Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring improves measurement precision, eliminates observer bias, and identifies white coat hypertension, though its prognostic superiority over clinic pressures remains untested in outcome trials.
Hypertension
Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring vs Clinic blood pressure measurement
Summary points Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring is an increasingly popular method of recording blood pressure It improves the precision and reproducibility of blood pressure measurement, eliminates observer errors and bias, and allows assessment of white coat hypertension and white coat responses It is indicated particularly in the evaluation of patients with borderline hypertension, resistant hypertension, or variable blood pressure None of the major trials of treatment in hypertension has been conducted using ambula- tory blood pressure recordings; because of this the prognostic value of such monitoring remains uncertain The optimal method of data analysis, the importance of day and night time readings and of white coat responses, cost effectiveness, and the fact that few marketed devices have been fully vali- dated also need addressing Despite these issues, ambulatory monitoring is already making an important contribution to the assessment and management of selected patients with high blood pressure
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Neeraj Prasad
Wrightington, Wigan and Leigh NHS Foundation Trust
Chris Isles
Dumfries and Galloway Royal Infirmary
BMJ
Dumfries and Galloway Royal Infirmary
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Prasad et al. (Sat,) conducted a review in Hypertension. Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring vs. Clinic blood pressure measurement was evaluated. Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring improves measurement precision, eliminates observer bias, and identifies white coat hypertension, though its prognostic superiority over clinic pressures remains untested in outcome trials.
synapsesocial.com/papers/6a22383690e08a9539582d1c — DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.313.7071.1535