Population Studies Unit, National Institute for Health and Welfare, Turku, Finland.
Hypertension. 2010 Jun;55(6):1346-51. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.109.149336. Epub 2010 Apr 12.
Previous studies with some limitations have provided equivocal results for the prognostic significance of home-measured blood pressure (BP). We investigated whether home-measured BP is more strongly associated with cardiovascular events and total mortality than is office BP. A prospective nationwide study was initiated in 2000 to 2001 on 2081 randomly selected subjects aged 45 to 74 years. Home and office BP were determined at baseline along with other cardiovascular risk factors. The primary end point was incidence of a cardiovascular event (cardiovascular mortality, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, hospitalization for heart failure, percutaneous coronary intervention, or coronary artery bypass graft surgery). The secondary end point was total mortality. After a mean follow-up of 6.8 years, 162 subjects had experienced a cardiovascular event, and 118 subjects had died. In Cox proportional hazard models adjusted for other cardiovascular risk factors, office BP (systolic/diastolic hazard ratio [HR] per 10/5 mm Hg increase in BP, 1.13/1.13; systolic/diastolic 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05 to 1.22/1.05 to 1.22) and home BP (HR, 1.23/1.18; 95% CI, 1.13 to 1.34/1.10 to 1.27) were predictive of cardiovascular events. However, when both BPs were simultaneously included in the models, only home BP (HR, 1.22/1.15; 95% CI, 1.09 to 1.37/1.05 to 1.26), not office BP (HR, 1.01/1.06; 95% CI, 0.92 to 1.12/0.97 to 1.16), was predictive of cardiovascular events. Systolic home BP was the sole predictor of total mortality (HR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.01/1.23). Our findings suggest that home-measured BP is prognostically superior to office BP. On the basis of the results of this and previous studies, it can be concluded that home BP measurement offers specific advantages more than conventional office measurement.
先前的一些研究结果存在局限性,无法明确家庭自测血压(BP)的预后意义。我们旨在探讨家庭自测 BP 是否比诊室 BP 与心血管事件和总死亡率的相关性更强。2000 年至 2001 年,我们开展了一项前瞻性全国性研究,纳入了 2081 名年龄在 45 岁至 74 岁之间的随机受试者。在基线时,我们同时测量了家庭和诊室血压以及其他心血管危险因素。主要终点是心血管事件(心血管死亡率、非致死性心肌梗死、非致死性卒中和心力衰竭住院、经皮冠状动脉介入治疗或冠状动脉旁路移植术)的发生率。次要终点是总死亡率。平均随访 6.8 年后,162 名受试者发生了心血管事件,118 名受试者死亡。在调整了其他心血管危险因素的 Cox 比例风险模型中,诊室 BP(收缩压/舒张压每增加 10/5mmHg 的风险比[HR],1.13/1.13;收缩压/舒张压 95%置信区间[CI],1.05 至 1.22/1.05 至 1.22)和家庭 BP(HR,1.23/1.18;95%CI,1.13 至 1.34/1.10 至 1.27)均可预测心血管事件。然而,当同时将两种 BP 纳入模型时,仅家庭 BP(HR,1.22/1.15;95%CI,1.09 至 1.37/1.05 至 1.26),而不是诊室 BP(HR,1.01/1.06;95%CI,0.92 至 1.12/0.97 至 1.16),可预测心血管事件。家庭收缩压是总死亡率的唯一预测因素(HR,1.11;95%CI,1.01/1.23)。我们的研究结果表明,家庭自测 BP 比诊室 BP 具有更好的预后价值。基于本研究和以往研究的结果,可以得出结论,家庭 BP 测量比传统诊室测量具有更多的优势。