Why Is Out-of-Office Blood Pressure Measurement Needed?: Home Blood Pressure Measurements Will Increasingly Replace Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring in the Diagnosis and Management of Hypertension (original) (raw)
Related papers
ABPM is best for diagnosing hypertension in primary care
2011
Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) is more accurate than clinic and home monitoring in diagnosing hypertension. A diagnostic strategy for hypertension using ABPM following an initial raised clinic reading would reduce misdiagnosis and NHS costs. If the first and second measurements taken during a consultation are both > or = 140/90 mmHg, 24-hour ABPM should be used to confirm the diagnosis of hypertension. Home monitoring can be used to confirm the diagnosis if the patient cannot tolerate ABPM. In cases of severe hypertension (clinic BP > or = 180/110 mmHg) and evidence of target organ damage, antihypertensive drug treatment should be started immediately without waiting for the results of ABPM or home monitoring. ABPM estimates true mean BP more accurately than clinic measurement because multiple readings are taken. It has been shown to have better correlation with a range of cardiovascular outcomes and end organ damage, Out-of-office methods can enable a diagnosis to...
European Society of Hypertension position paper on ambulatory blood pressure monitoring
Journal of Hypertension, 2013
Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) is being used increasingly in both clinical practice and hypertension research. Although there are many guidelines that emphasize the indications for ABPM, there is no comprehensive guideline dealing with all aspects of the technique. It was agreed at a consensus meeting on ABPM in Milan in 2011 that the 34 attendees should prepare a comprehensive position paper on the scientific evidence for ABPM. This position paper considers the historical background, the advantages and limitations of ABPM, the threshold levels for practice, and the cost-effectiveness of the technique. It examines the need for selecting an appropriate device, the accuracy of devices, the additional information and indices that ABPM devices may provide, and the software requirements. At a practical level, the paper details the requirements for using ABPM in clinical practice, editing considerations, the number of measurements required, and the circumstances, such as obesity and arrhythmias, when particular care needs to be taken when using ABPM. The clinical indications for ABPM, among which white-coat phenomena, masked hypertension, and nocturnal hypertension appear to be prominent, are outlined in detail along with special considerations that apply in certain clinical circumstances, such as childhood, the elderly and pregnancy, and in cardiovascular illness, examples being stroke and chronic renal disease, and the place of home measurement of blood pressure in relation to ABPM is appraised. The role of ABPM in research circumstances, such as pharmacological trials and in the prediction of outcome in epidemiological studies is examined and finally the implementation of ABPM in practice is considered in relation to the issue of reimbursement in different countries, the provision of the technique by primary care practices, hospital clinics and pharmacies, and the growing role of registries of ABPM in many countries.
Clinical practice of ambulatory versus home blood pressure monitoring in hypertensive patients
Blood Pressure Monitoring, 2015
Objectives This study aimed to analyze whether blood pressure (BP) measurement is concordant between ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) and home blood pressure monitoring (HBPM), and determine whether the decision on treatment changes is similar on the basis of information provided by both methods. Methods Treated hypertensive patients were studied with ABPM and HBPM to evaluate therapeutic efficacy and/or diagnose resistant hypertension (HTN). Modification of pharmacological treatment was decided on the basis of preestablished criteria; therefore, the number of therapeutic changes between both techniques was compared. Results A total of 200 patients were included. The average daytime ABPM systolic blood pressure (SBP) was 136 ± 16 compared with 136 ± 15 (P = 1) with HBPM; the average diurnal diastolic blood pressure (DBP) was 83 ± 12 and 81 ± 9, respectively (P = 0.06). The concordance between both methods was very good for SBP [r = 0.85; Bland-Altman 0.2 (95% confidence interval 0.9-1.4 mmHg)], and good for the DBP [r = 0.77; Bland-Altman 1.8 (95% confidence interval 0.8-2.8 mmHg)]. Both methods were in agreement that HTN was controlled in 68 patients and that it was not controlled in 90 patients, that is, they were concordant in 158 patients (79%, κ = 0.6). More patients required changes with ABPM than HBPM (149 vs. 99 patients, P < 0.0001) Conclusion There were no significant differences in the measurement of diurnal SBP and DBP between both methods. The concordance to determine proper control of HTN was 79%. There was a significant difference in the decision to modify the treatment in favor of the ABPM.
Home Blood Pressure Monitoring in the Diagnosis and Treatment of Hypertension: A Systematic Review
American Journal of Hypertension, 2011
Background It is recognized that for the reliable assessment of blood pressure (BP) and the accurate diagnosis of hypertension, out-of-office BP measurement with ambulatory (aBPM) or home BP monitoring (HBPM) is often required. The clinical usefulness of aBPM is well established. However, despite the wide use of HBPM, only in the last decade convincing evidence on its usefulness has accumulated. Methods Systematic review of the evidence on applying HBPM in the diagnosis and treatment of hypertension (PubMed, Cochrane Library, 1970-2010). results Sixteen studies in untreated and treated subjects assessed the diagnostic ability of HBPM by taking aBPM as reference. Seven randomized studies compared HBPM vs. office measurements or aBPM for treatment adjustment, whereas many studies compared HBPM with office measurements in assessing the antihypertensive drug effects. Several studies with different design investigated the role of HBPM vs. office measurements in improving patients' compliance with treatment and hypertension control rates. The evidence on the cost-effectiveness of HBPM is limited. The studies reviewed consistently showed moderate diagnostic agreement between HBPM and aBPM, and superiority of HBPM compared to office measurements in diagnosing uncontrolled hypertension, assessing antihypertensive drug effects and improving patients' compliance and hypertension control. Preliminary evidence suggests that HBPM has the potential for cost savings. conclusions There is conclusive evidence that HBPM is useful for the initial diagnosis and the long-term follow-up of treated hypertension. These data are useful for the optimal application of HBPM, which is widely used in clinical practice. More studies on the costeffectiveness of HBPM are needed.
Hypertension, 2008
Home blood pressure monitoring (HBPM) overcomes many of the limitations of traditional office blood pressure (BP) measurement and is both cheaper and easier to perform than ambulatory BP monitoring. Monitors that use the oscillometric method are currently available that are accurate, reliable, easy to use, and relatively inexpensive. An increasing number of patients are using them regularly to check their BP at home, but although this has been endorsed by national and international guidelines, detailed recommendations for their use have been lacking. There is a rapidly growing literature showing that measurements taken by patients at home are often lower than readings taken in the office and closer to the average BP recorded by 24-hour ambulatory monitors, which is the BP that best predicts cardiovascular risk. Because of the larger numbers of readings that can be taken by HBPM than in the office and the elimination of the white-coat effect (the increase of BP during an office visit), home readings are more reproducible than office readings and show better correlations with measures of target organ damage. In addition, prospective studies that have used multiple home readings to express the true BP have found that home BP predicts risk better than office BP (Class IIa; Level of Evidence A). This call-to-action article makes the following recommendations: (1) It is recommended that HBPM should become a routine component of BP measurement in the majority of patients with known or suspected hypertension; (2) Patients should be advised to purchase oscillometric monitors that measure BP on the upper arm with an appropriate cuff size and that have been shown to be accurate according to standard international protocols. They should be shown how to use them by their healthcare providers; (3) Two to 3 readings should be taken while the subject is resting in the seated position, both in the morning and at night, over a period of 1 week. A total of Ն12 readings are recommended for making clinical decisions; (4) HBPM is indicated in patients with newly diagnosed or suspected hypertension, in whom it may distinguish between white-coat and sustained hypertension. If the results are equivocal, ambulatory BP monitoring may help to establish the diagnosis; (5) In patients with prehypertension, HBPM may be useful for detecting masked hypertension; (6) HBPM is recommended for evaluating the response to any type of antihypertensive treatment and may improve adherence; (7) The target HBPM goal for treatment is Ͻ135/85 mm Hg or Ͻ130/80 mm Hg in high-risk patients; (8) HBPM is useful in the elderly, in whom both BP variability and the white-coat effect are increased; (9) HBPM is of value in patients with diabetes, in whom tight BP control is of paramount importance; (10) Other populations in whom HBPM may be beneficial include pregnant women, children, and patients with kidney disease; and (11) HBPM has the potential to improve the quality of care while reducing costs and should be reimbursed. (Hypertension. 2008;52:000-000.)
Guidance on ambulatory blood pressure monitoring: A statement from the HOPE Asia Network
The Journal of Clinical Hypertension, 2020
Hypertension is an important public health issue due to its association with a number of serious diseases, including cardiovascular disease and stroke. The importance of evaluating hypertension taking into account different blood pressure (BP) profiles and BP variability (BPV) is increasingly being recognized, and is particularly relevant in Asian populations given the specific features of hypertension in the region (including greater salt sensitivity and a high rate of nocturnal hypertension). Ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) is the gold standard for diagnosing hypertension and assessing 24‐hour BP and provides data on several important parameters that cannot be obtained using any other form of BP measurement. In addition, ABPM parameters provide better information on cardio‐ and cerebrovascular risk than office BP. ABPM should be used in all patients with elevated BP, particularly those with unstable office or home BP, or who are suspected to have white‐coat or masked hypertension....
Hypertension is a very common disease, and office measurements of blood pressure are frequently inaccurate. Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring (ABPM) offers a more accurate diagnosis, more detailed readings of average blood pressures, better blood pressure measurement during sleep, fewer false positives by detecting more white-coat hypertension, and fewer false negatives by detecting more masked hypertension. ABPM offers better management of clinical outcomes. For example, based on more accurate measurements of blood pressure variability, ABPM demonstrates that taking anti-hypertensive medication at night leads to better controlled nocturnal blood pressure, which translates into less end organ damage and fewer clinical complications of hyper-tension. For these reasons, albeit some shortcomings which were discussed, ABPM should be considered as a first-line tool for diagnosing and managing hypertension.