Key result
ABPM demonstrates ~72% agreement with office BP while identifying white-coat and masked hypertension.
Why the study?
Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring complements office blood pressure measurement, and this study aimed to assess its diagnostic value for hypertension management in private cardiology practice in Senegal.
Does 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring improve the diagnostic classification of hypertension compared to office blood pressure measurement in patients in a private cardiology practice?
Cross-Sectional (n=97)
No
Does 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring improve the diagnostic classification of hypertension compared to office blood pressure measurement in patients in a private cardiology practice?
Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring provides substantial diagnostic value by identifying a high prevalence of discordant phenotypes (white-coat and masked hypertension) and nocturnal blood pressure abnormalities compared to office measurements alone.
ABPM may refine hypertension diagnosis in Senegalese private practice; leaves open routine adoption pending confirmatory trials.
Hypertension is a major contributor to cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) complements office blood pressure measurement by detecting white-coat hypertension, masked hypertension, and nocturnal blood pressure abnormalities, and this study aimed to assess its diagnostic value in the management of hypertension in private cardiology practice in Senegal. A prospective, descriptive, and analytical study was conducted from July to September 2024 at Clinique Urgence Cardio in Dakar, including patients aged 18 years or older with a valid 24-hour ABPM recording. Clinical, anthropometric, and treatment data, together with cardiovascular risk factors, were collected; office and ambulatory blood pressure measurements were compared; and logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with discordance between the two methods. Of the 104 patients assessed, 97 had valid ABPM recordings. The mean age was 53.2 ± 14.1 years, and women predominated. Cardiovascular risk factors included abdominal obesity (77.3%), known hypertension (54.6%), physical inactivity (43.3%), dyslipidemia (37.1%), and diabetes (16.5%). Mean office blood pressure was 145.7/91.4 mmHg, compared with 130.5/80.2 mmHg over 24 hours, 134.4/82.4 mmHg during daytime, and 125/75 mmHg during nighttime. ABPM identified sustained hypertension in 53.61% of patients, white-coat hypertension in 18.56%, masked hypertension in 9.28%, and normotension in 18.56%, with overall agreement between office and ambulatory measurements of 72.2%. Among patients with elevated office blood pressure, 25.7% had white-coat hypertension, while 33.3% of those with normal office blood pressure had masked hypertension. Non-dipping and reverse-dipping patterns were observed in 45.4% and 19.6% of patients, respectively, and discordance was independently associated with alcohol consumption (OR = 5.08; p = 0.007). ABPM improves the diagnostic classification of hypertension and reveals a high prevalence of discordant phenotypes and nocturnal blood pressure abnormalities, and wider use of ABPM may help optimize patient management in this setting.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gaye et al. (2026) conducted a cross-sectional in Hypertension (n=97). Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) vs. Office blood pressure measurement was evaluated on Overall agreement between office and ambulatory blood pressure measurements. Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring demonstrated a 72.2% overall agreement with office measurements, identifying white-coat hypertension in 18.6% and masked hypertension in 9.3% of patients.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: