Why the study?
Hypertension guidelines recommend measuring BP on both arms, but whether an automatic oscillometric monitor allowing simultaneous double arm measurement is effective for screening potential vascular disease was tested.
Does simultaneous double arm automated blood pressure measurement identify subjects with increased cardiovascular risk in an unselected community sample?
Does simultaneous double arm automated blood pressure measurement identify subjects with increased cardiovascular risk in an unselected community sample?
An abnormal inter-arm blood pressure difference is significantly associated with a higher prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors and established cardiovascular disease, supporting the routine use of simultaneous both-arm BP measurement.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Simultaneous oscillometric IAD screening flags higher CV risk in community samples; leaves open whether it improves outcomes beyond guideline-directed sequential measurement.
PURPOSE: Hypertension guidelines recommend measuring blood pressure (BP) on both arms, since an abnormal inter-arm difference (IAD) in BP is associated with an increased risk of vascular abnormalities and cardiovascular (CV) disease. We tested whether an automatic oscillometric BP monitor allowing simultaneous both arm BP measurement might be effective for screening of subjects with potential vascular disease. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 220 consecutive subjects from an unselected sample of individuals of a small Italian community were screened using an automated upper-arm electronic BP monitor (Microlife WatchBP Office). Seated BP was measured in triplicate at 1 min interval. Demographic and clinical data were collected prior to any BP measurement. An average IAD difference >20 mmHg for systolic (S) and/or >10 mmHg for diastolic (D) BP was considered abnormal. RESULTS: , p=.0001), higher BP levels (154 ± 15/92 ± 11 vs. 133 ± 18/80 ± 10 mmHg, p=.001) and were more likely to report obesity (56 vs. 13%, p=.001), a history of hypertension (67 vs. 35%, p=.044) or cardiovascular disease (33 vs. 10%, p=.034) than subjects with normal IAD. In a multivariate analysis, a higher BMI [odds ratio (95% confidence interval): 1.29 (1.11, 1.51)] and SBP [1.06 (1.01, 1.10)] were significantly associated with a larger risk of an abnormal IAD (p=.001 and p=.012, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: An abnormal IAD in BP is associated with a larger prevalence of CV risk factors and CV disease. Our study confirms that simultaneous both arm BP measurement must always be accomplished in subjects at risk for or with established CV disease.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Omboni et al. (2018) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: