Why the study?
Can ambulatory blood pressure monitoring be used to statistically confirm or exclude stage I hypertension?
Can ambulatory blood pressure monitoring be used to statistically confirm or exclude stage I hypertension?
A statistical approach using pooled standard deviations from ambulatory blood pressure monitoring can help determine the probability of a patient having true stage I hypertension.
May aid probabilistic ABPM assessment of stage I hypertension; leaves open prospective validation before clinical use.
Criteria for the diagnosis or exclusion of hypertension using ambulatory blood pressure monitoring have not been agreed upon. We designed this study to provide a statistically based guide for using results of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring to resolve this issue. To generate this information, we used a database of 228 subjects (135 men, 93 women; average age, 45 years) referred by their primary physicians over the past 7 years for evaluation of borderline or stage I hypertension (average blood pressure, 148/92 mm Hg; SD, +/-17.5/12.2 mm Hg). In this population, the pooled SDs of systolic and diastolic ambulatory blood pressures were 13.8 and 11.6 mm Hg, respectively. Using the pooled SD, we calculated the probability that a patient's blood pressure falls within the hypertensive range (> 140/90 mm Hg). The 95% confidence interval for each subject's blood pressure was also determined. For example, if 40 ambulatory blood pressure measurements are performed on a subject and the average systolic ambulatory blood pressure is 137 mm Hg, then there is a 10% probability that the patient's "true" average blood pressure is actually in the hypertensive range. By contrast, if the systolic pressure is 143 mm Hg, there is a 90% probability that the patient is hypertensive. This approach may be useful for clinical decision making and also for the design of clinical trials.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Moore et al. (1997) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: