R. Seibt, K. Scheuch,, W. Boucsein, A. Grass
{"title":"Cardiovascular reactivity of different mental stress models in normotensives, borderline hypertensives and hypertensives","authors":"R. Seibt, K. Scheuch,, W. Boucsein, A. Grass","doi":"10.1002/(SICI)1099-1700(199807)14:3<183::AID-SMI776>3.0.CO;2-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The present study compared simulated job-strain-conditions according to Karasek, in which psychological demand and decision latitude are independently varied (model I), with traditional concentration and short-term memory tasks (model II), with respect to their feasibility to differentiate cardiovascular reactivity in various blood pressure groups. Twenty normotensives, 20 borderline hypertensives and 20 untreated hypertensives (20–45 years) were investigated under both models in counterbalanced order. Each model consisted of a baseline, four mental tests separated by rest phases and a final recovery period. Blood pressure (BP) was recorded both intermittently from the brachial artery (Riva-Rocci) and continuously from the finger (Penaz principle). Heart rate was also continuously recorded. The results show that model I evokes lower cardiovascular strain compared to model II, and that the expected cardiovascular effects can only be demonstrated for the peripheral BP in borderline hypertensives and hypertensives. Peripheral BP increases during the test phases of model I but decreases in model II. Cardiovascular reactivity does not significantly differ between the blood pressure groups. However, hypertensives show a significantly slower recovery in peripheral BP. With a reclassification rate of 70 percent over all conditions, the Karasek model does not give a more reliable discrimination of the blood pressure groups than model II. The usability of mental stress tests for identifying hypertension prone subjects is critically discussed. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.","PeriodicalId":82818,"journal":{"name":"Stress medicine","volume":"7 2","pages":"183-193"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1998-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Stress medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1700(199807)14:3<183::AID-SMI776>3.0.CO;2-6","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7
正常血压、交界性高血压和高血压患者不同心理应激模式的心血管反应性
本研究比较了Karasek的模拟工作压力条件,其中心理需求和决策纬度是独立变化的(模型I),与传统的集中和短期记忆任务(模型II),比较了它们区分不同血压组心血管反应性的可行性。20例血压正常者、20例边缘性高血压患者和20例未治疗高血压患者(20 - 45岁)在两种模型下按平衡顺序进行研究。每个模型都包括一个基线,四个由休息阶段和最后恢复期分开的智力测试。间歇记录肱动脉血压(Riva-Rocci)和连续记录手指血压(Penaz原理)。心率也被连续记录。结果表明,与模型II相比,模型I引起的心血管负荷较低,并且预期的心血管效应仅在交界性高血压和高血压患者的外周血压中得到证实。外周血压在模型ⅰ的实验阶段升高,而在模型ⅱ的实验阶段降低。心血管反应性在血压组之间没有显著差异。然而,高血压患者外周血压恢复明显较慢。在所有情况下,卡拉塞克模型的重新分类率为70%,对血压组的区分并不比模型II更可靠。精神压力测试的可用性,以确定高血压倾向的受试者进行了批判性的讨论。©1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。