Martin B. Thomsen, Jakob Nyvad, Kent L. Christensen, Mark Reinhard, Niels Henrik Buus
{"title":"High versus low measurement frequency during 24-h ambulatory blood pressure monitoring - a randomized crossover study","authors":"Martin B. Thomsen, Jakob Nyvad, Kent L. Christensen, Mark Reinhard, Niels Henrik Buus","doi":"10.1038/s41371-023-00868-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) may be stressful and associated with discomfort, possibly influenced by the number of cuff inflations. We compared a low frequency (LF-ABPM) regimen with one cuff inflation per hour, with a high frequency (HF-ABPM) regimen performed according to current guidelines using three cuff-inflations per hour during daytime and two cuff-inflations during night time. In a crossover study, patients underwent ABPMs with both frequencies, in a randomized order, within an interval of a few days. Patients reported pain (visual analogue scale from 0 to 10) and sleep disturbances after each ABPM. The primary endpoint was the difference in mean 24 h systolic BP (SBP) between HF-ABPM and LF-ABPM. A total of 171 patients were randomized, and data from 131 (age 58 ± 14 years, 47% females, 24% normotensive, 53% mildly hypertensive, and 22% moderately-severely hypertensive) completing both ABPMs were included in the analysis. Mean SBP was 137.5 mmHg (95% CI, 134.8;140.2) for HF-ABPM and 138.2 mmHg (95%CI, 135.2;141.1) for LF-ABPM. The 95% limits of agreement were −15.3 mmHg and +14.0 mmHg. Mean 24 h SBP difference between HF-ABPM and LF-ABPM was −0.7 mmHg (95%CI, −2.0;0.6). Coefficients of variation were similar for LF-ABPM and HF-ABPM. Pain scores (median with interquartile range), for HF-ABPM and LF-ABPM were 1.5 (0.6;3.0) and 1.3 (0.6;2.9) during daytime, and 1.3 (0.4:3.4) and 0.9 (0.4;2.0) during nighttime (P < 0.05 for both differences). We conclude that LF-ABPM and HF-ABPM values are in good agreement without any clinically relevant differences in BP. Furthermore, LF-ABPM causes a relatively modest reduction in procedure-related pain.","PeriodicalId":16070,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Human Hypertension","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.nature.com/articles/s41371-023-00868-0.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Human Hypertension","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.nature.com/articles/s41371-023-00868-0","RegionNum":4,"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
Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) may be stressful and associated with discomfort, possibly influenced by the number of cuff inflations. We compared a low frequency (LF-ABPM) regimen with one cuff inflation per hour, with a high frequency (HF-ABPM) regimen performed according to current guidelines using three cuff-inflations per hour during daytime and two cuff-inflations during night time. In a crossover study, patients underwent ABPMs with both frequencies, in a randomized order, within an interval of a few days. Patients reported pain (visual analogue scale from 0 to 10) and sleep disturbances after each ABPM. The primary endpoint was the difference in mean 24 h systolic BP (SBP) between HF-ABPM and LF-ABPM. A total of 171 patients were randomized, and data from 131 (age 58 ± 14 years, 47% females, 24% normotensive, 53% mildly hypertensive, and 22% moderately-severely hypertensive) completing both ABPMs were included in the analysis. Mean SBP was 137.5 mmHg (95% CI, 134.8;140.2) for HF-ABPM and 138.2 mmHg (95%CI, 135.2;141.1) for LF-ABPM. The 95% limits of agreement were −15.3 mmHg and +14.0 mmHg. Mean 24 h SBP difference between HF-ABPM and LF-ABPM was −0.7 mmHg (95%CI, −2.0;0.6). Coefficients of variation were similar for LF-ABPM and HF-ABPM. Pain scores (median with interquartile range), for HF-ABPM and LF-ABPM were 1.5 (0.6;3.0) and 1.3 (0.6;2.9) during daytime, and 1.3 (0.4:3.4) and 0.9 (0.4;2.0) during nighttime (P < 0.05 for both differences). We conclude that LF-ABPM and HF-ABPM values are in good agreement without any clinically relevant differences in BP. Furthermore, LF-ABPM causes a relatively modest reduction in procedure-related pain.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Human Hypertension is published monthly and is of interest to health care professionals who deal with hypertension (specialists, internists, primary care physicians) and public health workers. We believe that our patients benefit from robust scientific data that are based on well conducted clinical trials. We also believe that basic sciences are the foundations on which we build our knowledge of clinical conditions and their management. Towards this end, although we are primarily a clinical based journal, we also welcome suitable basic sciences studies that promote our understanding of human hypertension.
The journal aims to perform the dual role of increasing knowledge in the field of high blood pressure as well as improving the standard of care of patients. The editors will consider for publication all suitable papers dealing directly or indirectly with clinical aspects of hypertension, including but not limited to epidemiology, pathophysiology, therapeutics and basic sciences involving human subjects or tissues. We also consider papers from all specialties such as ophthalmology, cardiology, nephrology, obstetrics and stroke medicine that deal with the various aspects of hypertension and its complications.