Suppr超能文献

单次诊室血压测量的可靠性。

Reliability of single office blood pressure measurements.

机构信息

Hypertension Clinic, ESH Hypertension Centre of Excellence, Medical Outpatient Department, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland.

Department of Cardiology, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland.

出版信息

Heart. 2018 Jul;104(14):1173-1179. doi: 10.1136/heartjnl-2017-312523. Epub 2018 Mar 12.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

Standard operating procedures for office blood pressure measurement (OBPM) vary greatly between guidelines and studies. We aimed to compare the difference between a single OBPM and the mean of the three following measurements. Further, we studied how many patients with possible hypertension may be missed due to short-term masked hypertension (STMH) and how many might be overdiagnosed due to short-term white coat hypertension (STWCH).

DESIGN AND SETTING

In this cross-sectional, single-centre trial, 1000 adult subjects were enrolled. After 5 min of rest, four sequential standard OBPMs were performed at 2 min intervals in a quiet room in sitting position. We compared the first (fBPM) to the mean of the second to fourth measurement (mBPM). STMH was defined as fBPM <140 mm Hg systolic and <90 mm Hg diastolic and mBPM systolic ≥140 mm Hg or diastolic ≥90 mm Hg. STWCH was defined as fBPM systolic ≥140 mm Hg or diastolic ≥90 mm Hg and mBPM <140 mm Hg systolic and <90 mm Hg diastolic.

RESULTS

Complete measurements were available in 802 subjects. Between fBPM and mBPM, 662 (82.5%), 441 (55%) and 208 (25.9%) subjects showed a difference in systolic and 531 (66.2%), 247 (30.8%) and 51 (6.4%) in diastolic blood pressure (BP) values of >2 mm Hg, >5 mm Hg and >10 mm Hg, respectively. In 3.4% of initially normotensives STMH and in 34.3% of initially hypertensives, STWCH was apparent.

CONCLUSIONS

There are significant differences between a single OBPM and the mean of consecutive BP measurements. Our study provides evidence that a single OBPM should not be the preferred method and should be discouraged in future guidelines.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02552030;Results.

摘要

目的

办公室血压测量(OBPM)的标准操作规程在指南和研究之间差异很大。我们旨在比较单次 OBPM 与随后三次测量的平均值之间的差异。此外,我们还研究了由于短期隐匿性高血压(STMH)可能会漏诊多少可能患有高血压的患者,以及由于短期白大衣高血压(STWCH)可能会过度诊断多少患者。

设计和设置

在这项横断面、单中心试验中,共纳入了 1000 名成年受试者。在安静的房间中,受试者静坐休息 5 分钟后,每隔 2 分钟进行 4 次连续标准 OBPM。我们比较了第一次(fBPM)与第二次至第四次测量的平均值(mBPM)。STMH 定义为 fBPM<140mmHg 收缩压和<90mmHg 舒张压,且 mBPM 收缩压≥140mmHg 或舒张压≥90mmHg。STWCH 定义为 fBPM 收缩压≥140mmHg 或舒张压≥90mmHg,且 mBPM<140mmHg 收缩压和<90mmHg 舒张压。

结果

802 名受试者完成了完整的测量。fBPM 与 mBPM 之间,662(82.5%)、441(55%)和 208(25.9%)名受试者的收缩压差值>2mmHg,差值>5mmHg 和>10mmHg 的分别有 531(66.2%)、247(30.8%)和 51(6.4%)名。在最初血压正常的受试者中,有 3.4%存在 STMH,在最初血压升高的受试者中,有 34.3%存在 STWCH。

结论

单次 OBPM 与连续血压测量的平均值之间存在显著差异。我们的研究提供了证据表明,单次 OBPM 不应该是首选方法,未来的指南应该不鼓励使用这种方法。

试验注册号

NCT02552030;结果。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验