PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
December 5, 2015Journal of Hypertension51 citations

Differences in night-time and daytime ambulatory blood pressure when diurnal periods are defined by self-report, fixed-times, and actigraphy

JBJohn N. BoothPMPaul MuntnerMAMarwah Abdalla

Key Result

Self-report to define diurnal periods on ambulatory blood pressure monitoring showed high agreement with actigraphy for night-time hypertension (kappa 0.91; 95% CI 0.86-0.96).

Study Design

Type

Observational (n=330)

Structured PICO

Does defining diurnal periods by self-report, fixed-times, or actigraphy produce different estimates of night-time and daytime ambulatory blood pressure?

P
Population
330 participants who completed two 24-h ambulatory blood pressure (ABP) and actigraphy monitoring periods with sleep diaries
I
Intervention
Defining diurnal periods by self-report
C
Comparator
Defining diurnal periods by fixed-times (0000-0600 h and 1000-2000 h) or actigraphy
O
Outcome
Within-individual differences for mean night-time and daytime ABP and kappa statistics for night-time and daytime hypertensionsurrogate

Self-report is a highly agreeable method with actigraphy for defining diurnal periods on ambulatory blood pressure monitoring, with fixed-time periods as a reasonable alternative.

Main Result

Effect estimate: kappa 0.91 (95% CI 0.86-0.96)

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether defining diurnal periods by self-report, fixed-time, or actigraphy produce different estimates of night-time and daytime ambulatory blood pressure (ABP). METHODS: Over a median of 28 days, 330 participants completed two 24-h ABP and actigraphy monitoring periods with sleep diaries. Fixed night-time and daytime periods were defined as 0000-0600 h and 1000-2000 h, respectively. Using the first ABP period, within-individual differences for mean night-time and daytime ABP and kappa statistics for night-time and daytime hypertension (systolic/diastolic ABP≥120/70 mmHg and ≥135/85 mmHg, respectively) were estimated comparing self-report, fixed-time, or actigraphy for defining diurnal periods. Reproducibility of ABP was also estimated. RESULTS: Within-individual mean differences in night-time systolic ABP were small, suggesting little bias, when comparing the three approaches used to define diurnal periods. The distribution of differences, represented by 95% confidence intervals (CI), in night-time systolic and diastolic ABP and daytime systolic and diastolic ABP was narrowest for self-report versus actigraphy. For example, mean differences (95% CI) in night-time systolic ABP for self-report versus fixed-time was -0.53 (-6.61, +5.56) mmHg, self-report versus actigraphy was 0.91 (-3.61, +5.43) mmHg, and fixed-time versus actigraphy was 1.43 (-5.59, +8.46) mmHg. Agreement for night-time and daytime hypertension was highest for self-report versus actigraphy: kappa statistic (95% CI) = 0.91 (0.86,0.96) and 1.00 (0.98,1.00), respectively. The reproducibility of mean ABP and hypertension categories was similar using each approach. CONCLUSION: Given the high agreement with actigraphy, these data support using self-report to define diurnal periods on ABP monitoring. Further, the use of fixed-time periods may be a reasonable alternative approach.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Booth et al. (2015) conducted an observational in Ambulatory blood pressure (n=330). Self-report vs. Fixed-time and actigraphy was evaluated on Agreement for night-time hypertension (self-report vs actigraphy) (kappa 0.91, 95% CI 0.86-0.96). Self-report to define diurnal periods on ambulatory blood pressure monitoring showed high agreement with actigraphy for night-time hypertension (kappa 0.91; 95% CI 0.86-0.96).

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a0f9eff006d7a1de4a2f9c6https://doi.org/10.1097/hjh.0000000000000791
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper