Unattended Blood Pressure Research Articles

Agreement between resting heart rate measured by unattended automated office and office blood pressure measurement, ambulatory blood pressure monitoring, or electrocardiography.

The application of unattended blood pressure measurement (uAOBPM) for resting heart rate (RHR) assessment is unknown. To assess the agreement between RHR measured during uAOBPM and other methods, the authors conducted a comparability study with office blood pressure measurement (OBPM), ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM), and electrocardiogram (ECG) in a group of 110 participants referred for ABPM. RHR measured with uAOBPM (70.8±12.5 bpm) was significantly lower than OBPM (72.8±12.6 bpm) but higher than measured by 24h ABPM (67.5±10.2 bpm). There was no significant difference was found between RHR measured by uAOBPM and daytime ABPM (70.3±11.2 bpm) or ECG (69.1±11.6 bpm). Using Bland-Altman statistics, the authors discovered a small difference in agreement between RHR measured by uAOBPM and daytime ABPM (bias: 0.4 with 95% confidence interval: -0.8 to 1.6 bpm), with a poorer agreement with OBPM (bias -2 with 95% confidence interval: -2.8 to -1.3 bpm) and ECG (bias 1.6 with 95% confidence interval: 0.5 to 2.7 bpm). The authors found significant agreement between uAOBPM and ECG in identifying subjects with RHR>80 bpm OBPM, with Cohen's kappa coefficients of 0.783 and 0.671, respectively. Their findings indicate that RHR measured with uAOBPM remains in acceptable agreement with OBPM, ABPM, and ECG, the best agreement obtained with RHR from daytime ABPM.

Unattended versus conventional blood pressure measurements in hospitalized hypertensive patients.

This study aims to compare the differences between unattended and conventional blood pressure measurements in hospitalized hypertensive patients. In fall of 2019, hypertensive patients at Ruijin Hospital underwent two rounds of unattended and conventional (nurse-monitored) blood pressure measurement. Both rounds used the same electronic blood pressure monitor with measurements taken three times, 30 s apart. Comparison was made using intra-class correlation coefficients, Bland-Altman plots, paired t-tests, etc. Among the 92 subjects in the study, the median age was 50 years old, with women accounting for 33.7%. Among the subjects, the median duration of hypertension was 8.0 years. The prevalence of diabetes, coronary heart disease, and stroke were 26.1%, 5.4%, and 6.5%, respectively. Whether unattended or conventional measurements were taken first, the average blood pressure measured first was slightly higher than the one measured later, but the difference was within 1-2 mmHg. Except that the average DBP during the round of conventional blood pressure measurements was significantly reduced by 1.6 mmHg compared to the conventional DBP, there were no other significant differences. Subgroup analysis by age, gender, BMI, and diabetes showed no significant difference in blood pressure measurement results between unattended and conventional methods. No significant difference was observed between unattended and conventional methods of blood pressure measurement in hospitalized hypertensive patients. Unattended blood pressure measurement can be adopted as the current standard for blood pressure management in hospitalized patients.

Abstract P311: Revisiting unattended vs attended automated office blood pressure measurements: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: Standardized automated office blood pressure (AOBP) measurement is now widely accepted as the preferred method for monitoring blood pressure (BP). However, disagreements persist amongst expert societies as to the need to perform AOBP in an unattended manner, where the patient is left alone in a quiet room. In 2019, two meta-analyses aiming to quantify the differences between unattended and attended BP showed opposite results. prompting the publication of several more studies on this subject. Our objective was thus to reassess the BP differences between unattended and attended AOBP when performed with the same device and an identical measurement protocol. Methods: This systematic review with meta-analysis was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines and is registered on PROSPERO. Studies were included if both unattended and attended AOBP were measured on the same participants in a randomized or alternating sequence manner during a single visit with the same device and an identical measurement protocol apart from attendance status. Four databases were searched (Embase, Medline, Web of Science, Google Scholar). The primary outcome was the difference between unattended and attended systolic (SBP) and diastolic (DBP) BP, expressed as weighted mean differences (95% confidence interval) using random-effects models. Results: From 8,088 screened studies, data was extracted from 15 studies which met the inclusion criteria (n=1,747 participants). In the pooled analysis, the attended compared with unattended BP was higher for SBP by 2.7 mmHg (95%CI 0.6 to 4.7) and DBP by 0.9 mmHg (95%CI 0.1 to 1.8). In leave-one out analyses, results were similar except when excluding the study with the most extreme BP difference (Chotruangnapa 2023) where the difference became non-significant. Conclusion: Standardized attended AOBP measurements result in slightly higher readings than unattended AOBP. Whether such small differences translate into clinically significant changes in management of BP remains uncertain. Therefore, standardized attended AOBP could be viewed as a reasonable option for BP measurement in a real-life clinical setting.

Abstract P108: Correlations of attended and unattended office blood pressure measurements with Left Ventricular Mass in untreated hypertensives.

Introduction: Unattended (UA) office blood pressure (BP) measurements have been proposed as better substitutes for attended (AT) BP readings for the diagnosis and monitoring of patients with hypertension (HTN). A superior correlation of UA over AT BP measurements with Left Ventricular Hypertrophy (LVH), an early marker of hypertensive organ damage has not been conclusively demonstrated. We hypothesized that in a group with untreated HTN, UA BP would correlate more strongly with left ventricular hypertrophy than AT BP. Methods: Newly diagnosed untreated patients with HTN presenting newly to an outpatient clinic in Nigeria were consented as part of a larger study. Three sets of AT and UA seated BP readings were carried out using a validated device followed by same-day echocardiographic assessment of their Left Ventricular Mass Indexed to Body surface area (LVMI). Pearson’s coefficient (r) was determined and a 2-tailed significance was defined by a two-tailed P value (P) less than 0.05. Coefficients were compared using Fisher r to z transformation. Results: A total of 49 participants (female=25) were recruited with a mean age of 46.2 +/- 9 years. The mean of the AT BP in the cohort (mAT) was 157.1 +/- 13.5mmHg, while the mean of the UA BP was 151.9 +/- 15.7 with no significant difference in both (P=0.085). The mean LVMI of the cohort was 102.3 +/- 28.7 mg/m2. Both the mAT BP (r= 0.304, P= 0.034) and the mUA BP (r=0.354, P=0.013) positively correlated with LVMI, with no significant difference in the strength of both correlations with r to z transformation (z=0.27, P=0.394 ). Conclusion: In a small cohort of newly diagnosed Nigerian hypertensives, both attended and unattended systolic office blood pressure readings correlated positively with left ventricular mass indexed to body surface area, with no significant difference in the strength of their correlation. Having failed to demonstrate a superior correlation of unattended blood pressure readings with LVH, our findings support the continued use of attended office blood pressure readings for clinical monitoring in busy time-constrained office settings where unattended office blood pressure monitoring may not be feasible. Larger studies are however required to confirm these findings.

Unattended blood pressure measurement: is it really superior to traditional clinic readings?

Unattended blood pressure measurement: is it really superior to traditional clinic readings?

Prevalence of masked hypertension in attended versus unattended office blood pressure measurement.

There is a controversial debate regarding whether unattended blood pressure (BP) measurement should be regarded as the new gold standard of office BP measurement. Unattended BP measurement eliminates the white-coat effect and reduces external influences on the patient. On the other hand, it might underestimate real-life BP. The present study compares the prevalence of masked hypertension using attended versus unattended office BP measurements. We performed a cross-sectional study on 213 patients in a general practitioner's outpatient clinic and compared attended and unattended office BP with 24h-ambulatory BP monitoring (24h-ABPM). Masked hypertension was defined as pressure ≥135/85mmHg in daytime ABPM with office systolic BP<140/90mmHg. Median attended and unattended office BPs were 140/86 and 134/80mmHg with a median 24h-BP of 129/79mmHg and daytime ABP of 133/82mmHg. The number of patients with masked hypertension was 45/213 (21.2%) using unattended and 23/213 (10.8%) using attended office BP measurements (p<.0001). Bland-Altman analysis revealed a 7.4mmHg systolic and 6.2mmHg diastolic bias between the attended versus unattended office BP, and two systolic and -1.7mmHg diastolic biases between the unattended office BP and daytime ambulatory BP. In linear regression analysis, an unattended office BP of 134mmHg corresponded to 140mmHg in attended BP measurement. Using a cut-off of 135/85mmHg instead of 140/90mmHg in unattended office BP measurement, the rate of masked hypertension was 26/213 (12.2%). Thus, unattended office BP measurement results in a substantial increase in the prevalence of masked hypertension using the traditional definition of hypertension. The present findings suggest that it might be reasonable to use a definition of 135/85mmHg.

PREVALENCE OF MASKED HYPERTENSION IN ATTENDED VS. UNATTENDED OFFICE BLOOD PRESSURE MEASUREMENT

Objective: There is a controversial debate, whether unattended blood pressure (BP) measurement should be regarded as the new gold standard of office BP measurement, since it eliminates the white-coat effect and reduces external influences on the patient. On the other hand, it might underestimate real life BP. The present study compares the prevalence of masked hypertension using attended vs. unattended office BP measurement. Design and method: We performed a cross-sectional study in 213 patients in a general practioners outpatient clinic and compared attended and unattended office BP with 24h-ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (24h-ABPM). Masked hypertension was defined as pressure &gt;=135/85mmHg in daytime ABPM with office systolic BP&lt;140/90mmHg. Results: Median attended and unattended office BPs were 140/86 and 134/80mmHg with median 24h-BP of 129/79mmHg and daytime-ABP of 133/82mmHg. The number of patients with masked hypertension was 45/213 (21.2%) using unattended and 23/213 (10.8%) using attended office BP measurement (p&lt;0.0001). Bland-Altman analysis revealed biases of 7.4mmHg systolic and 6.2mmHg diastolic between the attended vs. unattended office BP and biases of 2 systolic and -1.7mmHg diastolic between unattended office BP and daytime ambulatory BP. In linear regression analysis an unattended office BP of 134mmHg corresponded to 140mmHg in attended BP measurement. Using a cut-off of 135/85mmHg instead of 140/90mmHg in unattended office BP measurement the rate of masked hypertension was 26/213 (12.2%). Conclusions: Thus, unattended office BP measurement results in a substantial increase in the prevalence of masked hypertension using the traditional definition of hypertension. The present findings suggest that it might be reasonable to use a definition of 135/85mmHg.

DIAGNOSTIC PERFORMANCE OF COMMUNITY HEALTH WORKER-LED ATTENDED AND UNATTENDED OFFICE BLOOD PRESSURE MEASUREMENTS IN RURAL SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA

Objective: The burden of hypertension in rural sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) has been on the rise. In rural SSA, screening, diagnosis and treatment monitoring for hypertension is typically through attended office blood pressure (OBP) conducted by a trained health worker. A community-centered approach where community health workers (CHWs) conduct out-of-office blood pressure (BP) measurements at the homes of community members may increase the proportion of patients diagnosed early and improve monitoring during treatment. However, the diagnostic performance of these BP measurements when conducted by CHWs remains unclear. Design and method: We are conducting a cross-sectional study to determine the diagnostic performance of OBP performed by CHWs in identifying individuals with hypertension in rural Kenya and The Gambia. A random age-stratified random sample of 1250 participants aged 30 years and above from the Kilifi Health and Demographic Surveillance System and the Kiang West Demographic Surveillance System are being enrolled into the study. Participants undergo randomly assigned attended and unattended OBP measurement and 24-hour ambulatory BP monitoring (reference standard) conducted by trained CHWs at their homes. Results: Recruitment is ongoing. We have enrolled and completed BP measurements for 166 participants, all from the Kenya study site (13% of the total sample). Of these, 114 (69%) are female with an average age of 57 years (standard deviation 15 years). Based on ambulatory BP, 71 (43%) of included participants are hypertensive. The preliminary sensitivity of attended and unattended OBP is 0.50 (0.38, 0.62) and 0.47 (0.35, 0.59) respectively with both measurement methods having a high specificity of 0.93 (0.85, 0.97). The diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) for attended OBP (DOR 13.6; likelihood ratio (LR) positive 7.33 (3.26, 16.47)) is higher than that of unattended OBP (DOR 12.1; LR positive 6.89 (3.05, 15.54)). Diagnostic performance does not appear to differ by age or sex. Further analyses will be conducted when recruitment is complete. Conclusions: Attended OBP appears to have better diagnostic performance than unattended OBP when conducted at participants’ homes by CHWs, but the sensitivity of both methods for detecting hypertension is low.

A NOVEL ELECTRO-HYDRAULIC ACOUSTIC THERAPY REDUCES BLOOD PRESSURE IN HYPERTENSIVE PATIENTS WITH CHRONIC KIDNEY DISEASE: 12-MONTH FOLLOW-UP

Objective: Arterial hypertension (HTN) coexisting with chronic kidney disease (CKD) presents a significant global healthcare challenge, with limited effective clinical interventions. Electro-Hydraulic Acoustic Therapy (eHAT), a lower-energy modality vs. lithotripsy, emerges as a promising technique for relieving ischemia and promoting tissue regeneration. We hypothesized that eHAT would reduce blood pressure (BP) and preserve renal function in patients with hypertension and CKD. Design and method: Twenty medically treated patients with HTN and Stage IIIa/b CKD enrolled in this prospective, single-arm study were treated over 3-weeks with six eHAT sessions (2400 shockwaves/kidney; 0.09 mJ/mm2 at 2.66Hz; NephrospecTM, Curespec, Yehud, Israel). Follow-up (FU) visits at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months involved measurements of attended and unattended office BP, ambulatory BP and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). Results: The treatment was well tolerated. All BP measurements strongly tended to decline over 12 months and showed a similar pattern.(Table 1, Figs. 1-3), whereas eGFR was well preserved (Table 1, Fig. 4). Conclusions: Conclusion. eHAT is a tolerable and safe procedure and, moreover, a 3-week regimen tends to reduce BP and preserve eGFR in patients with HTN and CKD. Therefore, eHAT may constitute a novel, safe, and non-invasive alternative therapeutic approach in the management of HTN in the context of CKD.

Management of hypertensive urgencies: a new opportunity for unattended blood pressure measurement.

Management of hypertensive urgencies: a new opportunity for unattended blood pressure measurement.

Using 15-Minute Serial Blood Pressures as an Alternative to Measuring a Single Blood Pressure.

Thirty-minute office blood pressure (OBP-30) is an alternative to ambulatory blood pressure (BP) measurement, yet is impractical to implement. This study aimed to determine whether unattended BP readings over 15 minutes would result in a similar probability of obtaining a BP of <140/90. Sixty-seven adults self-described as having high BP were analyzed. BP was measured at baseline and every 5 minutes for 15 minutes with the initial reading compared to the average of the last three readings (OBP-15). Compared to baseline, there was a decline in both average systolic (4.2 points) and diastolic (2.8 points) BP. The probability of BP control predicted by multivariate model was 71.6% at baseline and 78.0% using OBP-15 (p=0.011). The increase in BP control from initial to OBP-15 measurement was significant for indigenous or persons of color compared to whites, and men compared to women. OBP-15 is convenient and results in lower BP readings and higher probability of BP control compared to the initial reading.

Effect of initial treatment with a single pill containing quadruple combination of quarter doses of blood pressure medicines versus standard dose monotherapy on ambulatory blood pressure indices

Abstract Background The QUARTET trial showed that a combination of four ultra-low-dose blood pressure (BP) medications lowered mean unattended office BP more effectively than initial monotherapy. Purpose To investigate the effects of a combination of four ultra-low-dose blood pressure (BP) medications on ambulatory BP changes. Methods Australian adults (≥18 years) with hypertension who were untreated or on monotherapy were eligible for participation in the QUARTET study. Overall, 591 participants were randomly assigned to receive either the quadpill (containing irbesartan 37.5 mg, amlodipine 1.25 mg, indapamide 0.625 mg, and bisoprolol 2.5 mg) or an indistinguishable monotherapy control (irbesartan 150 mg). The difference in 24-hour, daytime and night-time systolic and diastolic ambulatory BP at 12 and 52 weeks were pre-defined secondary outcomes. Reported parameters for this analysis were derived from ambulatory BP recordings of 576 participants that fulfilled pre-defined validation criteria. Results Of 576 participants, 289 were randomized to the quadpill group and 287 to the monotherapy group. At baseline, 24-h systolic/diastolic BP was 139.2/81.0 mmHg in the monotherapy vs. 139.8/81.3 in the quadpill group, daytime BP was 142.5/83.5 vs 143.4/84.0 mmHg, and night-time BP was 125.1/70.7 vs. 125.4/70.7 mmHg. At 12 weeks, mean 24-h ambulatory systolic and diastolic BP were 7.7 (95%CI: 9.6, 5.8) and 5.3 (95%CI: 6.5, 4.1) mmHg lower in the quadpill versus monotherapy group (p&amp;lt;0.001 for both). Similar reductions were observed for daytime (8.1/5.7 mmHg lower in quadpill compared to montherapy group) and night-time (6.3/4.0 mmHg lower in quadpill compared to monotherapy group) BP (all p&amp;lt;0.001) at 12 weeks. The reduction in systolic and diastolic ambulatory BP variability were more pronounced in the quadpill group at 12 weeks, the 24-h standard deviation was reduced by -1.2 (-1.8, -0.5) mmHg for systolic and -0.9 (-1.5, -0.4) mmHg diastolic BP. The rate of BP control (24 hours BP ≥130 and/or ≥80 mmHg) at 12 weeks was higher in the quadpill group (77% vs 50%; p&amp;lt;0.001). These effects were maintained at 52 weeks. Conclusion A quadruple quarter-dose combination compared to monotherapy resulted in greater ambulatory BP lowering across the entire 24-hour period with higher ambulatory BP control rates at both 12 and 52 weeks. These findings further substantiate the efficacy of an ultra-low-dose quadpill-based BP lowering strategy – which has been previously shown not to increase the rate of side effects - and extends it to ambulatory BP measurements.

Adapted Mindfulness Training for Interoception and Adherence to the DASH Diet

Hypertension is a major cause of cardiovascular disease, and although the Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension (DASH) diet lowers blood pressure (BP), adherence is typically low. Mindfulness training adapted to improving health behaviors that lower BP could improve DASH adherence, in part through improved interoceptive awareness relevant to dietary consumption. To evaluate the effects of the Mindfulness-Based Blood Pressure Reduction (MB-BP) program on interoceptive awareness and DASH adherence. Parallel-group, phase 2, sequentially preregistered randomized clinical trials were conducted from June 1, 2017, to November 30, 2020. Follow-up was 6 months. Participants with elevated unattended office BP (≥120/80 mm Hg) were recruited from the population near Providence, Rhode Island. Of 348 participants assessed for eligibility, 67 did not meet inclusion criteria, 17 declined, and 63 did not enroll prior to study end date. In total, 201 participants were randomly assigned, 101 to the MB-BP program and 100 to the enhanced usual care control group, with 24 (11.9%) unavailable for follow-up. Outcome assessors and the data analyst were blinded to group allocation. Analyses were performed using intention-to-treat principles from June 1, 2022, to August 30, 2023. The 8-week MB-BP program was adapted for elevated BP, including personalized feedback, education, and mindfulness training directed to hypertension risk factors. Both MB-BP and control groups received home BP monitoring devices with instructions and options for referral to primary care physicians. The control group also received educational brochures on controlling high BP. The primary outcome was Multidimensional Assessment of Interoceptive Awareness (MAIA) questionnaire scores (range 0-5, with higher scores indicating greater interoceptive awareness), and the secondary outcome was DASH adherence scores assessed via a 163-item Food Frequency Questionnaire (range 0-11, with higher scores indicating improved DASH adherence), all compared using regression analyses. Among 201 participants, 118 (58.7%) were female, 163 (81.1%) were non-Hispanic White, and the mean (SD) age was 60.0 (12.2) years. The MB-BP program increased the MAIA score by 0.54 points (95% CI, 0.35-0.74 points; P < .001; Cohen d = 0.45) at 6 months vs control. In participants with poor baseline DASH adherence, the MB-BP program also significantly increased the DASH score by 0.62 points (95% CI, 0.13-1.11 points; P = .01; Cohen d = 0.71) at 6 months vs controls. The intervention was also associated with a 0.34-point improvement in the DASH diet score in all MB-BP participants from baseline (95% CI, 0.09-0.59 points; P = .01; Cohen d = 0.27), while the control group showed a -0.04 point change in DASH diet score from baseline to 6 months (95% CI, -0.31 to 0.24 points; P = .78; Cohen d = -0.03). A mindfulness program adapted to improving health behaviors to lower BP improved interoceptive awareness and DASH adherence. The MB-BP program could support DASH dietary adherence in adults with elevated BP. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT03859076 and NCT03256890.

Exploring flexible methods for national health examination surveys in Germany

Abstract Background National health examination surveys (HES) are rarely carried out due to high costs and high complexity. We piloted more flexible methods such as self-sampling, self-measurements and household visits conducted by a study-nurse replacing physician examinations in study centers. Methods Feasibility of several new methods for the German HES was tested, e.g.: large-scale implementation of unattended self-sampled dried blood spots (DBS) and oral-nasal swabs (ONS) in a countrywide general population panel including a large subsample with migration background (Study 1, n = 15,122); household visits with brief biosampling &amp; examinations (Study 2, n = 470); and unattended blood pressure (BP) self-measurements with mailed devices and video instructions (Study 3, n = 202). Results Among participants consenting to participate, Study 1 showed successful postal self-sampling of DBS for SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests in 98% of participants and 97% valid ONS for SARS-CoV-2 PCR tests. Study 2 showed successful standardized measurements of BP (97%), weight/height (99%) and DBS and venous blood sampling with onsite whole blood centrifugation (97%). Temperature requirements for centrifugation, cooled transport and ATC-coded medication assessment (Anatomical Chemical Classification) proved challenging and needed revised methods to avoid data loss. Nested validation studies confirmed use of a multiplex assay for various antibodies with DBS and of HbA1c analysis with uncooled specimen. The strict and time-consuming BP self-measurement-protocol with 12 measurements in Study 3 was followed only by 54% of participants. Conclusions Self-sampling and biosampling &amp; examinations in households are feasible options for HES but protocols with high complexity may result in low data completeness.

Sympathetic Neural Mechanisms in Hypertension: Recent Insights.

To examine published and unpublished data documenting the role of sympathetic neural factors in the pathogenesis of different hypertensive phenotypes. These phenotypes relate to attended or unattended blood pressure measurements, to nighttime blood pressure profile alterations, and to resistant, pseudoresistant, and refractory hypertension. Results of original clinical studies as well as of recent meta-analyses based on the behavior of different sympathetic biomarkers in various hypertensive forms will be also discussed. Studies performed in the past decade have shown that office blood pressure measurements, including in recent years those characterizing unattended or attended blood pressure assessment, are associated with profound changes in the behavior of different sympathetic biomarkers. This is the case for the clinical hypertensive phenotypes characterized by alterations in the nocturnal blood pressure profile and by sleep duration abnormalities. This is also the case for the clinical conditions defined as resistant, refractory, and pseudoresistant hypertension. Data reviewed in the present paper highlight the relevance of sympathetic neural factors in the development and progression of different clinical hypertensive phenotypes. This suggests that a common hallmark of the majority of the essential hypertensive states detectable in current clinical practice is represented by the alteration in the sympathetic blood pressure control.

COMPARISON OF ATTENDED WITH UNATTENDED BLOOD PRESSURE MEASUREMENTS PERFORMED BY TWO DIFFERENT DEVICES

Objective: Unattended blood pressure (uBP) is lower than blood pressure (BP) measured by physician or nurse (attended blood pressure, aBP). We aimed to compare the uBP values obtained in two population-based cohorts, where uBP was measured in different way. Design and method: In the MONICA Study, 1% random samples from general population were repeatedly examined. We selected two cohorts for the present analysis: cohort 1 (examined in 2016, n = 179), where uBP was measured by BPTru (six measurements, first skipped, with no pause before the measurements), and cohort 2 (year 2018, n = 166) where uBP was measured by Omron 907 (three measurements after a preset 5-minute pause). aBP was measured after uBP in triplicate by physician using auscultatory method. Results: The two cohorts did not differ in age (67 vs 69 years), sex distribution, prevalence of cardiovascular disease, prevalence of hypertension (74 vs 73%), atrial fibrillation, diabetes, antihypertensive or hypolipidemic treatment and smoking. Systolic aBP was 137.6 ± 16.6 vs 135.4 ± 17.8 mmHg (NS) and diastolic aBP was 81.4 ± 9.4 vs 77.2 ± 9.5 mmHg (&lt;0.0001) in the two cohorts, respectively. Differences between aBP and uBP were significant in all cases (p &lt; 0.001), ranging from 3.7 mmHg (diastolic aBP – BP by Omron) to 8.8 mmHg (systolic aBP – BPTru). When the BPTru and Omron uBP measurements were compared, no difference was found. This was true when the means of all measurements were compared (five by BPTru and three by Omron) and also when only two measurements were analyzed (2nd and 3rd one, available for both devices). Multiple regression of systolic aBP – uBP difference showed that the only significant determinant was aBP value (positive association, p &lt; 0.0001). Conclusions: There was no difference between the uBP values measured by BPTru and Omron 907. The 2nd and 3rd measurements seem to be sufficient to be taken into account.

Effect of Adapted Mindfulness Training in Participants With Elevated Office Blood Pressure: The MB-BP Study: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Background Hypertension is a leading risk factor for cardiovascular disease. Despite availability of effective lifestyle and medication treatments, blood pressure (BP) is poorly controlled in the United States. Mindfulness training may offer a novel approach to improve BP control. The objective was to evaluate the effects of Mindfulness-Based Blood Pressure Reduction (MB-BP) versus enhanced usual care control on unattended office systolic BP. Methods and Results Methods included a parallel-group phase 2 randomized clinical trial conducted from June 2017 to November 2020. Follow-up time was 6 months. Outcome assessors and data analyst were blinded to group allocation. Participants had elevated unattended office BP (≥120/80 mm Hg). We randomized 201 participants to MB-BP (n=101) or enhanced usual care control (n=100). MB-BP is a mindfulness-based program adapted for elevated BP. Loss-to-follow-up was 17.4%. The primary outcome was change in unattended office systolic BP at 6 months. A total of 201 participants (58.7% women; 81.1% non-Hispanic White race and ethnicity; mean age, 59.5 years) were randomized. Results showed that MB-BP was associated with a 5.9-mm Hg reduction (95% CI, -9.1 to -2.8 mm Hg) in systolic BP from baseline and outperformed the control group by 4.5 mm Hg at 6 months (95% CI, -9.0 to -0.1 mm Hg) in prespecified analyses. Plausible mechanisms with evidence to be impacted by MB-BP versus control were sedentary activity (-350.8 sitting min/wk [95% CI, -636.5 to -65.1] sitting min/wk), Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension diet (0.32 score [95% CI, -0.04 to 0.67]), and mindfulness (7.3 score [95% CI, 3.0-11.6]). Conclusions A mindfulness-based program adapted for individuals with elevated BP showed clinically relevant reductions in systolic BP compared with enhanced usual care. Mindfulness training may be a useful approach to improve BP. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifiers: NCT03256890 and NCT03859076.

PS-C28-5: ROLE OF SYMPATHETIC NERVOUS SYSTEM IN ATTENDED AND UNATTENDED BP LEVELS IN ESSENTIAL HYPERTENSION

Objective: It has been hypothesized that unattended blood pressure (BP) measurement may provide complementary clinical information to conventionally attended BP measurement. The role of sympathetic nervous system activation during attended and unattended BP measurements is largely undetermined. Design and method: We studied 161 untreated hypertensive patients undergoing attended and unattended office BP measurements. Patients were divided into two groups - group A, unattended systolic BP greater than the attended systolic BP (n = 79), and group B, unattended systolic BP equal or lower than the attended (n = 82). All participants underwent muscle sympathetic nerve activity (MSNA) estimation by microneurography. Unattended and attended BP measurements were performed with the same device in a random order for each patient on the day of MSNA recording. MSNA levels were compared between the two groups. Results: We examined 161 hypertensive patients [54% men, mean age 56 ± 12 years, BMI 29 ± 5 kg/m2, mean attended BP 140 ± 17 / 87 ± 13 mmHg, mean unattended BP 141 ± 20 / 85 ± 12 mmHg]. Group A and group B had statistically significant differences between attended systolic BP (136.7 ± 17.8 vs 143.7 ± 15.7 mmHg respectively, p = 0.009), attended diastolic BP (85.5 ± 14.7 vs 89.7 ± 11.4 mmHg respectively, p = 0.004), unattended systolic BP (145.5 ± 19 vs 135.7 ± 19.9 mmHg respectively, p = 0.002) and unattended diastolic BP (86.9 ± 13 vs 83.2 ± 11.2 mmHg respectively, p = 0.05). However, the two groups did not differ as regards MSNA levels (42.5 ± 10 vs. 41.6 ± 7.8 bursts per minute respectively, p = 0.5). MSNA levels did not correlate to attended and unattended systolic/diastolic BP in both groups. Conclusions: In conclusion, sympathetic nervous system activity may not contribute significantly to the differential BP levels during attended or unattended BP measurements.

PS-BPC06-9: THE EFFECT OF COMMON SURGICAL MASKS ON UNATTENDED BLOOD PRESSURE CHANGES IN DRUG TREATED HYPERTENSIVE PATIENTS

Objective: While there are several studies that have focused on the role of face masks in preventing airborne transmission of SARS-CoV-2, few data are available on their effects on physiological measures, and no study has examined their effects on blood pressure (BP). The purpose of our study was to investigate the effect of surgical masks on BP in drug-treated hypertensive patients who had a routine follow-up visit to a university hospital outpatient hypertension clinic. Design and method: The study included already treated hypertensive patients aged &gt; 18 years, while the exclusion criteria were atrial fibrillation or any other arrhythmia affecting the BP measurement, an arm circumference &gt; 42 cm, mental disorders, Parkinson disease, pregnancy, intolerance to the BP measurement method, or unwillingness to participate. A new surgical mask was provided to all participants to replace the face mask that was already in use. After the routine mask-on office BP measurement, patients were left alone and randomized to automated office BP measurement, with measurements taken after first wearing a mask for 10 min, then without wearing the mask for 10 min, and vice versa. Results: A total number of 265 patients were included in the study. Among the participants, 115 were women (43.4%), the mean age was 62 ± 12 years, and the mean office BP was 134 ± 15 / 81 ± 12 mmHg. There was no significant difference between mask-on unattended systolic BP (133 ± 15 mmHg) and mask-off unattended systolic BP (132 ± 15 mmHg) (P = 0.13) or between mask-on unattended diastolic BP (77 ± 13 mmHg) and mask-off unattended diastolic BP (76 ± 13 mmHg) (P = 0.32). Moreover, there was no difference in the heart rate (mask-on first, 69 ± 11 bpm; mask-off first, 69 ± 11 bpm, P = 0.7). Conclusions: Common surgical masks do not affect systolic/diastolic BP levels during unattended BP measurements in treated hypertensive patients.

Sympathetic nervous system activity and unattended blood pressure measurement

Abstract Background/Introduction Sympathetic nervous system activation plays a crucial role in the pathophysiology and variability of hypertension. It has been hypothesized that measurement of unattended blood pressure (BP) may provide additional information to conventionally attended BP measurement, as it can lead to the limitation of the white coat effect. Purpose The aim of this study was to demonstrate the relationship of sympathetic nervous system activation and BP measurement variations with and without medical supervision. Methods We studied 103 untreated hypertensive patients, who underwent muscle sympathetic nerve activity (MSNA) estimation by microneurography. Both unattended (patient alone in the room, an oscillometric device programmed to perform 3 BP measurements at 1-minute intervals, after 5 minutes of rest) and attended BP measurements were conducted in all participants, with the same device, on the same day of MSNA recording in random order. Patients were divided into two groups based on the difference between attended and unattended BP. In group A, patients had unattended BP greater than attended BP (n=31) and in group B, patients had unattended BP lower than attended BP (n=72). The two groups were compared regarding the median value of MSNA recordings in our population (median MSNA = 63 bursts per 100 heartbeats). Results The two groups did not differ as regards both attended SBP levels (group A: 142.3±15.4 mmHg, group B: 145.6±13.7 mmHg, p=0.29) and attended DBP levels (group A: 89.2±9.8 mmHg, group B: 91.2±11.5 mmHg, p=0.25). A difference was observed concerning unattended SBP levels (group A: 152±16.3 mmHg, group B: 142.5±13.8 mmHg, p=0.03) and unattended DBP levels (group A: 94.4±10.3 mmHg, group B: 85.2±11.8 mmHg, p&amp;lt;0.01). Higher levels of MSNA were recorded in patients in group A when compared to group B, although this difference was not statistically significant (66.8±15.6 vs. 61.6±14.8 bursts per 100 heartbeats, p=0.11). Higher percentage of patients in group A had MSNA levels greater than the median value of MSNA compared to group B (68% vs 46% respectively). Conclusions In the present study, we found that the majority of patients who exhibit higher BP during the unattended measurement also record high MSNA values, suggesting a more stimulated sympathetic nervous system. On the contrary, most of the patients who can calm down during the unattended measurement exhibit lower levels of MSNA. More patients are needed to fully determine the clinical significance of this observation. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: None.