Office Blood Pressure Readings Research Articles

Automated office blood pressure is in agreement with awake and mean 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure at the lower blood pressure range.

Automated office blood pressure measurement eliminates the white coat effect and is associated with awake ambulatory blood pressure. This study examined whether automated office blood pressure values at lower limits were comparable to those of awake and mean 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure. A total of 552 patients were included in the study, involving 293 (53.1%) men and 259 (46.9%) women, with a mean age 55.0±12.5, of whom 36% were treated for hypertension. Both systolic and diastolic automated office blood pressures exhibited lower values compared to awake ambulatory blood pressure among 254 individuals with systolic automated office blood pressure <130mmHg (119±8mmHg vs 125±11mmHg, P<.0001 and 75±9mmHg vs 79±9mm Hg, P<.0001 for systolic and diastolic BPs, respectively). Furthermore, the comparison of systolic automated office blood pressure to the mean 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure levels also showed lower values (119±8 vs 121±10, P=.007), whereas the diastolic automated office blood pressure measurements were similar to 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure values. Our findings show that when automated office blood pressure readings express values <130/80mmHg in repeated office visits, further investigation should be performed only when masked hypertension is suspected; otherwise, higher automated office blood pressure values could be used for the diagnosis of uncontrolled hypertension, especially in individuals with organ damage.

Urinary Sodium-to-Potassium Ratio and Blood Pressure in CKD

IntroductionIn the general population, urinary sodium-to-potassium (uNa/K) ratio associates more strongly with high blood pressure (BP) than either urinary sodium or potassium alone. Whether this is also the case among patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) is unknown.MethodsWe studied the associations of spot urine sodium-to-creatinine (uNa/Cr), potassium-to-creatinine (uK/Cr), and uNa/K ratios with a single office BP reading in 1660 patients with moderate to severe CKD at inclusion in the CKD-REIN cohort.ResultsPatients' median age was 68 (interquartile range [IQR], 59–76) years; most were men (65%), had moderate CKD (57%), and albuminuria (72%). Mean systolic and diastolic BP was 142/78 mm Hg. Spot uNa/Cr and uNa/K ratios were positively associated with systolic, mean arterial, and pulse pressures. The mean adjusted difference in systolic BP between the highest and the lowest quartile (Q4 vs. Q1) was 4.24 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.53–6.96) mm Hg for uNa/Cr and 4.79 (95% CI, 2.18–7.39) mm Hg for uNa/K. Quartiles of spot uK/Cr were not associated with any BP index. The higher the quartile of uNa/K, the higher the prevalence ratio of uncontrolled (Q4 vs. Q1, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.19–1.72) or apparently treatment-resistant hypertension (Q4 vs. Q1, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.14–1.60). Findings were consistent in a subset of 803 individuals with 2 BP readings.ConclusionIn patients with CKD, higher urinary sodium excretion is associated with higher BP, but unlike in general population, lower potassium excretion is not. Urinary Na/K does not add significant value in assessing high BP risk, except perhaps for hypertension control assessment.

SO035EFFECT OF DIETARY SALT REDUCTION ON BLOOD PRESSURE IN KIDNEY TRANSPLANT PATIENTS: A RANDOMISED CONTROLLED TRIAL

Abstract Background and Aims Cardiovascular morbidity and mortality are increased in kidney transplant patients. High blood pressure (BP) contributes significantly to this risk and is associated with shortened allograft survival. Dietary salt reduction is widely recommended as a strategy to lower BP in the general population and in chronic kidney disease. Due to a lack of evidence there is currently no consensus on dietary salt restriction in kidney transplant patients. The primary aim of the study was to examine the impact of reduced dietary salt intake on BP in kidney transplant patients. Method Sixty stable kidney transplant patients, ≥ 6-months post-transplantation, with BP ≥120/80 mmHg, and sodium intake ≥80 mmol/24hrs, were randomised in this parallel-designed study to receive either a regular-salt diet (target 150 mmol/24hr) or a low-salt diet (target 80 mmol/24hr) for 8-weeks. The primary outcome measure was systolic and diastolic BP. Secondary outcome measures included 24-hour ambulatory BP (ABP) and proteinuria. Dietary salt intake was assessed by 48-hour urinary sodium excretion. Results At baseline, patients (72% men) were 56±11 years with estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) 53±18 mL/min/1.73m2. Mean urinary sodium was 128±42 mmol/24hr, mean systolic BP was 132±12 mmHg, and mean diastolic BP was 77±10 mmHg. At the end of the intervention period sodium excretion was significantly lower in the low-salt group compared with the regular-salt group (90±37 vs. 132±51 mmol/24hr; adjusted mean difference, -36 [95% CI, -59 to -14] mmol/24hr; P=0.002). We found no difference in systolic BP (adjusted mean difference, -2 [95% CI, -12 to 9] mmHg; P=0.750), diastolic BP (adjusted mean difference, 0 [95% CI, -4 to 4] mmHg; P=0.887), 24-hour systolic ABP (adjusted mean difference, -3 [95% CI, -9 to 2] mmHg; P=0.213) or 24-hour diastolic ABP (adjusted mean difference, -2 [95% CI, -5 to 1] mmHg; P=0.267). There was no significant effect on proteinuria or eGFR. Conclusion In this study baseline urinary sodium was lower than expected and baseline BP was well controlled. Reducing dietary salt by 2g/day did not have a significant effect on office blood pressure readings.

Preference of blood pressure measurement methods by primary care doctors in Hong Kong: a cross-sectional survey

BackgroundHypertension is the most common chronic disease and is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality. Its screening, diagnosis, and management depend heavily on accurate blood pressure (BP) measurement. It is recommended that the diagnosis of hypertension should be confirmed or corroborated by out-of-office BP values, measured using ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) and home BP monitoring (HBPM). When office BP is used, automated office BP (AOBP) measurement method, which automatically provides an average of 3–5 BP readings, should be preferred. This study aimed to describe the BP measurement methods commonly used by doctors in primary care in Hong Kong, to screen, diagnose, and manage hypertensive patients.MethodsIn this cross-sectional survey, all doctors registered in the Hong Kong “Primary Care Directory” were mailed a questionnaire, asking their preferred BP-measuring methods to screen, diagnose, and manage hypertensive patients. Furthermore, we also elicited information on the usual number of office BP or HBPM readings obtained, to diagnose or manage hypertension.ResultsOf the 1738 doctors included from the directory, 445 responded. Manual measurement using a mercury or aneroid device was found to be the commonest method to screen (63.1%), diagnose (56.4%), and manage (72.4%) hypertension. There was a significant underutilisation of ABPM, with only 1.6% doctors using this method to diagnose hypertension. HBPM was used by 22.2% and 56.8% of the respondents to diagnose and manage hypertension, respectively. A quarter (26.7%) of the respondents reported using only one in-office BP reading, while around 40% participants reported using ≥12 HBPM readings. Doctors with specialist qualification in family medicine were more likely to use AOBP in clinics and to obtain the recommended number of office BP readings for diagnosis and management of hypertension.ConclusionPrimary Care doctors in Hong Kong prefer to use manual office BP values, measured using mercury or aneroid devices, to screen, diagnose, and manage hypertension, highlighting a marked underutilisation of AOBP and out-of-office BP measuring techniques, especially that of ABPM. Further studies are indicated to understand the underlying reasons and to minimise the gap between real-life clinical practice and those recommended, based on scientific advances.Trial registrationClinicaltrial.gov; ref. no.: NCT03926897.

The optimal use of automated office blood pressure measurement in clinical practice.

This evidence-based article endorses the use of automated office blood pressure (AOBP). AOBP is the most favorable office blood pressure (BP) measuring technique as it provides accurate readings with 3-15mmHg lower values than the casual conventional office measurements with auscultatory or semi-automated oscillometric devices and relates closely to awake ABP readings. The AOBP technique seems to be superior to conventional office BP in predicting hypertension-mediated organ damage and appears to be equally reliable to awake ABP in the prediction of cardiovascular (CV) disease. AOBP readings should be obtained either unattended, with the patient alone in the examination room, or attended with the presence of personnel in the room but with no talking to the patient, although this recommendation is not frequently followed in routine clinical practice. To optimize office BP readings, the type of device, the rest period before AOBP measurements (preceding rest), and the time intervals between measurements were evaluated. As AOBP readings have the advantage of removing many confounding factors, the authors propose to perform measurements with a preceding rest in all patients at the initial visit; if AOBP readings remain <130mmHg in subsequent visits, measurements could be accepted, otherwise, if are higher, patients should be evaluated by out-of-office BP measurements.

The relationship between nocturnal blood pressure drop and body composition indices among hypertensive patients.

Among hypertensive subjects, the lack of physiological blood pressure drop as part of diurnal blood pressure variations is termed as non-dipper blood pressure. Herein, we investigated the relationship between hypertension character and body composition indices. This study included a total of 104 patients (54 M, mean age: 47.6±12.1years). Patients' heights, weights, and waist and hip circumferences were measured, and body composition indices were calculated. All patients' office blood pressure measurements and 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure readings were recorded. A blood pressure drop of at least 10% compared with daytime blood pressure readings is called dipper blood pressure, while a drop of less than 10% is termed as non-dipper blood pressure. Based on ambulatory blood pressure readings, the patients were grouped into Group 1 (dipper pattern; 51 pts, 34 M, mean age 45.6±12.3) and Group 2 (non-dipper pattern, 53 pts; 20 M, mean age 49.6±11.6). The proportion of females and smokers were significantly lower in Group 1 than Group 2. BRI, BAI, waist-to-height ratio, and waist circumference were significantly higher in Group 2 than Group 1. There were significant positive correlations between body roundness index (BRI), body adiposity index (BAI), waist-to-weight ratio, and WC and nocturnal mean systolic and diastolic blood pressure readings. Percent systolic nocturnal drop was significantly correlated with waist-to-height ratio, BAI, and BRI. Similarly, percent diastolic nocturnal drop and waist-to-height ratio, BAI, and BRI were correlated. In conclusion, the relatively new body composition indices, namely BRI and BAI, are more closely related to nocturnal blood pressure readings among non-dipper subjects.

Randomized Dose-Response Study of the New Dual Endothelin Receptor Antagonist Aprocitentan in Hypertension.

This study examined the dose-response characteristics of aprocitentan, a dual endothelin A/endothelin B receptor antagonist, in patients with essential hypertension. In a randomized, double-blind, parallel study design, eligible patients with a sitting diastolic blood pressure (BP) of 90-109 mm Hg received aprocitentan 5, 10, 25, or 50 mg, placebo, or lisinopril 20 mg as a positive control once daily for 8 weeks. Multiple automated office BP readings were obtained with patients resting unattended (unattended automated office BP) at baseline, weeks 2, 4, and 8. Ambulatory BP was monitored for 24 hours at baseline and week 8. After a single-blind placebo run-in period, 490 eligible patients were randomized to the double-blind phase, with 409 patients completing 8 weeks of therapy per protocol. Aprocitentan 10, 25, and 50 mg decreased sitting systolic/diastolic unattended automated office BP from baseline to week 8 (placebo-corrected decreases: 7.05/4.93, 9.90/6.99, and 7.58/4.95 mm Hg, respectively, P≤0.014 versus placebo), compared with an unattended automated office BP reduction of 4.84/3.81 mm Hg with lisinopril 20 mg. For patients with valid ambulatory BP, aprocitentan 10, 25, and 50 mg significantly decreased placebo-corrected 24-hour BP by 3.99/4.04, 4.83/5.89, and 3.67/4.45 mm Hg, respectively. Incidence of adverse events was similar in the aprocitentan groups (22.0%-40.2%) and the placebo group (36.6%). Aprocitentan produced dose-dependent decreases in hemoglobin, hematocrit, albumin, and uric acid, an increase in estimated plasma volume, but no change in weight versus placebo. These findings support further investigation of aprocitentan at doses of 10 to 25 mg in hypertension. Registration- URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02603809.

Twenty-Four-Hour Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring.

The diagnosis, management, and estimated mortality risk in patients with hypertension have been historically based on clinic or office blood pressure readings. Current evidence indicates that 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring should be an integral part of hypertension care. The 24-hour ambulatory monitors currently available on the market are small devices connected to the arm cuff with tubing that measure blood pressure every 15 to 30 minutes. After 24 hours, the patient returns, and the data are downloaded, including any information requested by the physician in a diary. The most useful information includes the 24-hour average blood pressure, the average daytime blood pressure, the average nighttime blood pressure, and the calculated percentage drop in blood pressure at night. The most widely used criteria for 24-hour measurements are from the American Heart Association 2017 guidelines and the European Society of Hypertension 2018 guidelines. Two important scenarios described in this document are white coat hypertension, in which patients have normal blood pressures at home but high blood pressures during office visits, and masked hypertension, in which patients are normotensive in the clinic but have high blood pressures outside of the office. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services has made changes in its policy to allow reimbursement for a broader use of 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring within some specific guidelines. Primary care physicians should make more use of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring, especially in patients with difficult to manage hypertension.

Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring in HIV-Infected Patients: Usefulness for Cardiovascular Risk Assessment.

Background:There is a lack of consensus regarding the risk of hypertension in HIV-infected patients compared to the general population. Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) is the most accurate method for the hypertension diagnosis. Nevertheless, it is rarely used in HIV clinical care.Materials and Methods:All HIV-infected patients who underwent 24 hours ABPM were included. The agreement between office blood pressure (BP) readings and ABPM was analyzed. The rate of patients with masked hypertension (MH), isolated clinical hypertension, and nocturnal hypertension was obtained. Furthermore, it was analyzed if the differences between both methods may affect the cardiovascular risk (CVR) assessment.Results:A total of 116 patients were included. The κ coefficient between office BP and ABPM was 0.248. Over a quarter of the cohort was diagnosed with MH—25.8% (CI 95% 17.7%-34.0%), and 12% (CI 95%: 6.1%-16.1%) was diagnosed with ICH. Moreover, 19% of patients had hypertension exclusively during the night. The patients classified as low risk according to the CVR scores had a different diagnosis with ABPM than with office BP (P < .001).Conclusions:The agreement between office BP and ABPM was low in HIV-infected patients. Ambulatory BP monitoring is useful in HIV-infected patients as a hypertension diagnosis method, especially among patients classified as low risk.

From Clinical Trials to Bedside: the Use of Antihypertensives in Aged Individuals. Part 1: Evaluation and Evidence of Treatment Benefit

Use of antihypertensives in older adults can be complicated by the potential for undesired effects on comorbidities, adverse effects of the drugs, and overall medication burden. The purpose of this two-part review is to discuss contemporary issues encountered in the management of hypertension in aged individuals, with a particular focus on the individualization of treatment. In part 1, we discuss the evaluation of the aged hypertensive patient and review the clinical trial evidence for treatment benefit of hypertension in the elderly. Elderly patients with suspected hypertension need careful evaluation of their blood pressure, as errors in measurement technique, inaccurate devices, or overreliance on office blood pressure readings may lead to under- or over-treatment, thereby increasing risks of adverse medication effects and/or cardiovascular events. Epidemiologic evidence in older adults suggests a link between low blood pressure and increased mortality. However, key prospective hypertension trials such as HYVET and SPRINT, which were focused in mostly healthy, community-dwelling elderly cohorts, have unequivocally demonstrated benefits of lowering blood pressure in reducing cardiovascular events in the very elderly. Recent evidence also suggests benefit in reducing the risks of cognitive impairment. Hypertension is a major modifiable risk factor and the benefits of treatment in lowering cardiovascular events are realized for most individuals, even at advanced ages.

Self-blood pressure monitoring as a tool to increase hypertension awareness, adherence to antihypertensive therapy, and blood pressure control.

Self-blood pressure monitoring as a tool to increase hypertension awareness, adherence to antihypertensive therapy, and blood pressure control.

ACCURACY OF SEQUENTIAL BLOOD PRESSURE MEASUREMENTS IN COMPARISON TO AMBULATORY BLOOD PRESSURE MEASUREMENTS

Objective: Accurate blood pressure measurement is crucial for diagnosis and follow up hypertension. Office blood pressure may be misleading in certain situations. Our study aimed to compare the accuracy and degree of agreement of automated sequential blood pressure with office blood pressure and ambulatory blood pressure readings Design and method: This was a cross sectional observational study that included patients who were known to be hypertensive and coming to check up their blood pressure. The study was conducted in Kasr El-Aini Specialized hypertension clinic. Full medical history, clinical examination, electrocardiogram, fundus examination and essential labs (e.g. urine analysis, fasting blood sugar, serum potassium, creatinine, lipid profile and hemoglobin) were done for each patient. Office blood pressure was recorded by using digital sphygmomanometer device (Omrone-6 automated device), automated sequential blood pressure by using the Mobile-O- Graph, PWA device over half an hour. The ambulatory blood pressure readings were taken within 24 hours from the previous measurements. All measurements were taken according to the European society guidelines for the management of hypertension. Results: 64 patients were included. Their age ranged between 20 and 85 years (mean ± SD of age 50.0 ± 15.0 years). There were 51.1% female. The office blood pressure readings were significantly higher than the automated sequential blood pressure (142.7 ± 15.5 versus 137.8 ± 16.7 mmHg, P < 0.0001) for systolic blood pressure and (88.5 ± 12.3 versus 86.1 ± 13.8 mmHg, P < 0.0001) for diastolic blood pressure. And higher than the day time ambulatory blood pressure readings (142.7 ± 15.5 versus 135.8 ± 15.7 mmHg, P < 0.0001) for systolic blood pressure and (88.5 ± 12.3 versus 82.1 ± 13.7 mmHg, P < 0.0001) for diastolic blood pressure. The automated sequential blood pressure has a strong positive correlation with day time ambulatory blood pressure(r = 0.74, P < 0.0001). There is a moderate degree of agreement between sequential systolic blood pressure and day time systolic ambulatory blood pressure (kappa = 0.59, P < 0.001). Conclusions: Automated sequential blood pressure measurement is significantly lower than office blood pressure measured by semi-automated electronic devices, and provides a reading which has significant correlation with the day time ambulatory blood pressure.

Reproducibility of masked uncontrolled hypertension detected through home blood pressure monitoring.

Masked uncontrolled hypertension (MUCH) is an entity described in treated hypertensive subjects, where office blood pressure (BP) is well controlled and out-of-office BP is elevated. It has been related to a higher cardiovascular risk. However, the reproducibility of MUCH has been scarcely studied. In this study, we aimed to determine the reproducibility of MUCH detected through home blood pressure monitoring (HBPM). Two sets of measurements were performed in hypertensive adults under stable treatment with a 1-week interval. Each set of measurements included three office BP readings and a 4-day HBPM with duplicate readings in the morning, afternoon, and evening (the same validated oscillometric device was employed in both settings). We determined the percentage of agreement regarding the presence of MUCH in the two sets of measurements and quantified such agreement through the Cohen's kappa coefficient (κ), its 95% confidence interval, and P value. We included 105 patients (median age 58.6 [IQR 45.6-67.2] years old, 53.4% men). MUCH prevalence on at least one occasion was 22.3% (95% CI: 15.2-31.5). The reproducibility of MUCH was scant: κ=0.19 (95% CI: 0.0002-0.38), P=0.02, due to the poor reproducibility of the office BP component of MUCH in comparison with the home BP component: κ=0.21 (95% CI: 0.03-0.39), P=0.01 vs κ=0.48 (95% CI 0.29-0.67), P<0.001, respectively. In conclusion, the reproducibility of MUCH detected through HBPM is minimal, mainly due to the poor reproducibility of office BP measurements. An HBPM-based strategy for the management of patients with MUCH may be more adequate in terms of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality.

Review: Automated office BP measures are similar to awake ambulatory BP and lower than other office BP measures.

Source Citation Roerecke M, Kaczorowski J, Myers MG. Comparing automated office blood pressure readings with other methods of blood pressure measurement for identifying patients with possible hyper...

Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring: Profiles in Chronic Kidney Disease Patients and Utility in Management.

Optimal control of blood pressure (BP) may reduce the risk of progression of CKD. Misclassification of hypertension (HTN) and status of control may result in suboptimal management. Clinic or home BP may overestimate or underestimate status of control compared with ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM), which is considered the gold standard. The latter relates not only to the superiority of ABPM concerning outcome prognosis but also to its ability to accurately diagnose white coat and masked HTN, which is critical in assuring adequate BP control. However, ABPM has not gained widespread use in practice because of limited third-party reimbursement and a paucity of high quality randomized controlled intervention studies evaluating its use. Herein, we review HTN phenotypes that have been identified in patients with CKD, and the potential value of ABPM in this high-risk population.

Automated Office Blood Pressure Readings Are Nearly Identical to Awake Ambulatory BPs

Awake ambulatory blood pressure (BP) measurement — by devices that repeatedly record BP during 24 hours — is considered to be more accurate than

Comparing Automated Office Blood Pressure Readings With Other Methods of Blood Pressure Measurement for Identifying Patients With Possible Hypertension

ImportanceAutomated office blood pressure (AOBP) measurement involves recording several blood pressure (BP) readings using a fully automated oscillometric sphygmomanometer with the patient resting alone in a quiet place. Although several studies have shown AOBP measurement to be more accurate than routine office BP measurement and not subject to a “white coat effect,” the cumulative evidence has not yet been systematically reviewed.ObjectiveTo perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the association between AOBP and office BP readings measured in routine clinical practice and in research studies, and ambulatory BP recorded during awake hours, as the latter is a standard for predicting future cardiovascular events.Data SourcesThe MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched from 2003 to April 25, 2018.Study SelectionStudies on systolic and diastolic BP measurement by AOBP in comparison with awake ambulatory BP, routine office BP, and research BP measurements were included if they contained 30 patients or more.Data Extraction and SynthesisStudy characteristics were abstracted independently and random effects meta-analyses and meta-regressions were conducted.Main Outcomes and MeasuresPooled mean differences (95% CI) of systolic and diastolic BP between types of BP measurement.ResultsData were compiled from 31 articles comprising 9279 participants (4736 men and 4543 women). In samples with systolic AOBP of 130 mm Hg or more, routine office and research systolic BP readings were substantially higher than AOBP readings, with a pooled mean difference of 14.5 mm Hg (95% CI, 11.8-17.2 mm Hg; n = 9; I2 = 94.3%; P < .001) for routine office systolic BP readings and 7.0 mm Hg (95% CI, 4.9-9.1 mm Hg; n = 9; I2 = 85.7%; P < .001) for research systolic BP readings. Systolic awake ambulatory BP and AOBP readings were similar, with a pooled mean difference of 0.3 mm Hg (95% CI, −1.1 to 1.7 mm Hg; n = 19; I2 = 90%; P < .001).Conclusions and RelevanceAutomated office blood pressure readings, only when recorded properly with the patient sitting alone in a quiet place, are more accurate than office BP readings in routine clinical practice and are similar to awake ambulatory BP readings, with mean AOBP being devoid of any white coat effect. There has been some reluctance among physicians to adopt this technique because of uncertainty about its advantages compared with more traditional methods of recording BP during an office visit. Based on the evidence, AOBP should now be the preferred method for recording BP in routine clinical practice.

A Comparison of the Diagnostic Accuracy of Common Office Blood Pressure Measurement Protocols.

The optimal approach to measuring office blood pressure (BP) is uncertain. We aimed to compare BP measurement protocols that differed based on numbers of readings within and between visits and by assessment method. We enrolled a sample of 707 employees without known hypertension or cardiovascular disease, and obtained 6 standardized BP readings during each of 3 office visits at least 1 week apart, using mercury sphygmomanometer and BpTRU oscillometric devices (18 readings per participant) for a total of 12,645 readings. We used confirmatory factor analysis to develop a model estimating "true" office BP that could be used to compare the probability of correctly classifying participants' office BP status using differing numbers and types of office BP readings. Averaging 2 systolic BP readings across 2 visits correctly classified participants as having BP below or above the 140 mm Hg threshold at least 95% of the time if the averaged reading was <134 or >149 mm Hg, respectively. Our model demonstrated that more confidence was gained by increasing the number of visits with readings than by increasing the number of readings within a visit. No clinically significant confidence was gained by dropping the first reading vs. averaging all readings, nor by measuring with a manual mercury device vs. with an automated oscillometric device. Averaging 2 BP readings across 2 office visits appeared to best balance increased confidence in office BP status with efficiency of BP measurement, though the preferred measurement strategy may vary with the clinical context.

Attended and Unattended Automated Office Blood Pressure Measurements Have Better Agreement With Ambulatory Monitoring Than Conventional Office Readings.

BackgroundAutomated office blood pressure (AOBP) measurement is superior to conventional office blood pressure (OBP) because it eliminates the “white coat effect” and shows a strong association with ambulatory blood pressure.Methods and ResultsWe conducted a cross‐sectional study in 146 participants with office hypertension, and we compared AOBP readings, taken with or without the presence of study personnel, before and after the conventional office readings to determine whether their variation in blood pressure showed a difference in blood pressure values. We also compared AOBP measurements with daytime ambulatory blood pressure monitoring and conventional office readings. The mean age of the studied population was 56±12 years, and 53.4% of participants were male. Bland–Altman analysis revealed a bias (ie, mean of the differences) of 0.6±6 mm Hg systolic for attended AOBP compared with unattended and 1.4±6 and 0.1±6 mm Hg bias for attended compared with unattended systolic AOBP when measurements were performed before and after conventional readings, respectively. A small bias was observed when unattended and attended systolic AOBP measurements were compared with daytime ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (1.3±13 and 0.6±13 mm Hg, respectively). Biases were higher for conventional OBP readings compared with unattended AOBP (−5.6±15 mm Hg for unattended AOBP and oscillometric OBP measured by a physician, −6.8±14 mm Hg for unattended AOBP and oscillometric OBP measured by a nurse, and −2.1±12 mm Hg for unattended AOBP and auscultatory OBP measured by a second physician).ConclusionsOur findings showed that independent of the presence or absence of medical staff, AOBP readings revealed similar values that were closer to daytime ambulatory blood pressure monitoring than conventional office readings, further supporting the use of AOBP in the clinical setting.

Automated Office Blood Pressure Measurement.

Manual blood pressure (BP) recorded in routine clinical practice is relatively inaccurate and associated with higher readings compared to BP measured in research studies in accordance with standardized measurement guidelines. The increase in routine office BP is the result of several factors, especially the presence of office staff, which tends to make patients nervous and also allows for conversation to occur. With the disappearance of the mercury sphygmomanometer because of environmental concerns, there is greater use of oscillometric BP recorders, both in the office setting and elsewhere. Although oscillometric devices may reduce some aspects of observer BP measurement error in the clinical setting, they are still associated with higher BP readings, known as white coat hypertension (for diagnosis) or white coat effect (with treated hypertension). Now that fully automated sphygmomanometers are available which are capable of recording several readings with the patient resting quietly, there is no longer any need to have office staff present when BP is being recorded. Such readings are called automated office blood pressure (AOBP) and they are both more accurate than conventional manual office BP and not associated with the white coat phenomena. AOBP readings are also similar to the awake ambulatory BP and home BP, both of which are relatively good predictors of cardiovascular risk. The available evidence suggests that AOBP should now replace manual or electronic office BP readings when screening patients for hypertension and also after antihypertensive drug therapy is initiated.