Blood pressure response to close or loose contact between physician and patient during attended office blood pressure measurement.

IF 4.6 Q2 MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS
Jitka Seidlerová, Jan Filipovský, Veronika Kordíková, Július Gelžinský, Štěpán Mareš, Otto Mayer
{"title":"Blood pressure response to close or loose contact between physician and patient during attended office blood pressure measurement.","authors":"Jitka Seidlerová,&nbsp;Jan Filipovský,&nbsp;Veronika Kordíková,&nbsp;Július Gelžinský,&nbsp;Štěpán Mareš,&nbsp;Otto Mayer","doi":"10.1080/08037051.2022.2104694","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Compared to unattended office blood pressure (uOBP), attended office blood pressure (aOBP) is higher. It is not known, however, to what extent distance between physician and patient influences blood pressure (BP) values.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Participants were stable hypertensive patients, followed in the university hospital-based out-patient center. During a session, automated office BP was measured three times after a pre-set five-minute pause, using the Omron 907 device; both aOBP and uOBP were done, in a random order. Simultaneously, beat-to-beat BP measurement was performed using the Finapress device. During aOBP, some participants were in close contact with the physician while others were in loose contact where the doctor was sitting in the room about 2.5 m apart. One year later, the second session with the same protocol was organized, but the close and loose contact were interchanged. The data were analyzed using a paired <i>t</i>-test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Complete data were collected in 32 patients, baseline uOBP was 122.8 ± 14.8/69.5 ± 11.7 mmHg. Systolic and diastolic aOBP with close contact was higher by 4.6 ± 6.9 and 1.9 ± 3.4 mmHg (<i>p</i> < 0.0007 and 0.0039, respectively), while aOBP with loose contact was not different from uOBP. Beat-to-beat BP increased during aOBP by 6.5 ± 8.5/3.3 ± 4.8 mmHg. The increase persisted during all the three aOBP measurements (<i>p</i> < 0.0001 for all systolic and diastolic BP values); the results were similar for close and loose contact. The peak increase during uOBP was of similar magnitude as during aOBP but it lasted shorter: it reached the significance level of <i>p</i> < 0.0001 only during the first uOBP measurement.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Compared to uOBP, aOBP values were higher with close, but not with loose contact between physician and patient. These differences were, however, not detected by beat-to-beat BP measurement.</p>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08037051.2022.2104694","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Compared to unattended office blood pressure (uOBP), attended office blood pressure (aOBP) is higher. It is not known, however, to what extent distance between physician and patient influences blood pressure (BP) values.

Materials and methods: Participants were stable hypertensive patients, followed in the university hospital-based out-patient center. During a session, automated office BP was measured three times after a pre-set five-minute pause, using the Omron 907 device; both aOBP and uOBP were done, in a random order. Simultaneously, beat-to-beat BP measurement was performed using the Finapress device. During aOBP, some participants were in close contact with the physician while others were in loose contact where the doctor was sitting in the room about 2.5 m apart. One year later, the second session with the same protocol was organized, but the close and loose contact were interchanged. The data were analyzed using a paired t-test.

Results: Complete data were collected in 32 patients, baseline uOBP was 122.8 ± 14.8/69.5 ± 11.7 mmHg. Systolic and diastolic aOBP with close contact was higher by 4.6 ± 6.9 and 1.9 ± 3.4 mmHg (p < 0.0007 and 0.0039, respectively), while aOBP with loose contact was not different from uOBP. Beat-to-beat BP increased during aOBP by 6.5 ± 8.5/3.3 ± 4.8 mmHg. The increase persisted during all the three aOBP measurements (p < 0.0001 for all systolic and diastolic BP values); the results were similar for close and loose contact. The peak increase during uOBP was of similar magnitude as during aOBP but it lasted shorter: it reached the significance level of p < 0.0001 only during the first uOBP measurement.

Conclusions: Compared to uOBP, aOBP values were higher with close, but not with loose contact between physician and patient. These differences were, however, not detected by beat-to-beat BP measurement.

在门诊血压测量期间,医患之间密切或松散接触对血压的影响。
目的:与无人值守办公室血压(uOBP)相比,值守办公室血压(aOBP)更高。然而,尚不清楚医患之间的距离在多大程度上影响血压(BP)值。材料和方法:参与者为稳定期高血压患者,随访于大学附属医院门诊中心。在会议期间,在预先设定的五分钟暂停后,使用欧姆龙907设备自动测量三次办公室血压;aOBP和uOBP均按随机顺序进行。同时,使用Finapress设备进行搏动间血压测量。在aOBP期间,一些参与者与医生保持密切接触,而另一些参与者则与医生保持松散接触,医生坐在距离约2.5米的房间里。一年后,第二次会议以相同的协议组织,但密切和松散的接触互换。数据采用配对t检验进行分析。结果:32例患者资料完整,基线uOBP为122.8±14.8/69.5±11.7 mmHg。密切接触时收缩期aOBP和舒张期aOBP分别升高4.6±6.9和1.9±3.4 mmHg (p p p p)。结论:与无obp相比,医患密切接触时aOBP升高,而疏离接触时aOBP升高。然而,这些差异并没有被心跳间的血压测量检测到。
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
ACS Applied Bio Materials
ACS Applied Bio Materials Chemistry-Chemistry (all)
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
2.10%
发文量
464
×
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