Key result
White-coat normotension shows no difference in 24-hour blood pressure variability versus essential hypertension.
Why the study?
Blood pressure variability in patients with clinical normotension and ambulatory hypertension (white-coat normotension) was not well characterized.
Case-Control (n=116)
Comparable 24-hour BP variability in white-coat normotension and essential hypertension; leaves open differential cardiovascular risk.
The objective of this study was to assess blood pressure variability in patients with clinical normotension and ambulatory hypertension (the so-called white-coat normotension). In 58 white-coat normotensives (mean age 64.2 +/- 14.9 years; male/female ratio = 1.5:1) the authors evaluated blood pressure variability using the twenty-four-hour coefficient of variability. Fifty-eight essential hypertensives with the same age and sex distribution were recruited as a control group. The coefficient of variability in white-coat normotension was greater than in the control group (14.8/16.1 +/- 4.2/3.8% vs 13.5/15.1 +/- 3.3/3.1%), but this difference was not statistically significant. These findings suggest that white-coat normotension is the result of a specific relaxing response to medical visits and not the expression of an elevated blood pressure variability. It is probably due to the reverse of the alerting response, which causes white-coat hypertension.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Prattichizzo et al. (1996) conducted a case-control in White-coat normotension (n=116). White-coat normotension vs. Essential hypertension was evaluated on Twenty-four-hour coefficient of variability of blood pressure (p=not significant). White-coat normotension showed no statistically significant difference in twenty-four-hour blood pressure variability compared to essential hypertension (14.8/16.1% vs 13.5/15.1%).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: