, or with morning BP determination than in their counterparts. BP control was more frequently overestimated in those who were younger, male, nonobese, smokers, or with evening BP determination. Ambulatory-based hypertension control was far better than office-based hypertension control. This conveys an encouraging message to clinicians, namely that they are actually doing better than is evidenced by office-based data. However, the burden of underestimation and overestimation of BP control at the office is still remarkable. Physicians should be aware that the likelihood of misestimating BP control is higher in some hypertensive subjects.
我们通过动态血压监测(ABPM)研究了西班牙各地初级保健中心治疗的大量高血压患者在诊所外的血压(BP)控制效果。样本包括12897名有ABPM指征的接受治疗的高血压患者。诊室血压计算为两次读数的平均值。然后使用SpaceLabs 90207监测仪在标准化条件下进行24小时ABPM。共有3047名患者(23.6%)的诊室血压得到控制,6657名患者(51.6%)根据日间ABPM得到控制。医生在诊室对患者血压控制的抵抗或低估比例(诊室血压≥140/90 mmHg且日间动态平均血压<135/85 mmHg)为33.4%,孤立的诊室控制或控制高估比例(诊室血压<140/90 mmHg且日间动态平均血压≥135/85 mmHg)为5.4%。与同龄人相比,年龄较大、女性、肥胖或进行晨起血压测定的患者的血压控制更常被低估。年龄较小、男性、非肥胖、吸烟者或进行夜间血压测定的患者的血压控制更常被高估。基于动态血压的高血压控制远优于基于诊室血压的高血压控制。这向临床医生传达了一个令人鼓舞的信息,即他们实际上做得比诊室数据所显示的要好。然而,诊室血压控制低估和高估的负担仍然很显著。医生应该意识到,在一些高血压患者中,错误估计血压控制的可能性更高。