Cumes-Rayner D P, Price J
Dept. of Psychiatry, University of Queensland, Royal Brisbane Hospital, Australia.
J Psychosom Res. 1988;32(2):181-90. doi: 10.1016/0022-3999(88)90053-0.
Two very different assumptions about the principles of blood pressure reactivity lead to quite different notions about hypertensive/normotensive behaviour. Both are referred to as the Law of Initial Value (LIV). Subsequent confusion about blood pressure reactivity vs resting level partly explains a number of inconsistencies between studies describing hypertensive behaviour. Here the validity of each assumption was tested. Young hypertensives and normotensives who had first been placed into a condition of arousal or relaxation performed a mental arithmetic task. Group behaviour and idiosyncratic paradoxical response phenomena were investigated. Results showed that the state of the subject immediately prior to the mental arithmetic task was more important in determining the reaction to that task than blood pressure category was: in an aroused subject blood pressure fell. The implications for both clinicians and researchers interested in blood pressure behaviour, in particular where stimuli have failed to elicit responses, are discussed.
关于血压反应性原理的两种截然不同的假设,导致了对高血压/正常血压行为的截然不同的看法。这两种假设都被称为初始值定律(LIV)。随后关于血压反应性与静息水平的混淆,部分解释了描述高血压行为的研究之间的一些不一致之处。在此对每种假设的有效性进行了测试。首先被置于唤醒或放松状态的年轻高血压患者和正常血压患者进行了心算任务。研究了群体行为和个体特异的矛盾反应现象。结果表明,在心算任务之前受试者的状态,比血压类别在决定对该任务的反应方面更为重要:在处于唤醒状态的受试者中,血压下降。讨论了对于关注血压行为的临床医生和研究人员的意义,特别是在刺激未能引发反应的情况下。