Suppr超能文献

自我测量血压、偶然血压测量与动态血压监测的比较和相关性。

Comparison and correlation between self-measured blood pressure, casual blood pressure measurement and ambulatory blood pressure monitoring.

机构信息

Liga de Hipertensão Arterial, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade Federal de Goiás, Goiânia, GO, Brasil.

出版信息

Arq Bras Cardiol. 2011 Aug;97(2):148-55. doi: 10.1590/s0066-782x2011005000076. Epub 2011 Jun 17.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Casual blood pressure (BP) measurement by healthcare professionals is subject to great variability and new methods are necessary to overcome this limitation.

OBJECTIVE

To compare and assess the correlation between the BP levels obtained by self-measured BP (SMBP), casual BP measurement and ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM).

METHODS

We assessed hypertensive individuals submitted to the three methods of BP measurement at an interval < 30 days; the BP means were used for comparison and correlation. The following devices were used: OMRON 705 CP (casual measurement), OMRON HEM 714 (SMBP) and SPACELABS 9002 (ABPM).

RESULTS

A total of 32 patients were assessed, of which 50.09% were females, with a mean age of 59.7 (± 11.2), BMI mean of 26.04 (± 3.3) kg/m(2). Mean systolic (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) for SMBP were 134 (± 15.71) mmHg and 79.32 (± 12.38) mmHg. The casual measurement means of SBP and DBP were, respectively, 140.84 (± 16.15) mmHg and 85 (± 9.68) mmHg. The mean values of ABPM during the wakefulness period were 130.47 (± 13.26) mmHg and 79.84 (± 9.82) mmHg for SBP and DBP, respectively. At the comparative analysis, the SMBP had similar results to those obtained at ABPM (p > 0.05) and different from the casual measurement (p < 0.05). At the analysis of correlation, SMBP values were higher than the casual measurements, considering ABPM as the reference standard in BP measurements.

CONCLUSION

SMBP showed a better correlation with ABPM than the casual measurement and was also better correlated with the latter, especially regarding the DBP and should be considered as a low-cost alternative for the follow-up of the hypertensive patient.

摘要

背景

医护人员进行的偶然血压(BP)测量存在很大的变异性,需要新的方法来克服这一局限性。

目的

比较和评估自我测量血压(SMBP)、偶然血压测量和动态血压监测(ABPM)获得的 BP 水平之间的相关性。

方法

我们在<30 天的时间间隔内评估了接受三种 BP 测量方法的高血压患者;使用 BP 平均值进行比较和相关性分析。使用了以下设备:OMRON 705 CP(偶然测量)、OMRON HEM 714(SMBP)和 SPACELABS 9002(ABPM)。

结果

共评估了 32 名患者,其中 50.09%为女性,平均年龄 59.7(±11.2)岁,BMI 平均值为 26.04(±3.3)kg/m2。SMBP 的平均收缩压(SBP)和舒张压(DBP)分别为 134(±15.71)mmHg 和 79.32(±12.38)mmHg。偶然测量的 SBP 和 DBP 平均值分别为 140.84(±16.15)mmHg 和 85(±9.68)mmHg。清醒期 ABPM 的平均 SBP 和 DBP 分别为 130.47(±13.26)mmHg 和 79.84(±9.82)mmHg。在比较分析中,SMBP 的结果与 ABPM 相似(p>0.05),与偶然测量不同(p<0.05)。在相关性分析中,考虑到 ABPM 作为 BP 测量的参考标准,SMBP 值高于偶然测量值。

结论

与偶然测量相比,SMBP 与 ABPM 的相关性更好,与后者的相关性也更好,特别是在 DBP 方面,因此应考虑作为高血压患者随访的低成本替代方案。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验