Association of anxiety with discrepancies between unattended and attended office blood pressure measurement.

IF 3.2 3区 医学 Q2 PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE
M Stopa, K Zięba, A Tofilska, B Bętkowska-Korpała, G Bilo, M Rajzer, A Olszanecka
{"title":"Association of anxiety with discrepancies between unattended and attended office blood pressure measurement.","authors":"M Stopa, K Zięba, A Tofilska, B Bętkowska-Korpała, G Bilo, M Rajzer, A Olszanecka","doi":"10.1093/ajh/hpaf075","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Precision of blood pressure (BP) measurements is crucial in hypertension care. Conventional office measurements (OBP) are susceptible to confounding factors, including the white coat effect. An emerging alternative is unattended automated office BP measurement (UAOBP). UAOBP values are typically lower than OBP, but factors responsible for this phenomenon remain poorly understood. The study aimed to analyze factors affecting discrepancies between these methods.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>219 hypertensive patients completed the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory questionnaire, assessing anxiety levels. Subsequently, BP measurements were performed using two methodologies in a randomized sequence:UAOBP: After a 5-minute rest in the examination room, BP was automatically measured three times at 1-minute intervals.OBP: Following a 5-minute rest, a physician performed three automated oscillometric measurements at 1-minute intervals.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The BP values obtained through UAOBP were significantly lower than those in OBP: mean (SD) 124.7 (14.4) vs. 128.2 (14.2) mmHg, p<0.001 for systolic, and 73.3 (10.2) vs. 75.2 (10.6) mmHg, p<0.001 for diastolic. In the multiple regression analysis, the only factors significantly affecting the differences in systolic BP measurements were trait anxiety level (β = 0.22; p = 0.02) and the order in which the measurements were taken (β = 3.5; p = 0.01). Diastolic BP differences were only predicted by the order of measurement (β = 2.8; p < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>UAOBP appears particularly efficient in mitigating the white coat effect in patients with high levels of anxiety. Further research is needed to investigate whether this may improve the assessment of BP-related risk in such patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":7578,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Hypertension","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Hypertension","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ajh/hpaf075","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Precision of blood pressure (BP) measurements is crucial in hypertension care. Conventional office measurements (OBP) are susceptible to confounding factors, including the white coat effect. An emerging alternative is unattended automated office BP measurement (UAOBP). UAOBP values are typically lower than OBP, but factors responsible for this phenomenon remain poorly understood. The study aimed to analyze factors affecting discrepancies between these methods.

Methods: 219 hypertensive patients completed the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory questionnaire, assessing anxiety levels. Subsequently, BP measurements were performed using two methodologies in a randomized sequence:UAOBP: After a 5-minute rest in the examination room, BP was automatically measured three times at 1-minute intervals.OBP: Following a 5-minute rest, a physician performed three automated oscillometric measurements at 1-minute intervals.

Results: The BP values obtained through UAOBP were significantly lower than those in OBP: mean (SD) 124.7 (14.4) vs. 128.2 (14.2) mmHg, p<0.001 for systolic, and 73.3 (10.2) vs. 75.2 (10.6) mmHg, p<0.001 for diastolic. In the multiple regression analysis, the only factors significantly affecting the differences in systolic BP measurements were trait anxiety level (β = 0.22; p = 0.02) and the order in which the measurements were taken (β = 3.5; p = 0.01). Diastolic BP differences were only predicted by the order of measurement (β = 2.8; p < 0.001).

Conclusions: UAOBP appears particularly efficient in mitigating the white coat effect in patients with high levels of anxiety. Further research is needed to investigate whether this may improve the assessment of BP-related risk in such patients.

焦虑与无人值守和有人值守办公室血压测量差异的关系。
背景:精确的血压(BP)测量在高血压治疗中至关重要。传统的办公室测量(OBP)容易受到混杂因素的影响,包括白大衣效应。一种新兴的替代方案是无人值守的自动办公室血压测量(UAOBP)。UAOBP值通常低于OBP,但导致这一现象的因素尚不清楚。本研究旨在分析影响这些方法差异的因素。方法:219例高血压患者完成状态-特质焦虑量表,评估焦虑水平。随后,采用两种方法按随机顺序进行血压测量:UAOBP:在检查室休息5分钟后,每隔1分钟自动测量3次血压。OBP:休息5分钟后,医生每隔1分钟进行3次自动振荡测量。结果:UAOBP测得的血压值明显低于OBP测得的血压值:平均(SD) 124.7(14.4)比128.2 (14.2)mmHg。结论:UAOBP在缓解高水平焦虑患者的白大褂效应方面特别有效。这是否可以改善此类患者bp相关风险的评估,还需要进一步的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
American Journal of Hypertension
American Journal of Hypertension 医学-外周血管病
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
6.20%
发文量
144
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The American Journal of Hypertension is a monthly, peer-reviewed journal that provides a forum for scientific inquiry of the highest standards in the field of hypertension and related cardiovascular disease. The journal publishes high-quality original research and review articles on basic sciences, molecular biology, clinical and experimental hypertension, cardiology, epidemiology, pediatric hypertension, endocrinology, neurophysiology, and nephrology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信