Defining childhood hypertension: is it too complicated? An evaluation of the potential impact of different approaches in an Australian paediatric population.

Abstract

Objectives: Current American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) and European Society of Hypertension (ESH) thresholds defining hypertension in children use blood pressure (BP) normalised to age, sex and height. However, scare data exists regarding the relative importance of these variables to accurately model the 95th quantile of BP. We hypothesised that height alone may fit the population data equally well compared to more complex definitions. We also compare the potential impact of various thresholds for defining hypertension in an Australian population.

Methods: Longitudinal data from the Raine Study were used, with 2248 participants contributing 7479 valid BP values across the 3/5/10/14/17-year study visits. BP was measured after 5 min rest, ≥3 times at each visit, using a Dinamap device. Quantile regression was used to predict the 95th percentile of BP, with nonlinear modelling of covariates through restricted cubic spline terms.

Results: At a single visit, 6-16% of young children exceeded the ESH threshold and 12-23% the AAP threshold. The transition to fixed thresholds (≥13 years AAP, ≥16 years ESH), increased the number of males (AAP only) and reduced the number of females considered hypertensive. A quantile regression model constructed with Raine Study data using height-only as the explanatory variable better predicted BP than the respective model using age-only (or a combination of the two).

Conclusions: There may be large differences in the prevalence of hypertension according to AAP and ESH criteria, with a marked sex-discrepancy emerging from the point of fixed threshold application in adolescence. It may not be necessary to normalise BP by both age and height, the latter being a better predictor of childhood BP. Simpler methods may be preferable in clinical practice but require validation against clinical outcomes.