有培训和无培训的家庭血压监测比较:遵守建议说明是否会忽略高血压?

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q3 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS Anatolian Journal of Cardiology Pub Date : 2024-09-20 DOI:10.14744/AnatolJCardiol.2024.4530
Hülya Şirin, Ahmet Arslan, İbrahim Sefa Güneş, Arslan Öcal, Fatma Sena Konyalıoğlu, Gamze Ketrez, Asiye Çiğdem Şimşek, Salim Yaşar, Cem Barçın
{"title":"有培训和无培训的家庭血压监测比较:遵守建议说明是否会忽略高血压?","authors":"Hülya Şirin, Ahmet Arslan, İbrahim Sefa Güneş, Arslan Öcal, Fatma Sena Konyalıoğlu, Gamze Ketrez, Asiye Çiğdem Şimşek, Salim Yaşar, Cem Barçın","doi":"10.14744/AnatolJCardiol.2024.4530","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Home blood pressure monitoring (HBPM) is commonly used to diagnose hypertension (HT), with a diagnostic threshold of ≥135/85 mm Hg, the same as daytime ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM). This study hypothesizes that training and adherence to HBPM guidelines will yield more accurate BP readings compared to ABPM.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The study involved 129 patients with elevated office BP but no prior HT diagnosis. After a two-week observation period with lifestyle advice, HBPM was conducted over a week before and after structured measurement training, with ABPM performed in each period. Adherence to instructions post-training was also assessed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Post-training, mean systolic and diastolic home BP values significantly decreased (from 128 ± 13.1/84.9 ± 8.2 to 122.6 ± 12.7/81.8 ± 7.8; P < 0.001 for both), while daytime ABPM values remained unchanged (131.7 ± 11.1/86.7 ± 9.3 before vs. 130.7 ± 11.7/85.9 ± 8.6 after; P = 0.185). Although HBPM values were consistently lower than ABPM values, the discrepancy grew post-training. The number of patients reaching the HT threshold via HBPM decreased significantly post-training [71 (55%) to 54 (41.9%); P = 0.006], whereas the number via daytime ABPM remained similar [82 (64.3%) vs. 84 (65.1%); P = 1.000].</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Training and adherence to HBPM guidelines led to lower BP readings and fewer HT diagnoses. Contrary to the hypothesis, this method under \"ideal conditions\" underestimated HT prevalence when compared to daytime ABPM. Further studies with clinical endpoints are needed to refine HBPM methods and establish new BP thresholds for more accurate HT detection.</p>","PeriodicalId":7835,"journal":{"name":"Anatolian Journal of Cardiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of Home Blood Pressure Monitoring with and without Training: Does Adherence to the Recommended Instructions Overlook Hypertension?\",\"authors\":\"Hülya Şirin, Ahmet Arslan, İbrahim Sefa Güneş, Arslan Öcal, Fatma Sena Konyalıoğlu, Gamze Ketrez, Asiye Çiğdem Şimşek, Salim Yaşar, Cem Barçın\",\"doi\":\"10.14744/AnatolJCardiol.2024.4530\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Home blood pressure monitoring (HBPM) is commonly used to diagnose hypertension (HT), with a diagnostic threshold of ≥135/85 mm Hg, the same as daytime ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM). This study hypothesizes that training and adherence to HBPM guidelines will yield more accurate BP readings compared to ABPM.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The study involved 129 patients with elevated office BP but no prior HT diagnosis. After a two-week observation period with lifestyle advice, HBPM was conducted over a week before and after structured measurement training, with ABPM performed in each period. Adherence to instructions post-training was also assessed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Post-training, mean systolic and diastolic home BP values significantly decreased (from 128 ± 13.1/84.9 ± 8.2 to 122.6 ± 12.7/81.8 ± 7.8; P < 0.001 for both), while daytime ABPM values remained unchanged (131.7 ± 11.1/86.7 ± 9.3 before vs. 130.7 ± 11.7/85.9 ± 8.6 after; P = 0.185). Although HBPM values were consistently lower than ABPM values, the discrepancy grew post-training. The number of patients reaching the HT threshold via HBPM decreased significantly post-training [71 (55%) to 54 (41.9%); P = 0.006], whereas the number via daytime ABPM remained similar [82 (64.3%) vs. 84 (65.1%); P = 1.000].</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Training and adherence to HBPM guidelines led to lower BP readings and fewer HT diagnoses. Contrary to the hypothesis, this method under \\\"ideal conditions\\\" underestimated HT prevalence when compared to daytime ABPM. Further studies with clinical endpoints are needed to refine HBPM methods and establish new BP thresholds for more accurate HT detection.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7835,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Anatolian Journal of Cardiology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Anatolian Journal of Cardiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14744/AnatolJCardiol.2024.4530\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anatolian Journal of Cardiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14744/AnatolJCardiol.2024.4530","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:家庭血压监测(HBPM)通常用于诊断高血压(HT),诊断阈值为≥135/85 mm Hg,与日间非卧床血压监测(ABPM)相同。本研究假设,与 ABPM 相比,经过培训并遵守 HBPM 指南将获得更准确的血压读数:研究涉及 129 名办公室血压升高但之前未确诊为高血压的患者。在经过两周的观察期并提供生活方式建议后,在结构化测量培训前后各进行一周的 HBPM,并在每个阶段进行 ABPM。此外,还对培训后是否遵守指导进行了评估:结果:培训后,收缩压和舒张压的平均家庭血压值显著下降(从 128 ± 13.1/84.9 ± 8.2 降至 122.6 ± 12.7/81.8 ± 7.8;两者的 P < 0.001),而日间 ABPM 值保持不变(培训前为 131.7 ± 11.1/86.7 ± 9.3,培训后为 130.7 ± 11.7/85.9 ± 8.6;P = 0.185)。虽然 HBPM 值一直低于 ABPM 值,但培训后的差异有所扩大。培训后,通过 HBPM 达到高血压阈值的患者人数明显减少 [71 (55%) 降至 54 (41.9%);P = 0.006],而通过日间 ABPM 达到高血压阈值的患者人数保持相似 [82 (64.3%) vs. 84 (65.1%);P = 1.000]:结论:培训和遵守 HBPM 指南可降低血压读数,减少高血压诊断。与假设相反,与日间 ABPM 相比,这种方法在 "理想条件 "下低估了高血压患病率。需要对临床终点进行进一步研究,以完善 HBPM 方法并建立新的血压阈值,从而更准确地检测出高血压。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Comparison of Home Blood Pressure Monitoring with and without Training: Does Adherence to the Recommended Instructions Overlook Hypertension?

Background: Home blood pressure monitoring (HBPM) is commonly used to diagnose hypertension (HT), with a diagnostic threshold of ≥135/85 mm Hg, the same as daytime ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM). This study hypothesizes that training and adherence to HBPM guidelines will yield more accurate BP readings compared to ABPM.

Methods: The study involved 129 patients with elevated office BP but no prior HT diagnosis. After a two-week observation period with lifestyle advice, HBPM was conducted over a week before and after structured measurement training, with ABPM performed in each period. Adherence to instructions post-training was also assessed.

Results: Post-training, mean systolic and diastolic home BP values significantly decreased (from 128 ± 13.1/84.9 ± 8.2 to 122.6 ± 12.7/81.8 ± 7.8; P < 0.001 for both), while daytime ABPM values remained unchanged (131.7 ± 11.1/86.7 ± 9.3 before vs. 130.7 ± 11.7/85.9 ± 8.6 after; P = 0.185). Although HBPM values were consistently lower than ABPM values, the discrepancy grew post-training. The number of patients reaching the HT threshold via HBPM decreased significantly post-training [71 (55%) to 54 (41.9%); P = 0.006], whereas the number via daytime ABPM remained similar [82 (64.3%) vs. 84 (65.1%); P = 1.000].

Conclusion: Training and adherence to HBPM guidelines led to lower BP readings and fewer HT diagnoses. Contrary to the hypothesis, this method under "ideal conditions" underestimated HT prevalence when compared to daytime ABPM. Further studies with clinical endpoints are needed to refine HBPM methods and establish new BP thresholds for more accurate HT detection.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Anatolian Journal of Cardiology
Anatolian Journal of Cardiology CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS-
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
7.70%
发文量
270
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Anatolian Journal of Cardiology is an international monthly periodical on cardiology published on independent, unbiased, double-blinded and peer-review principles. The journal’s publication language is English. The Anatolian Journal of Cardiology aims to publish qualified and original clinical, experimental and basic research on cardiology at the international level. The journal’s scope also covers editorial comments, reviews of innovations in medical education and practice, case reports, original images, scientific letters, educational articles, letters to the editor, articles on publication ethics, diagnostic puzzles, and issues in social cardiology. The target readership includes academic members, specialists, residents, and general practitioners working in the fields of adult cardiology, pediatric cardiology, cardiovascular surgery and internal medicine.
期刊最新文献
Comparison of Home Blood Pressure Monitoring with and without Training: Does Adherence to the Recommended Instructions Overlook Hypertension? Disturbed Atrial Conduction in Patients with Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy. Efficacy and Mechanism of Alprostadil in Diabetes Mellitus Combined with Peripheral Atherosclerosis. Predicting Postoperative Atrial Fibrillation Using HARMS2-AF Score. The Effect of Low-Intensity Interval Exercise with Blood Flow Restriction on Plasma Cardiac Troponin: A Cross-Design Trial.
×
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:481959085
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