Why the study?
Does the updated 2017 AAP CPG definition for high blood pressure change the prevalence and associations of HBP compared to the Fourth Report definition in Chinese youth?
Does the updated 2017 AAP CPG definition for high blood pressure change the prevalence and associations of HBP compared to the Fourth Report definition in Chinese youth?
Applying the 2017 AAP CPG criteria for high blood pressure in youth leads to a higher prevalence of diagnosed hypertension compared to previous guidelines, while maintaining strong associations with known risk factors.
May increase HBP diagnoses in Chinese youth; leaves open whether 2017 CPG improves risk prediction over prior definitions.
OBJECTIVE: The American Academy of Pediatrics updated Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPG) for screening high blood pressure (HBP) in children and adolescents in 2017. This study aimed to assess differences in HBP classification applying this updated HBP definition in a large sample of Chinese youth. METHODS: Data from 50 336 youth aged 6-17 participating in the 2013 Chinese national survey were analyzed. HBP was diagnosed according to the established (Fourth Report) and updated (2017 CPG) definitions. The associations between HBP with BMI, height, early life factors and behavioral factors were investigated using logistic regression models. RESULTS: Applying the CPG definition, 16.7% of children (6-12 years) and 7.9% of adolescents (13-17 years) had HBP, compared with 10.8 and 6.3% applying the Fourth Report definition. Prevalence estimates for HBP differed the greatest for boys, children aged 11, those with high BMI, and those of tall stature. The odds ratios (ORs) for HBP with BMI, height, hip and waist circumference, early life factors and behavioral factors were comparable for the two definitions. CONCLUSION: The new criteria for HBP in young people will lead healthcare providers to diagnose more children as hypertensive. Notably, associations between HBP with BMI and other medical and behavioral factors remained strong, supporting validity of the new definition.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dong et al. (2018) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: