Mean Daytime Ambulatory Blood Pressure Research Articles

Abstract 093: Does Ambulatory Blood Pressure Variability Predicts Target Organ Damage In Youth? The Ship Ahoy Study

Altered BP and HR variability are associated with abnormalities of cardiac structure and function in adults. Our aim was to determine if BP and HR variability increase prediction of subclinical cardiac changes in youth after adjustment for mean ambulatory BP (ABP) measures. We measured anthropometrics and performed echocardiography for left ventricular mass index (LVMI), LV systolic strain and LV diastolic function (e’/a’). ABP was measured with an oscillometric device and ABP mean percentiles were calculated per pediatric guidelines to adjust mean ABP for differences in age-, height- and sex. ABP and HR coefficients of variation (CV) were calculated as SD/mean. HR dipping was day mean HR - night mean HR. General linear models were used to determine if ABP and HR CV measures remained significant determinants of cardiac measures in models containing mean ABP levels, age, sex, race/ethnicity, BMIz, HR. Mean age was 15.6 ± 1.7 years (63% white, 59% male) with mean casual BP 122.7/71.6 mmHg ±12.3/10.5, mean daytime ABP 124.2/72.0 ± 11.3/7.7 mmHg. In linear models, DBP day CV, DBP nite CV and HR dip remained significant determinants of LVMI even after adjustment for covariates and ABP percentile (R 2 0.36, p < 0.0001). HR nite CV was a determinant of e’/a’ after adjustments (R 2 0.16, p < 0.0001). No BP or HR variability parameters enter the model for LV systolic strain. When stratified by ABP phenotype, participants with white coat HTN (WCH) had higher 24-hour BP, HR variability and HR dipping compared to other phenotypes. Measures of BP and HR variability which may represent altered autonomic tone, may affect LVM and diastolic function in youth especially those with WCH.

WHITE-COAT HYPERTENSION: SIZE OF THE WHITE-COAT EFFECT IS STRONGLY ASSOCIATED WITH CENTRAL ARTERIAL STIFFNESS

Objective: To explore the relationship between the systolic/diastolic white-coat effect (sWCE and dWCE), defined by the difference between clinic BP and mean daytime ambulatory BP, and central arterial stiffness. Design and method: The Brighton and Verona Seniors Study (BRAVES) recruited 184 healthy older adults aged 65–85 from primary care. Participants were not eligible for recruitment if they had known: cardiovascular disease, chronic kidney disease, diabetes, malignancy, smoking, statin therapy, or hormone therapy. Each participant was evaluated for office BP, anthropometrics, and cardiovascular risk factors. 24-hour ambulatory BP was measured using Diasys Integra II (Novacor, France). Carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity (cfPWV) and carotid-radial pulse wave velocity (crPWV) was measured using Complior (Alam Medical, France). 101 participants, not on antihypertensive therapy and with complete ambulatory readings, were selected for analysis. Participants were grouped by BP phenotype: normotension (NT), white-coat hypertension (WCH), masked hypertension (MH), and sustained hypertension (SH). Results: The 101 participants (mean age ± standard deviation: 72 ± 5 years) consisted of 32 NT, 34 WCH, 9 MH, and 26 SH. A positive correlation was seen between both sWCE (r = 0.21; p = 0.03) and dWCE (r = 0.34; p < 0.001) with cfPWV. The WCH subgroup analysis (n = 34) revealed a stronger association between sWCE (r = 0.44; p = 0.01) and dWCE (r = 0.74; p < 0.001) with cfPWV. There was no association in the other BP phenotypes. There was no association of crPWV with either sWCE or dWCE. Multivariable linear regression was conducted on sWCE and dWCE as dependent variables and age, gender, BMI and cfPWV as independent variables (sWCE model: R2 = 0.19; p = 0.23; dWCE model: R2 = 0.61, p < 0.001). After adjustment, a significant association remained between cfPWV and sWCE (B = 2.72, 95% CI 0.32–5.13, p = 0.03) and cfPWV and dWCE (B = 2.70, 95% CI 1.60–3.79, p < 0.001). Conclusions: In healthy older adults with WCH, sWCE and dWCE are independently associated with central arterial stiffness. Central arterial stiffness accounts for a greater proportion of the overall variance of dWCE than sWCE. The WCE is not associated with peripheral arterial stiffness. In WCH, a large WCE may identify individuals at a higher risk of cardiovascular events.

Team-Based Care for Improving Hypertension Management: A Pragmatic Randomized Controlled Trial.

Objective: We evaluated the effect on long term blood pressure (BP) of an interprofessional team-based care (TBC) intervention, involving nurses, pharmacists, and physicians, compared to usual care.Methods: We conducted a pragmatic randomized controlled study in ambulatory clinics and community pharmacies in Switzerland (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02511093). Uncontrolled treated hypertensive patients were randomized to TBC or usual care (UC). In the TBC group, nurses and pharmacists met patients every 6 weeks to measure BP, assess lifestyle, support medication adherence, and provide health education for 6 months. After each visit, they wrote a report to the physician who could adjust antihypertensive therapy. The outcome was the intention-to-treat difference in mean daytime ambulatory blood pressure measurement (ABPM) and control (<135/85 mmHg) at 6 and 12 months.Results: Eighty-nine patients (60 men/29 women; mean (SD) age: 61(12) year) were randomized to TBC (n = 43) or UC (n = 46). At baseline, mean (SD) BP was 144(10)/90(8) mmHg and 147(12)/87(11) mmHg in the TBC and UC groups. At 6 months, the between-groups difference in daytime systolic ABPM was−3 mmHg [95% confidence interval (CI):−10 to +4; p = 0.45]; at 12 months, this difference was−7 mmHg [95% CI:−13 to−2; p = 0.01]. At 6 months, the between-groups difference in daytime diastolic ABPM was +2 mmHg [95% CI:−1 to +6; p = 0.20]; at 12 months, this difference was−2 mmHg [95% CI:−5 to +2; 0.42]. Upon adjustment for baseline covariates including baseline BP, the between-groups differences at 6 and 12 months were maintained. At 6 months, there was no difference in BP control. At 12 months, the TBC group tended to have a better control in systolic BP (p = 0.07) but not in diastolic BP (p = 0.33).Conclusion: While there was not significant effect on BP at 6 months of follow-up, the TBC intervention can help decrease long-term systolic BP among uncontrolled hypertensive patients.

COLLATERAL BENEFITS OF PARTICIPATION IN CLINICAL RESEARCH: INSIGHTS FROM A RESISTANT HYPERTENSION TRIAL SCREEN OUT POPULATION

Objective: Patients with resistant hypertension (HTN) were invited to take part in an ongoing randomised, double-blind, sham-controlled, multi-centre, multi-national renal denervation trial. We evaluated the benefits for patients coming into research at our centre. Design and method: Male or female patients 18–75 years old with resistant HTN were invited to participate. Post consent, clinic blood pressure (CBP) measurements were recorded. Patients also had 24-hour ambulatory BP (ABP) to exclude pseudo-resistant HTN. All patients underwent screening for secondary causes of HTN. Antihypertensive medications were changed to a fixed dose combination pill (Sevikar/HCT). Ineligible patients had medication changes as per clinical judgement to improve BP control. Repeat CBP and ABP assessments were done at 4 weeks. Results: 170 patients were assessed. The mean age was 59.6 ± 9.6 years, males (78%) and Caucasians (66%). The average number of anti-hypertensive medications was 4.1 ± 1.2. The mean CBP was 154/91mmHg, mean daytime ABP was 150/85mmHg. Following adjustments in medication after 4 weeks, the reduction in Clinic SBP was 14 ± 10 mmHg and DBP was 6.3 ± 6.2 mmHg (n = 145; p &lt; 0.001 for both). The reduction in mean systolic daytime ABP was 8 ± 8.2 mmHg and DBP was 6 ± 7 mmHg (n = 91, p &lt; 0.001 for both). The average number of anti-hypertensive medications reduced to 3.2 ± 1.3. Screening generated 74 new diagnoses and 34 newly detected cases of secondary hypertension (summarised below). Conclusions: High screen failure rate in studies could be considered a waste of time and resources. However, our findings demonstrate considerable collateral benefits for patients: 1. Accessing specialist care as part of the study. 2. Frequent new diagnoses and newly detected secondary HTN. 3. Medication optimisation resulting in clinically meaningful BP reduction and reduced medication burden.

Screening for Hypertension in the INpatient Environment(SHINE): a protocol for a prospective study of diagnostic accuracy among adult hospital patients

IntroductionA significant percentage of patients admitted to hospital have undiagnosed hypertension. However, present hypertension guidelines in the UK, Europe and USA do not define a blood pressure threshold at which...

Effect of alpha-linolenic acid in combination with the flavonol quercetin on markers of cardiovascular disease risk in healthy, non-obese adults: A randomized, double-blinded placebo-controlled crossover trial.

Alpha-linolenic acid (ALA) and quercetin are characteristic compounds in plant-based diets. Cardioprotective effects have been described for both substances, although a possible benefit of combining ALA and quercetin has not, to our knowledge, been evaluated yet. The aim of this study was to investigate the potential independent and additive effects of ALA and quercetin on blood pressure (BP) and lipid and glucose metabolism, as well as on biomarkers of inflammation, oxidative stress, and antioxidant status in healthy, non-obese men and women. Another aim was to examine whether chronic supplementation of supranutritional doses of quercetin would result in an accumulation of plasma quercetin concentration over time. In a double-blinded, placebo-controlled crossover trial, healthy volunteers were randomized to receive 3.6 g/d ALA plus 190 mg/d quercetin or placebo for 8 wk. Data from 67 individuals (34 men, 33 women, mean age: 24.6 y) were assessed. Plasma quercetin, tamarixetin, isorhamnetin, and kaempferol increased significantly from baseline to study end with ALA + quercetin but not with ALA + placebo. No significant effect on office systolic BP, mean 24 h ambulatory BP (ABP), or mean daytime ABP was seen in either study group. Both interventions significantly decreased total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and apolipoprotein B to a similar extent. No effect on high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, apolipoprotein A1, glucose, uric acid, oxidized low-density lipoprotein, C-reactive protein, or lipid-adjusted retinol, α-tocopherol, or β-carotene was seen in either group. Although dietary supplements of 3.6 g/d ALA over an 8-wk period improved lipid profiles in healthy adults, antioxidative and oxidative status, inflammation, and BP remained unchanged. No evidence was seen for an additive or synergistic effect of ALA plus quercetin on markers of cardiovascular disease risk.

Comparability of Automated Office Blood Pressure to Daytime 24-Hour Ambulatory Blood Pressure

BackgroundClinical practice guidelines endorse automated office blood pressure (AOBP) measurement as the preferred in-office measurement modality. However, recent data indicate that this method may underestimate daytime ambulatory BP. The objective of this study was to further assess the comparability of mean AOBP and daytime ambulatory BP in clinical practice. MethodsA retrospective cross-sectional chart review was conducted of 96 consecutive patients referred from primary or specialty care practices to a tertiary care ambulatory BP monitoring service. Six AOBP readings were taken using an appropriately cuffed BpTRU (BpTRU Medical Devices, Coquitlam, Canada) device on the nondominant arm and no rest period (first reading discarded). Twenty-four–hour ambulatory BP monitoring was then performed. Between-group means were compared with paired t tests. The proportion of patients with differences of ≥ 5, 10, and 15 mm Hg was tabulated. ResultsMean age was 52.6 ± 16.7 years, 60% were women, and 79% had previously diagnosed hypertension. Mean AOBPs were 130.8 ± 15.5/82.3 ± 10.7 mm Hg, and mean daytime ambulatory BPs were 142.8 ± 14.9/83.9 ± 11.2 mm Hg (difference of −11.9 ± 13.5/−1.6 ± 7.6; P < 0.001 for systolic BP and P < 0.04 for diastolic BP). Between-group differences were greater in patients with previous hypertension and in those with daytime ambulatory BP levels ≥ 135 mm Hg. The proportions of patients with systolic or diastolic BP differences of ≥ 5, 10 and 15 mm Hg were 89%, 52%, and 33%, respectively. ConclusionsMean AOBP underestimates daytime ambulatory BP. Variability between the 2 methods is high. These findings do not support the premise that AOBP closely approximates daytime ambulatory BP.

Patient characteristics do not predict the individual response to antihypertensive medication: a cross-over trial

International guidelines on hypertension management do not agree on whether patient characteristics can be used for the first choice of treatment of uncomplicated essential hypertension. We wanted to identify predictive patient characteristics to the response of two different classes of antihypertensive drugs in patients with newly diagnosed hypertension in primary care. We conducted a prospective, open label, blinded endpoint cross-over trial in 120 patients with a new diagnosis of hypertension from 10 family practices. Patients received 4 weeks of 12.5 mgr hydrochlorothiazide once daily and 4 weeks of 80 mgr valsartan once daily, each followed by a 4-week washout. The sequence of drugs was randomized. Age, sex and menopausal state were recorded at run in and 24 h ambulatory blood pressure, office blood pressure, plasma renin concentration, NT-proBNP, potassium, estimated glomerular filtration rate, urinary albumin, body mass index and waist circumference at each regimen change. The difference in systolic blood pressure response between both study drugs, calculated from mean daytime ambulatory blood pressures, was the main outcome measure. Ninety-eight patients (52% female; median age 53 years) were eligible for per-protocol-analysis. None of the studied variables were predictive for the difference in systolic blood pressure response. Individual systolic blood pressure responses ranged from an increase by 18 mmHg to a decrease of 39 mmHg. In a relevant group of primary care patients with newly diagnosed hypertension, we were unable to detect predictors of treatment response. This study rather supports the United States and European guidelines than the United Kingdom and Dutch guidelines on hypertension.

Tailored Communication Within Mobile Apps for Diabetes Self-Management: A Systematic Review.

BackgroundThe prevalence of diabetes is increasing and with the requirements for self-management and risk of late complications, it remains a challenge for the individual and society. Patients can benefit from support from health care personnel in their self-management, and the traditional communication between patients and health care personnel is changing. Smartphones and apps offer a unique platform for communication, but apps with integrated health care personnel communication based on patient data are yet to be investigated to provide evidence of possible effects.ObjectiveOur goal was to systematically review studies that aimed to evaluate integrated communication within mobile apps for tailored feedback between patients with diabetes and health care personnel in terms of (1) study characteristics, (2) functions, (3) study outcomes, (4) effects, and (5) methodological quality.MethodsA systematic literature search was conducted following our International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) protocol, searching for apps with integrated communication for persons with diabetes tested in a controlled trial in the period 2008 to 2016. We searched the databases PubMed, Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Cochrane Central, Excerpta Medica database (EMBASE), ClinicalTrials.gov, and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. The search was closed in September 2016. Reference lists of primary articles and review papers were assessed. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed, and we applied the Cochrane risk of bias tool to assess methodological quality.ResultsWe identified 2822 citations and after duplicate removal, we assessed 1128 citations. A total of 6 papers were included in this systematic review, reporting on data from 431 persons participating in small trials of short duration. The integrated communication features were mostly individualized as written non–real-time feedback. The number of functions varied from 2 to 9, and blood glucose tracking was the most common. HbA1c was the most common primary outcome, but the remaining reported outcomes were not standardized and comparable. Because of both the heterogeneity of the included trials and the poor methodological quality of the studies, a meta-analysis was not possible. A statistically significant improvement in the primary measure of outcome was found in 3 of the 6 included studies, of which 2 were HbA1c and 1 was mean daytime ambulatory blood pressure. Participants in the included trials reported positive usability or feasibility postintervention in 5 out of 6 trials. The overall methodological quality of the trials was, however, scored as an uncertain risk of bias.ConclusionsThis systematic review highlights the need for more trials of higher methodological quality. Few studies offer an integrated function for communication and feedback from health care personnel, and the research field represents an area of heterogeneity with few studies of highly rigorous methodological quality. This, in combination with a low number of participants and a short follow-up, is making it difficult to provide reliable evidence of effects for stakeholders.

Renal artery sympathetic denervation: observations from the UK experience.

BackgroundRenal denervation (RDN) may lower blood pressure (BP); however, it is unclear whether medication changes may be confounding results. Furthermore, limited data exist on pattern of ambulatory blood pressure (ABP) response—particularly in those prescribed aldosterone antagonists at the time of RDN.MethodsWe examined all patients treated with RDN for treatment-resistant hypertension in 18 UK centres.ResultsResults from 253 patients treated with five technologies are shown. Pre-procedural mean office BP (OBP) was 185/102 mmHg (SD 26/19; n = 253) and mean daytime ABP was 170/98 mmHg (SD 22/16; n = 186). Median number of antihypertensive drugs was 5.0: 96 % ACEi/ARB; 86 % thiazide/loop diuretic and 55 % aldosterone antagonist. OBP, available in 90 % at 11 months follow-up, was 163/93 mmHg (reduction of 22/9 mmHg). ABP, available in 70 % at 8.5 months follow-up, was 158/91 mmHg (fall of 12/7 mmHg). Mean drug changes post RDN were: 0.36 drugs added, 0.91 withdrawn. Dose changes appeared neutral. Quartile analysis by starting ABP showed mean reductions in systolic ABP after RDN of: 0.4; 6.5; 14.5 and 22.1 mmHg, respectively (p < 0.001 for trend). Use of aldosterone antagonist did not predict response (p > 0.2).ConclusionIn 253 patients treated with RDN, office BP fell by 22/9 mmHg. Ambulatory BP fell by 12/7 mmHg, though little response was seen in the lowermost quartile of starting blood pressure. Fall in BP was not explained by medication changes and aldosterone antagonist use did not affect response.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00392-015-0959-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Office blood pressure is a predictor of aortic elastic properties and urinary protein excretion in subjects with white coat hypertension

BackgroundWhite coat hypertension (WCH) is related to target organ damage and increased cardiovascular risk. Arterial elastic properties and urinary protein excretion are determinants of cardiovascular performance and predictors of outcomes. We investigated whether office blood pressure (BP) is a better determinant of arterial and renal function than the ambulatory BP in WCH patients. MethodsWe studied 440 consecutive untreated non-diabetic patients with WCH (office BP >140/90mmHg, mean daytime ambulatory BP <135/85mmHg). Arterial function was evaluated with carotid–femoral pulse wave velocity (cfPWV), an index of aortic stiffness, and aortic augmentation index (AIx), a composite marker of aortic stiffness and wave reflections. In 24-hour urine, albumin excretion and albumin/creatinine ratio (ACR) were measured as markers of glomerular function and urinary α1-microglobulin was measured as a marker of renal tubular function. ResultsIn univariate analysis, office systolic BP correlated significantly with cfPWV (r=0.245, P<0.001), AIx (r=0.31, P<0.001), albumin (r=0.134, P=0.005), ACR (r=0.199, P<0.001) and α1-microglobulin (r=0.118, P=0.013). In contrast, mean ambulatory systolic BP did not correlate with arterial function or urinary proteins (all P>0.5). Hierarchical multilevel linear regression analysis showed that office systolic BP is an independent determinant of cfPWV (P=0.050), AIx (P=0.029), albumin (P=0.002) and ACR (P=0.001) and has a borderline association with α1-microglobulin (P=0.088). ConclusionsIn non-diabetic WCH individuals, office systolic BP is an independent predictor of aortic elastic properties and urinary protein excretion, whereas ambulatory BP is not. This finding suggests that office BP may be a marker of cardiovascular risk in subjects with WCH.

Treatment: special conditions: Psychological aspects relating to the treatment of hypertension

The objective of this study was to compare serial readings from an in–pharmacy automated blood pressure (BP) kiosk to mean daytime ambulatory BP. A total of 100 community–dwelling adults with hypertension underwent (1) three baseline automated office readings; (2) three in–pharmacy readings on each of four visits (12 total) using the PharmaSmart PS–2000 kiosk; and (3) 24–hour ambulatory BP monitoring between in–pharmacy visits two and three. Paired t–tests, Bland–Altman plots, and Pearson correlation coefficients were used for analysis. Mean BPs were 137.8 ± 13.7/81.9 ± 12.2 mm Hg for in–pharmacy and 135.5 ± 11.7/79.7 ± 10.0 mm Hg for daytime ambulatory (difference of 2.3 ± 9.5/2.2 ± 6.9 mm Hg [P ≤ .05]). Bland–Altman plots depicted a high degree of BP variability but did not show clinically important systematic BP differences. With ambulatory BP as the reference standard, in–pharmacy device results were similar to automated office results. The PharmaSmart PS–2000 closely approximated mean daytime ambulatory BP, supporting the use of serial readings from this device in the assessment of BP.

Abstract 11530: Age-Specific Differences Between Conventional and Ambulatory Daytime Blood Pressure Values

Introduction: Mean daytime ambulatory blood pressure (ABP) values are considered to be lower than conventional BP (CBP) values, but data on this relation among younger individuals &lt;50 years are scarce. To address this issue, we performed a collaborative analysis in a large group of participants representing a wide age range. Methods: CBP and 24-hour ABP were measured in 9550 individuals not taking BP lowering treatment from 13 population based cohorts. We compared the individual differences between daytime ABP and CBP according to 10-year age categories. Age-specific prevalences of white-coat hypertension and masked hypertension were calculated based on guideline-recommended thresholds. Results: Among individuals aged 18-30, 30-40 and 40-50 years, mean daytime systolic and diastolic ABP were significantly higher than the corresponding CBP (6.0, 5.2 and 4.7 mmHg for systolic BP; 2.5, 2.7 and 1.7 mmHg for diastolic BP, all p&lt;0.0001) (Figure). Systolic and diastolic BP indices were similar in participants aged 50-60 years (p=0.20 and 0.11, respectively). In individuals aged 60-70 and ≥70 years, CBP was significantly higher than daytime ABP (5.0 and 13.0 mmHg for systolic BP; 2.0 and 4.2 mmHg for diastolic BP, all p&lt;0.0001) (Figure). Accordingly, the prevalence of white coat hypertension exponentially increased from 2.2% to 19.5% from those aged 18-30 years to those aged ≥70 years, with some variation between men and women (prevalence 8.0% versus 6.1%, p=0.0003). Masked hypertension was more prevalent among men (21.1% versus 11.4%, p&lt;0.0001). The age-specific prevalence of masked hypertension was 18.2%, 27.3%, 27.8%, 20.1% 13.6% and 10.2% in men, and 9.0%, 9.9%, 12.2%, 11.9%, 14.7% and 12.1% in women. Conclusions: In this large collaborative analysis we found that the relation between daytime ABP and CBP strongly varies by age. These findings may have important implications for the diagnosis of hypertension and its subtypes in clinical practice.

Comparison of an in-pharmacy automated blood pressure kiosk to daytime ambulatory blood pressure in hypertensive subjects

The objective of this study was to compare serial readings from an in–pharmacy automated blood pressure (BP) kiosk to mean daytime ambulatory BP. A total of 100 community–dwelling adults with hypertension underwent (1) three baseline automated office readings; (2) three in–pharmacy readings on each of four visits (12 total) using the PharmaSmart PS–2000 kiosk; and (3) 24–hour ambulatory BP monitoring between in–pharmacy visits two and three. Paired t–tests, Bland–Altman plots, and Pearson correlation coefficients were used for analysis. Mean BPs were 137.8 ± 13.7/81.9 ± 12.2 mm Hg for in–pharmacy and 135.5 ± 11.7/79.7 ± 10.0 mm Hg for daytime ambulatory (difference of 2.3 ± 9.5/2.2 ± 6.9 mm Hg [P ≤ .05]). Bland–Altman plots depicted a high degree of BP variability but did not show clinically important systematic BP differences. With ambulatory BP as the reference standard, in–pharmacy device results were similar to automated office results. The PharmaSmart PS–2000 closely approximated mean daytime ambulatory BP, supporting the use of serial readings from this device in the assessment of BP.

Primary prevention of cardiovascular disease: new guidelines, technologies and therapies

A trend in primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) has been a move away from managing isolated risk factors, such as hypertension and dyslipidaemia, towards assessment and management of absolute CVD risk. In Australian guidelines, absolute CVD risk is calculated as the probability of a stroke, transient ischaemic attack, myocardial infarction, angina, peripheral arterial disease or heart failure occurring within the next 5 years. Absolute CVD risk should be regularly assessed in patients aged 45 years or older (35 years or older in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people) using the Australian absolute CVD risk calculator (http://www.cvdcheck.org.au). For patients currently taking a blood pressure (BP)-lowering or lipid-lowering agent, pretreatment values should be used to calculate risk. Patients at high absolute risk of CVD (> 15% over 5 years) should be treated with both BP-lowering and lipid-lowering agents, unless contraindicated or clinically inappropriate. For patients at moderate absolute risk of CVD (10%-15%) treatment with a BP-lowering and/or a lipid-lowering agent should be considered if the risk remains elevated after lifestyle interventions, BP is ≥ 160/100 mmHg, there is a family history of premature CVD, or the patient is of South Asian, Middle Eastern, Maori, Pacific Islander, Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander ethnicity. BP measurements taken using an oscillometric device can be used to approximate mean daytime ambulatory BP.

Homocysteine levels in patients with masked hypertension.

Masked hypertension is a clinical condition, the importance of which is agreed in recent years and which is characterized by increased cardiovascular mortality and morbidity and is thought to be important endothelial dysfunction in the pathophysiology. Plasma total homocysteine levels are accepted as a major independent biomarker for endothelial dysfunction and/or a contributor to hypertension and coronary artery disease. In this study, we aimed to measure the level of serum homocysteine and to evaluate the relationship between the parameters of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in patients with masked hypertension. This cross-sectional observational study included 37 subjects with normal blood pressure, 30 with masked-hypertension and 27 patients with obvious hypertension. Masked hypertension (MHT) was defined as office blood pressure <140/90 mm Hg and mean daytime ambulatory systolic blood pressure in 24 hours monitoring ≥135/85 mm Hg. Homocysteine levels of the subjects were measured by using HPLC system with fluorescent detector. Lipid parameters were measured by routine methods. Mann-Whitney U test was used for statistical analysis. In the analysis of homocysteine, it was observed that there was no difference between the control group and patients with MHT. Patients with high blood pressure showed higher homocysteine levels when compared to MHT (p=0.02). Homocysteine levels showed a weak positive correlation with average systolic blood pressure (r=0.335, p=0.043). Homocysteine levels were higher in smokers than non-smokers. compared with non-smokers group in all participants (p=0.036). We have reached the opinion that in the individuals with no obvious health problems but with MHT, homocysteine levels may not have any significant effect upon high blood pressure levels.

Prevalence of masked hypertension and associated factors in normotensive healthcare workers

Evidence on the elevated cardiovascular risk associated with masked hypertension (MHT) is becoming stronger. Determining the prevalence of MHT in apparently healthy individuals may enable better risk stratification and management. This was a cross-sectional study of normotensive healthcare workers recruited from 52 hypertension units. We included individuals aged at least 18 years with no known history of hypertension and office blood pressure (BP) less than 140/90 mmHg. MHT was defined as mean daytime ambulatory BP of at least 135/85 mmHg. Overall, 485 individuals (mean age 43.1 years, 55% women) were included. The prevalence of MHT was 23.9% [95% confidence interval (CI): 20.1-27.7]. The most prevalent associated cardiovascular risk factors in the total population were smoking (24.9%), dyslipidemia (16.4%), a family history of premature cardiovascular disease (15.9%), and obesity (7.4%). A total of 45.4% of individuals had a family history of hypertension. MHT was associated with male sex [odds ratio (OR) 1.722, 95% CI: 1.091-2.718] and prehypertension (OR 4.561, 95% CI: 2.880-7.222). In univariate analysis, the OR of the diagnosis of MHT increased by 2.3% per year of age. The prevalence of MHT in normotensive healthcare workers in Spain is almost 25%. Therefore, 24-h ambulatory BP monitoring should be routine in occupational health checks in health workers, especially men.

Blood Pressure Measurement in Peritoneal Dialysis: Which Method is Best?

The optimal approach to monitoring blood pressure (BP) in the peritoneal dialysis (PD) population is unclear. Ambulatory BP monitoring reliably predicts prognosis, but can be inconvenient. The accuracy of home BP monitoring in this population is unproven. The automated BpTRU device (BpTRU Medical Devices, Coquitlam, BC, Canada), which provides an average of up to 6 successive in-office BP measurements, has not been studied in this patient group. We studied 17 patients (average age: 54 ± 12 years; 12 men, 5 women; 94% on automated PD) attending a single center. All patients underwent office, home, BpTRU, and ambulatory BP measurement. The reference standard for analysis was daytime ambulatory BP. Correlation between the referent method and each comparator method was determined (Pearson correlation coefficient), and Bland-Altman scatter plots depicting the differences in the BP measurements were constructed. Mean office BP (126.4 ± 16.9/78.8 ± 11.6 mmHg) and BpTRU BP (123.8 ± 13.7/80.7 ± 11.1 mmHg) closely approximated mean daytime ambulatory BP (129.3 ± 14.8/78.2 ± 7.9 mmHg). Mean home BP (143.8 ± 15.0/89.9 ± 28.1 mmHg) significantly overestimated mean daytime systolic BP by 14.2 mmHg (95% confidence interval: 4.3 mmHg to 24.1 mmHg; p = 0.008). Bland-Altman plots demonstrated poorest agreement between home BP and daytime ambulatory BP. No patient had "white-coat hypertension," and only 1 patient had false-resistant hypertension. Most patients showed abnormal nocturnal dipping patterns (non-dipping: n = 11; reverse-dipping: n = 5; normal dipping: n = 1). We report a novel finding that BP measurement using the BpTRU device is more accurate than home BP measurement in a PD population. Potential explanations for this observation include poor home BP measurement technique, use of poorly validated home BP measurement devices, or a reduced prevalence of white-coat effect among PD patients. Our study also confirms that, in the PD population, BP measurements vary considerably with patient location, time of day, and measurement technique.

Primary prevention of cardiovascular disease: new guidelines, technologies and therapies

A trend in primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) has been a move away from managing isolated risk factors, such as hypertension and dyslipidaemia, towards assessment and management of absolute CVD risk. In Australian guidelines, absolute CVD risk is calculated as the probability of a stroke, transient ischaemic attack, myocardial infarction, angina, peripheral arterial disease or heart failure occurring within the next 5 2013s. Absolute CVD risk should be regularly assessed in patients aged 45 2013s or older (35 2013s or older in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people) using the Australian absolute CVD risk calculator (http://www.cvdcheck.org.au). For patients currently taking a blood pressure (BP)-lowering or lipid-lowering agent, pretreatment values should be used to calculate risk. Patients at high absolute risk of CVD (> 15% over 5 2013s) should be treated with both BP-lowering and lipid-lowering agents, unless contraindicated or clinically inappropriate. For patients at moderate absolute risk of CVD (10%-15%) treatment with a BP-lowering and/or a lipid-lowering agent should be considered if the risk remains elevated after lifestyle interventions, BP is ≥ 160/100 mmHg, there is a family history of premature CVD, or the patient is of South Asian, Middle Eastern, Maori, Pacific Islander, Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander ethnicity. BP measurements taken using an oscillometric device can be used to approximate mean daytime ambulatory BP.

Are there consequences of labeling patients with prehypertension? An experimental study of effects on blood pressure and quality of life

ObjectiveThe prehypertension classification was introduced to facilitate prevention efforts among patients at increased risk for hypertension. Although patients who have been told that they have hypertension report worse outcomes than unaware hypertensives, little is known about whether or not prehypertension labeling has negative effects. We evaluated the effects of labeling individuals with prehypertension on blood pressure and health-related quality of life three months later. MethodsOne hundred adults (aged 19 to 82 [mean=40.0] years; 54% women; 64% racial/ethnic minorities) with screening blood pressure in the prehypertensive range (120–139/80–89mmHg) and no history of diagnosis or treatment of elevated blood pressure were randomly assigned to either a “Labeled” group in which they were informed of their prehypertension, or an “Unlabeled” group in which they were not informed. Subjects underwent office blood pressure measurement, 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring and completed self-report questionnaires at baseline and at three months. ResultsMultilevel mixed effects regression analyses indicated that changes in the white coat effect, office blood pressure, mean daytime ambulatory blood pressure, and physical and mental health did not differ significantly between the two groups. Adjusting for age, sex, race/ethnicity and body mass index did not affect the results. ConclusionThese findings suggest that labeling patients with prehypertension does not have negative effects on blood pressure or quality of life. Additional research is needed to develop approaches to communicating with patients about their blood pressure that will maximize the clinical and public health impact of the prehypertension classification.