Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Medicine, Jichi Medical University School of Medicine, Tochigi, Japan.
Minamisanriku Hospital, Miyagi, Japan.
Am J Hypertens. 2023 Feb 13;36(2):90-101. doi: 10.1093/ajh/hpac103.
Inconsistencies between the office and out-of-office blood pressure (BP) values (described as white-coat hypertension or masked hypertension) may be attributable in part to differences in the BP monitoring devices used.
We studied consistency in the classification of BP control (well-controlled BP vs. uncontrolled BP) among office, home, and ambulatory BPs by using a validated "all-in-one" BP monitoring device. In the nationwide, general practitioner-based multicenter HI-JAMP study, 2,322 hypertensive patients treated with antihypertensive drugs underwent office BP measurements and 24-hour ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM), consecutively followed by 5-day home BP monitoring (HBPM), for a total of seven BP measurement days.
Using the thresholds of the JSH2019 and ESC2018 guidelines, the patients with consistent classification of well-controlled status in the office (<140 mmHg) and home systolic BP (SBP) (<135 mmHg) (n = 970) also tended to have well-controlled 24-hour SBP (<130 mmHg) (n = 808, 83.3%). The patients with the consistent classification of uncontrolled status in office and home SBP (n = 579) also tended to have uncontrolled 24-hour SBP (n = 444, 80.9%). Among the patients with inconsistent classifications of office and home BP control (n = 803), 46.1% had inconsistent ABPM-vs.-HBPM out-of-office BP control status. When the 2017 ACC/AHA thresholds were applied as an alternative, the results were essentially the same.
The combined assessment of the office and home BP is useful in clinical practice. Especially for patients whose office BP classification and home BP classification conflict, the complementary clinical use of both HBPM and ABPM might be recommended.
诊室血压(BP)和诊室外血压(描述为白大衣高血压或隐匿性高血压)之间的不一致可能部分归因于所使用的 BP 监测设备的差异。
我们使用经过验证的“一体式”BP 监测设备,研究了诊室、家庭和动态 BP 血压控制(血压控制良好与未控制)分类之间的一致性。在全国性、基于全科医生的多中心 HI-JAMP 研究中,2322 名接受降压药物治疗的高血压患者连续接受诊室 BP 测量和 24 小时动态 BP 监测(ABPM),随后进行 5 天家庭 BP 监测(HBPM),总共进行 7 天 BP 测量。
使用 JSH2019 和 ESC2018 指南的阈值,诊室和家庭收缩压(SBP)控制良好(<140mmHg)且一致(n=970)的患者,24 小时 SBP 也倾向于控制良好(<130mmHg,n=808,83.3%)。诊室和家庭 SBP 控制不良且一致(n=579)的患者,24 小时 SBP 也倾向于控制不良(<130mmHg,n=444,80.9%)。在诊室和家庭 BP 控制不一致的患者中(n=803),46.1%存在 ABPM 与 HBPM 不一致的诊室外 BP 控制状态。当应用 2017 年 ACC/AHA 阈值作为替代时,结果基本相同。
诊室和家庭 BP 的综合评估在临床实践中是有用的。特别是对于诊室 BP 分类和家庭 BP 分类存在冲突的患者,建议互补性地使用 HBPM 和 ABPM。