2015Journal of HypertensionRequires access

1B.09

Yu Kang, Y. Li, Qi-Fang Huang, Jie Song, Xue-Feng Shan, Yu Dou, Xiaodong Xu, S.H. Chen, Junyu Wang

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

Objective: We investigated accuracy of home blood pressure (BP) monitoring in the diagnosis of white-coat and masked hypertension in comparison with ambulatory BP monitoring. Design and method: Our study subjects were enrolled in the ongoing China Ambulatory and Home Blood Pressure Registry and underwent clinic, home and 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure measurements. The blood pressure threshold for hypertension diagnostic was 140mmHg and/or 90mmHg (systolic/diastolic) for clinic blood pressure, 130mmHg and/or 80mmHg for 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure and 135mmHg and/or 85mmHg for home blood pressure. We defined white-coat hypertension as an elevated clinic systolic/diastolic pressure and a normal 24-hour ambulatory or home systolic/diastolic pressure and masked hypertension as a normal clinic systolic/diastolic pressure and an elevated 24-hour ambulatory or home systolic/diastolic pressure. Results: In untreated subjects (n = 573), the prevalence of white-coat hypertension (13.1% vs. 19.9%), masked hypertension (17.8% vs. 13.1%) and sustained hypertension (46.4% vs. 39.6%) significantly (P < 0.02) differed between 24-hour ambulatory and home BP monitoring. In treated subjects (n = 1201), only the prevalence of masked hypertension differed significantly (18.7% vs.14.5%, P = 0.005). Regardless of the treatment status, home compared with 24-hour ambulatory BP had low sensitivity (range, 47%-74%) but high specificity (86%-94%) and accordingly low positive (41%-87%) but high negative predictive values (80%-94%), and had moderate diagnostic agreement (82%-85%) and Kappa statistic (0.41–0.66). In untreated and treated subjects, age advancing was associated with a higher prevalence of white-coat hypertension and a lower prevalence of masked hypertension defined by 24-hour ambulatory (P < 0.04) but not home BP (P > 0.10). Conclusions: Home BP monitoring has high specificity but low sensitivity in the diagnosis of white-coat and masked hypertension, and may therefore behave as a complementary to, but not a replacement of, ambulatory BP monitoring.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Objective: We investigated accuracy of home blood pressure (BP) monitoring in the diagnosis of white-coat and masked hypertension in comparison with ambulatory BP monitoring. Design and method: Our study subjects were enrolled in the ongoing China Ambulatory and Home Blood Pressure Registry and underwent clinic, home and 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure measurements. The blood pressure threshold for hypertension diagnostic was 140mmHg and/or 90mmHg (systolic/diastolic) for clinic blood pressure, 130mmHg and/or 80mmHg for 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure and 135mmHg and/or 85mmHg for home blood pressure. We defined white-coat hypertension as an elevated clinic systolic/diastolic pressure and a normal 24-hour ambulatory or home systolic/diastolic pressure and masked hypertension as a normal clinic systolic/diastolic pressure and an elevated 24-hour ambulatory or home systolic/diastolic pressure. Results: In untreated subjects (n = 573), the prevalence of white-coat hypertension (13.1% vs. 19.9%), masked hypertension (17.8% vs. 13.1%) and sustained hypertension (46.4% vs. 39.6%) significantly (P < 0.02) differed between 24-hour ambulatory and home BP monitoring. In treated subjects (n = 1201), only the prevalence of masked hypertension differed significantly (18.7% vs.14.5%, P = 0.005). Regardless of the treatment status, home compared with 24-hour ambulatory BP had low sensitivity (range, 47%-74%) but high specificity (86%-94%) and accordingly low positive (41%-87%) but high negative predictive values (80%-94%), and had moderate diagnostic agreement (82%-85%) and Kappa statistic (0.41–0.66). In untreated and treated subjects, age advancing was associated with a higher prevalence of white-coat hypertension and a lower prevalence of masked hypertension defined by 24-hour ambulatory (P < 0.04) but not home BP (P > 0.10). Conclusions: Home BP monitoring has high specificity but low sensitivity in the diagnosis of white-coat and masked hypertension, and may therefore behave as a complementary to, but not a replacement of, ambulatory BP monitoring.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Objective: We investigated accuracy of home blood pressure (BP) monitoring in the diagnosis of white-coat and masked hypertension in comparison with ambulatory BP monitoring. Design and method: Our study subjects were enrolled in the ongoing China Ambulatory and Home Blood Pressure Registry and underwent clinic, home and 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure measurements. The blood pressure threshold for hypertension diagnostic was 140mmHg and/or 90mmHg (systolic/diastolic) for clinic blood pressure, 130mmHg and/or 80mmHg for 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure and 135mmHg and/or 85mmHg for home blood pressure. We defined white-coat hypertension as an elevated clinic systolic/diastolic pressure and a normal 24-hour ambulatory or home systolic/diastolic pressure and masked hypertension as a normal clinic systolic/diastolic pressure and an elevated 24-hour ambulatory or home systolic/diastolic pressure. Results: In untreated subjects (n = 573), the prevalence of white-coat hypertension (13.1% vs. 19.9%), masked hypertension (17.8% vs. 13.1%) and sustained hypertension (46.4% vs. 39.6%) significantly (P < 0.02) differed between 24-hour ambulatory and home BP monitoring. In treated subjects (n = 1201), only the prevalence of masked hypertension differed significantly (18.7% vs.14.5%, P = 0.005). Regardless of the treatment status, home compared with 24-hour ambulatory BP had low sensitivity (range, 47%-74%) but high specificity (86%-94%) and accordingly low positive (41%-87%) but high negative predictive values (80%-94%), and had moderate diagnostic agreement (82%-85%) and Kappa statistic (0.41–0.66). In untreated and treated subjects, age advancing was associated with a higher prevalence of white-coat hypertension and a lower prevalence of masked hypertension defined by 24-hour ambulatory (P < 0.04) but not home BP (P > 0.10). Conclusions: Home BP monitoring has high specificity but low sensitivity in the diagnosis of white-coat and masked hypertension, and may therefore behave as a complementary to, but not a replacement of, ambulatory BP monitoring.

Key concepts: Medicine, Blood pressure, Ambulatory blood pressure, Masked Hypertension, White coat hypertension, Ambulatory, Diastole, Prehypertension

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
1B.09 — Research Paper | ScholarLens