Key result
Compared with casual BP measurements, 24-hour ABPM increased the proportion of older patients meeting hypertension control goals from 37.4% to 54.1% (absolute difference 16.7%; P<0.01).
Why the study?
Does 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring alter the classification of hypertension prevalence and control compared to casual blood pressure measurements in adults aged 60 years and older?
Cross-Sectional (n=1,047)
Does 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring alter the classification of hypertension prevalence and control compared to casual blood pressure measurements in adults aged 60 years and older?
Effect estimate: Absolute difference 16.7%
Absolute Event Rate: 54.1% vs 37.4%
Absolute Risk Reduction: 16.7%
p-value: p=<.01
Using 24-hour ABPM instead of casual BP measurements in older adults reduces the proportion recommended for hypertension treatment and increases the proportion classified as having controlled hypertension.
ABPM may reclassify more older adults as controlled; leaves open whether it should guide treatment over casual BP.
Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) accurately classifies blood pressure (BP) status but its impact on the prevalence and control of hypertension is little known. The authors conducted a cross-sectional study in 2012 among 1047 individuals 60 years and older from the follow-up of a population cohort in Spain. Three casual BP measurements and 24-hour ABPM were performed under standardized conditions. Approximately 68.8% patients were hypertensive based on casual BP (≥140/90 mm Hg or current BP medication use) and 62.1% based on 24-hour ABPM (≥130/80 mm Hg or current BP medication use) (P=.009). The proportion of patients with treatment-eligible hypertension who met BP goals increased from 37.4% based on the casual BP target to 54.1% based on the 24-hour BP target (absolute difference, 16.7%; P<.01). These results were consistent across alternative BP thresholds. Therefore, compared with casual BP, 24-hour ABPM led to a reduction in the proportion of older patients recommended for hypertension treatment and a substantial increase in the proportion of those with hypertension control.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Banegas et al. (2015) conducted a cross-sectional in Hypertension (n=1,047). 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) vs. Casual blood pressure measurements was evaluated on Proportion of patients with treatment-eligible hypertension who met BP goals (Absolute difference 16.7%, p=<.01). Compared with casual BP measurements, 24-hour ABPM increased the proportion of older patients meeting hypertension control goals from 37.4% to 54.1% (absolute difference 16.7%; P<0.01).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: