Pharmaceutical Care Research Group, University of Granada, Granada, Spain.
J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2012 Apr;14(4):236-44. doi: 10.1111/j.1751-7176.2012.00598.x. Epub 2012 Mar 5.
The usefulness of the community pharmacy blood pressure (CPBP) method in the diagnosis or treatment of hypertension has not been adequately addressed in controlled studies. The authors' aim was to assess the agreement between awake ambulatory blood pressure (ABP), home blood pressure (HBP), and CPBP in treated hypertensive patients. This was a cross-sectional study carried out in 169 patients in which blood pressure (BP) was measured at the pharmacy (4 visits), at home (4 days), and by 24-hour ABP monitoring. Lin correlation-concordance coefficient (CCC) and Bland-Altman plots were used to evaluate quantitative agreement. The qualitative agreement to establish the degree of BP control was evaluated using κ coefficient. The agreement was acceptable between HBP and CPBP (CCC=0.80 for systolic BP [SBP] and 0.80 for diastolic BP [DBP]; κ=0.62) and moderate between awake ABP and CPBP (CCC=0.74/0.67, respectively; κ=0.56). The Bland-Altman plots also showed lowest mean differences (0.5/0.3 for SBP and DBP, respectively) for the comparison between CPBP and HBP. The CPBP has a better agreement with HBP than with awake ABP. Thus, the CPBP measurement method could be a good alternative to HBP monitoring, whereas it cannot be used as a screening test to assess the degree of BP control by awake ABP.
社区药房血压(CPBP)方法在高血压的诊断或治疗中的有效性在对照研究中尚未得到充分解决。作者的目的是评估在接受治疗的高血压患者中清醒动态血压(ABP)、家庭血压(HBP)和 CPBP 之间的一致性。这是一项横断面研究,共纳入了 169 名患者,在药房(4 次就诊)、家中(4 天)和 24 小时 ABP 监测时测量血压(BP)。采用 Lin 相关一致性系数(CCC)和 Bland-Altman 图评估定量一致性。使用κ系数评估定性一致性以确定血压控制程度。HBP 和 CPBP 之间的一致性可接受(SBP 的 CCC=0.80,DBP 的 CCC=0.80;κ=0.62),清醒 ABP 和 CPBP 之间的一致性为中度(分别为 CCC=0.74/0.67,κ=0.56)。Bland-Altman 图还显示 CPBP 与 HBP 之间的平均差异最小(SBP 和 DBP 分别为 0.5/0.3)。与清醒 ABP 相比,CPBP 与 HBP 的一致性更好。因此,CPBP 测量方法可能是 HBP 监测的良好替代方法,但不能用作通过清醒 ABP 评估血压控制程度的筛查试验。