Comparing blood pressure measurements between sitting in chairs and sitting on the floor.

IF 3.6 Q2 PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE Clinical Hypertension Pub Date : 2024-07-01 DOI:10.1186/s40885-024-00273-w
Byung Sik Kim, Young-Hyo Lim, Woohyeun Kim, Hyungdon Kook, Jeong-Hun Shin, Yonggu Lee, Ran Heo, Hyun-Jin Kim, Jinho Shin
{"title":"Comparing blood pressure measurements between sitting in chairs and sitting on the floor.","authors":"Byung Sik Kim, Young-Hyo Lim, Woohyeun Kim, Hyungdon Kook, Jeong-Hun Shin, Yonggu Lee, Ran Heo, Hyun-Jin Kim, Jinho Shin","doi":"10.1186/s40885-024-00273-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The current standard approach to measuring home blood pressure (BP) involves taking measurements while sitting in a chair. In cultures where floor sitting is common, including Korea, assessing BP while sitting on the floor would be more feasible. However, there is still a lack of research investigating whether BP measurements obtained while seated in a chair and while sitting on the floor can be regarded as interchangeable. The aim of the study was to evaluate whether there is a difference between BP measurements taken while sitting in a chair and while sitting on the floor in a Korean adult.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Among the participants who visited for evaluation of pulse wave velocity, a total of 116 participants who agreed to participate in the study were randomly selected. All subjects rested for 5 min, and BP measurements were taken at 1-min intervals according to a randomly assigned order of standard method (chair-sitting) and BP in a seated on the floor (floor-sitting).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 116 participants, the median age was 68 (with an interquartile range of 59 to 75), and 82% were men. There were no significant differences in systolic BP (SBP, 129.1 ± 17.8 mmHg in chair-sitting and 130.1 ± 18.9 mmHg in floor-sitting, P = 0.228) and diastolic BP (DBP, 73.9 ± 11.4 mmHg in chair-sitting and 73.7 ± 11.4 mmHg in floor-sitting, P = 0.839) between the two positions. In addition, there was a high level of agreement between BP measurements taken in the two positions (intraclass correlation coefficients: 0.882 for SBP and 0.890 for DBP).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>These findings provide important insights into securing the reliability of home BP measurements through the commonly practiced floor-sitting posture in cultures where floor sitting is common. Furthermore, this could serve as substantial evidence for providing specific home BP measurement guidelines to patients who adhere to a floor-sitting lifestyle.</p>","PeriodicalId":10480,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Hypertension","volume":"30 1","pages":"16"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11215825/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Hypertension","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40885-024-00273-w","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The current standard approach to measuring home blood pressure (BP) involves taking measurements while sitting in a chair. In cultures where floor sitting is common, including Korea, assessing BP while sitting on the floor would be more feasible. However, there is still a lack of research investigating whether BP measurements obtained while seated in a chair and while sitting on the floor can be regarded as interchangeable. The aim of the study was to evaluate whether there is a difference between BP measurements taken while sitting in a chair and while sitting on the floor in a Korean adult.

Methods: Among the participants who visited for evaluation of pulse wave velocity, a total of 116 participants who agreed to participate in the study were randomly selected. All subjects rested for 5 min, and BP measurements were taken at 1-min intervals according to a randomly assigned order of standard method (chair-sitting) and BP in a seated on the floor (floor-sitting).

Results: Of the 116 participants, the median age was 68 (with an interquartile range of 59 to 75), and 82% were men. There were no significant differences in systolic BP (SBP, 129.1 ± 17.8 mmHg in chair-sitting and 130.1 ± 18.9 mmHg in floor-sitting, P = 0.228) and diastolic BP (DBP, 73.9 ± 11.4 mmHg in chair-sitting and 73.7 ± 11.4 mmHg in floor-sitting, P = 0.839) between the two positions. In addition, there was a high level of agreement between BP measurements taken in the two positions (intraclass correlation coefficients: 0.882 for SBP and 0.890 for DBP).

Conclusion: These findings provide important insights into securing the reliability of home BP measurements through the commonly practiced floor-sitting posture in cultures where floor sitting is common. Furthermore, this could serve as substantial evidence for providing specific home BP measurement guidelines to patients who adhere to a floor-sitting lifestyle.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
比较坐在椅子上和坐在地板上的血压测量结果。
背景:目前测量家庭血压(BP)的标准方法是坐在椅子上测量。在韩国等以席地而坐为常见文化的国家,席地而坐测量血压更为可行。然而,坐着测量血压和坐在地板上测量血压是否可以互换,目前还缺乏这方面的研究。本研究旨在评估韩国成年人坐在椅子上和坐在地板上测量的血压值是否存在差异:方法:在前来进行脉搏波速度评估的受试者中,随机抽取了 116 名同意参与研究的受试者。所有受试者休息 5 分钟,按照随机分配的标准方法(坐椅子)和坐在地板上(坐地板)的顺序,每隔 1 分钟测量一次血压:在 116 名参与者中,年龄中位数为 68 岁(四分位间范围为 59 岁至 75 岁),82% 为男性。两种坐姿的收缩压(SBP,椅子坐姿为 129.1 ± 17.8 mmHg,地板坐姿为 130.1 ± 18.9 mmHg,P = 0.228)和舒张压(DBP,椅子坐姿为 73.9 ± 11.4 mmHg,地板坐姿为 73.7 ± 11.4 mmHg,P = 0.839)无明显差异。此外,两种体位下的血压测量结果具有很高的一致性(类内相关系数:SBP 为 0.882,DBP 为 0.890):这些研究结果为在普遍采用坐姿的文化中,通过普遍采用的坐姿来确保家庭血压测量的可靠性提供了重要启示。此外,这还可作为重要证据,为坚持席地而坐生活方式的患者提供具体的家庭血压测量指南。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Clinical Hypertension
Clinical Hypertension PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE-
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
4.80%
发文量
34
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊最新文献
Blood pressure variability and the risk of post-stroke cognitive impairment following atrial fibrillation related acute ischemic stroke. Cardiac magnetic resonance assessment of left ventricular phenotypes and prognostic implications in hypertensive heart disease. Current perspectives and challenges of digital hypertension: artificial intelligence in the management of hypertension. Chronic hypertension diagnosed in a previous pregnancy is associated with recurrent preeclampsia. Arterial stiffness index and blood pressure phenotypes in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: prognostic implications for ischemic and bleeding events.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1