Key result
Self-monitoring of blood pressure demonstrated the lowest within-individual variability with a coefficient of variation of 4.2%, compared to 5.5% for ambulatory and 8.6% for office measurements.
Why the study?
Does self-monitoring of blood pressure have lower within-individual variability compared to office and ambulatory monitoring?
Observational (n=163)
No
Does self-monitoring of blood pressure have lower within-individual variability compared to office and ambulatory monitoring?
Absolute Event Rate: 4.2% vs 8.6%
Self-monitoring of blood pressure over a week demonstrates lower within-individual variability compared to office and 24-hour ambulatory monitoring, suggesting it is a more accurate method for assessing blood pressure.
High within-individual BP variability complicates diagnosis; leaves open optimal role of self-monitoring versus ambulatory monitoring.
BACKGROUND: The diagnosis of hypertension is difficult when faced with several different blood pressure measurements in an individual. Using the average of several office measurements is recommended, although considerable uncertainty remains. Twenty-four-hour ambulatory monitoring is often considered the gold standard, but self-monitoring of blood pressure has been proposed as a superior method. AIM: Determination of within-individual variability of blood pressure measured in the office, by ambulatory monitoring, and by a week of self-monitoring. DESIGN OF STUDY: Retrospective analysis of a clinical trial of 163 subjects. METHOD: Within-patient variability of office and ambulatory blood pressure was determined from measurements at 0 and 6 weeks. Subjects had performed self-monitoring of blood pressure twice each morning and evening, for at least 6 weeks; variability was determined from the means of week 1 and week 6. RESULTS: The within-individual coefficients of variation (CVs) for systolic blood pressure were: office, 8.6%; ambulatory, 5.5%; self, 4.2%. Equivalent values for diastolic blood pressure were 8.6%, 4.9%, and 3.9%. CVs tended to be lower with longer self-monitoring duration, and higher with longer intervals between self-monitoring. CONCLUSION: Office blood pressure is impractical for precise assessment, as 10-13 measurements are required to give the accuracy required for rational titration of antihypertensive drugs. Twenty-four-hour ambulatory monitoring is better than a single office measurement, but considerable uncertainty remains around the estimate. A week of self-monitoring appears to be the most accurate method of measuring blood pressure, but remains imperfect. Further research may identify superior self-monitoring schedules. Given the inherent accuracy in blood pressure measurement, the importance of considering overall cardiovascular risk is emphasised.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Warren et al. (2010) conducted an observational in Increased cardiovascular risk (hypertension or high BMI) (n=163). Self-monitoring of blood pressure vs. Office and 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring was evaluated on Within-individual coefficient of variation (CV) for systolic blood pressure. Self-monitoring of blood pressure demonstrated the lowest within-individual variability with a coefficient of variation of 4.2%, compared to 5.5% for ambulatory and 8.6% for office measurements.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: