Key result
Two-hour morning BP average correlates strongly with 24-hour readings at ~0.91.
Why the study?
Shorter-term alternatives to whole-day ambulatory blood pressure monitoring for mild hypertension patients require evaluation for reliability compared to 24-hour monitoring.
Observational (n=12)
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Two-hour BP averages may approximate 24-hour values in mild hypertension; leaves open whether shorter protocols can replace full ambulatory monitoring.
Several shorter-term alternatives for whole-day ambulatory monitoring of blood pressure using Pressurometer III or conventional sphygmomanometer were evaluated in 12 male patients with mild hypertension. Averages of BP reading at 8 AM once, 3 consecutive-readings either with Pressurometer or manually, serial readings for 2-hour intervals from 8-10 AM and 2-4 PM were compared with that of 24-hour ambulatory, non-invasive BP readings by Pressurometer. Both systolic and diastolic 2-hour BP averages in the morning (8 to 10 o'clock) correlated more strongly with 24-hour averages (r = 0.91 and 0.91) than the 3 consecutive (r = 0.88 and 0.66) or single (r = 0.49 and -0.35) reading alternatives did. In conclusion, the average of serial readings obtained during 2-hour monitoring period from 8 to 10 AM is a reliable predictor of 24-hour ambulatory BP and represents it more closely than the conventional single or multiple BP readings.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yoo et al. (1986) conducted an observational in Mild hypertension (n=12). 2-hour morning (8 to 10 AM) blood pressure average vs. Single 8 AM reading or 3 consecutive readings was evaluated on Correlation with 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure averages (r = 0.91 (systolic) and 0.91 (diastolic)). A 2-hour morning (8-10 AM) blood pressure average strongly correlated with 24-hour averages compared to single or 3 consecutive readings.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: