Key result
Home blood pressure monitoring over 7 days yielded an average real variability index of 10.56, which was not significantly different from the 10.65 index obtained via 24-hour ambulatory monitoring (p=0.91).
Why the study?
Does home blood pressure monitoring provide comparable blood pressure variability assessment to 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in hypertensive patients?
Observational (n=31)
No
Does home blood pressure monitoring provide comparable blood pressure variability assessment to 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in hypertensive patients?
Home blood pressure monitoring over 7 days provides comparable mean blood pressure and variability assessments to 24-hour ambulatory monitoring, offering a well-tolerated alternative for long-term follow-up.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Home BP monitoring may offer comparable variability assessment; leaves open randomized confirmation before substituting for ambulatory monitoring.
Background : A number of studies reveal that home blood pressure variability is associated with cardiovascular risk factors. However, we do not have a consensus regarding the variability index and the frequency of measurements. Objective: The aim of the study was to assess home blood pressure variability for a period of 7 consecutive days and 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure variability using the average real variability index and to test whether home blood pressure variability represents a suitable parameter for long-term monitoring of the hypertensive patients. Material and methods : A number of 31 hypertensive patients were included in the study, 8 male, 23 female, mean age 60.19±7.35 years. At the inclusion ambulatory blood pressure monitoring was performed, home blood pressure monitoring was carried out for 7 consecutive days with 2 measurements daily. We compared ambulatory blood pressure values, variability using paired t-test. We were looking for correlations between HBP values and cardiovascular risk factors. Results : Ambulatory versus home blood pressure derived mean blood pressure was 131.38±15.2 versus 131.93±8.25, p=0.81. Ambulatory derived variability was 10.65±2.05 versus home variability 10.56±4.83, p=0.91. Home versus ambulatory pulse pressure was 51.8± 9.06 mmHg vs. 54.9±11.9 mmHg, p=0.046. We found positive correlation between HBPV and home BP values, p=0.027, r2=0.1577, (CI: 0.04967 to 0.6588). Home, as well as ambulatory derived variability were positively correlated to age p=0.043, r2=0.1377 (CI: 0.01234 to 0.6451) versus p<0.0001, CI: 0.3870 to 0.8220, r2=0.4302. Conclusion : Assessment of home blood pressure monitoring and variability could represent a well-tolerated alternative for long-term follow-up of hypertension management.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Magdás et al. (2016) conducted an observational in Hypertension (n=31). Home blood pressure monitoring vs. 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring was evaluated on Blood pressure variability (average real variability index) (p=0.91). Home blood pressure monitoring over 7 days yielded an average real variability index of 10.56, which was not significantly different from the 10.65 index obtained via 24-hour ambulatory monitoring (p=0.91).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: