Key result
Continuous 24-hour direct arterial pressure recording yielded readings approximately 30 mm Hg lower than casual indirect measurements in treated hypertensive patients.
Why the study?
Does 24-hour continuous direct arterial pressure recording differ from casual indirect measurements in patients with suspected or treated hypertension?
Population
16 unrestricted patients in two groups: 8 asymptomatic, untreated patients with suspected hypertension, and…
Comparison
24 hour continuous recording of direct arterial… vs Casual indirect measurements of arterial…
Design
Cross-sectional
Follow-up
24 hours
Authors
Loading...
Casual indirect BP may overestimate true values in treated hypertension; leaves open need for standardized direct recording validation.
Cross-Sectional (n=16)
Does 24-hour continuous direct arterial pressure recording differ from casual indirect measurements in patients with suspected or treated hypertension?
Mean Difference: 30
Continuous 24-hour direct arterial pressure recording reveals that casual indirect measurements may significantly overestimate blood pressure in treated hypertensive patients, explaining the absence of target organ damage.
Littler et al. (1975) conducted a cross-sectional in Hypertension (n=16). 24-hour continuous recording of direct arterial pressure vs. Casual indirect measurements of arterial pressure was evaluated on Agreement between direct and indirect arterial pressure measurements (approx 30 mm Hg difference). Continuous 24-hour direct arterial pressure recording yielded readings approximately 30 mm Hg lower than casual indirect measurements in treated hypertensive patients.