The difference in blood pressure readings between arms and survival: primary care cohort study.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Objective
To determine whether a difference in systolic blood pressure readings between arms can predict a reduced event free survival after 10 years.Design
Cohort study.Setting
Rural general practice in Devon, United Kingdom.Participants
230 people receiving treatment for hypertension in primary care.Intervention
Bilateral blood pressure measurements recorded at three successive surgery attendances.Main outcome measures
Cardiovascular events and deaths from all causes during a median follow-up of 9.8 years.Results
At recruitment 24% (55/230) of participants had a mean interarm difference in systolic blood pressure of 10 mm Hg or more and 9% (21/230) of 15 mm Hg or more; these differences were associated with an increased risk of all cause mortality (adjusted hazard ratio 3.6, 95% confidence interval 2.0 to 6.5 and 3.1, 1.6 to 6.0, respectively). The risk of death was also increased in 183 participants without pre-existing cardiovascular disease with an interarm difference in systolic blood pressure of 10 mm Hg or more or 15 mm Hg or more (2.6, 1.4 to 4.8 and 2.7, 1.3 to 5.4). An interarm difference in diastolic blood pressure of 10 mm Hg or more was weakly associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events or death.Conclusions
Differences in systolic blood pressure between arms can predict an increased risk of cardiovascular events and all cause mortality over 10 years in people with hypertension. This difference could be a valuable indicator of increased cardiovascular risk. Bilateral blood pressure measurements should become a routine part of cardiovascular assessment in primary care.
SUBMITTER: Clark CE
PROVIDER: S-EPMC3309155 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundAccurate blood pressure (BP) measurement is essential for the diagnosis and management of hypertension. In clinical practice, BP is estimated using noninvasive methods with significant variability of application of guidelines in clinical practice, impacting the accuracy and certainty of BP measurements.ObjectiveWe sought to assess how BP is measured in clinical practice.MethodsA survey was administered through professional societies that included predominantly cardiologists. Assessment of adherence to guideline recommendations for BP assessment was measured and compared to the level of confidence in clinic BP measurement.ResultsThere were 571 surveys completed. The majority of respondents were cardiologists (61.1%), with 47 preventive cardiologists. BP was routinely checked in both arms by 53% at the initial visit, 48% check BP once each visit, and 64% wait 5 min before initial BP assessment. Automated BP assessment is used by 58% respondents. The majority (83%) trust their BP readings, and those who trust their BP readings are more likely to perform the initial BP assessment themselves, compared to those who do not trust the clinic BP readings (30.2% vs. 13.6%, P = 0.009). Accurate BP measurement is performed by 23% of cardiologists, and more likely performed accurately by a preventive cardiologist (38.3%) compared with other cardiologists (20.0%, P = 0.007). Accurate BP measurement is more likely for those who perform the initial BP themselves rather than any other staff (36.8% vs. 17.9%; P<0.001); and for those who repeat BP manually (80% vs. 54%; P<0.001), compared to those who do not measure BP accurately. Despite the inaccuracy of BP measurement, there is a high level of confidence in the BP readings.ConclusionsAccurate BP assessment continues to remain suboptimal in clinical practice. Reliability of BP assessment requires education, identifying barriers to implementation of recommendations and engagement of the entire team to improve BP assessment.
| S-EPMC8546363 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) is the most common chronic optic neuropathy worldwide. Epidemiological studies show a robust positive relation between intraocular pressure (IOP) and POAG and modest positive association between IOP and blood pressure (BP), while the relation between BP and POAG is controversial. The International Glaucoma Genetics Consortium (n=27 558), the International Consortium on Blood Pressure (n=69 395), and the National Eye Institute Glaucoma Human Genetics Collaboration Heritable Overall Operational Database (n=37 333), represent genome-wide data sets for IOP, BP traits and POAG, respectively. We formed genome-wide significant variant panels for IOP and diastolic BP and found a strong relation with POAG (odds ratio and 95% confidence interval: 1.18 (1.14-1.21), P=1.8 × 10-27) for the former trait but no association for the latter (P=0.93). Next, we used linkage disequilibrium (LD) score regression, to provide genome-wide estimates of correlation between traits without the need for additional phenotyping. We also compared our genome-wide estimate of heritability between IOP and BP to an estimate based solely on direct measures of these traits in the Erasmus Rucphen Family (ERF; n=2519) study using Sequential Oligogenic Linkage Analysis Routines (SOLAR). LD score regression revealed high genetic correlation between IOP and POAG (48.5%, P=2.1 × 10-5); however, genetic correlation between IOP and diastolic BP (P=0.86) and between diastolic BP and POAG (P=0.42) were negligible. Using SOLAR in the ERF study, we confirmed the minimal heritability between IOP and diastolic BP (P=0.63). Overall, IOP shares genetic basis with POAG, whereas BP has limited shared genetic correlation with IOP or POAG.
| S-EPMC5643970 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Ambulatory blood pressure (BP) (ABP) is a better predictor of adverse cardiovascular events than office BP (OBP). Owing to the extensive literature on the 'white coat effect', it is widely believed that ABP tends to be lower than OBP, with statements to this effect in Joint National Committee VII. However, recent evidence suggests that the difference varies systematically with age.We searched PubMed to identify population studies, published before April 2009, which assessed OBP and either ABP or home BP (HBP). On account of significant heterogeneity in the outcomes, random effect models were used for the meta-analyses.OBP increased with age more steeply than awake ABP. OBP became higher than awake systolic/diastolic ABP at the age of 51.3/42.7 years in men (13 studies, N=3562) and 51.9/42.3 years in women (11 studies, N=2585). In the data in which OBP and HBP were measured (eight studies, N=4916), OBP was higher than HBP at all ages. In the data in which OBP, awake ABP, and HBP were all measured (two studies, N=895), awake ABP was higher than HBP at younger ages, becoming similar at the older age.OBP tends to be higher than awake ABP only after the age of 50 years for systolic and after the age of 45 years for diastolic BP, but is lower than ABP at younger ages; in contrast OBP tends to exceed HBP at all ages.
| S-EPMC3839085 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND: Recent guidelines recognize the importance of home blood pressure monitoring (HBPM) as an adjunct to clinical measurements. We explored how people who have purchased and use a home blood pressure (BP) monitor make sense of, and act upon, readings and how they communicate with their doctor about the practice of home monitoring. METHODS: A qualitative study was designed and participants were purposively recruited from several areas in England, UK. Semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted with 18 users of home BP monitors. The transcribed data were thematically analysed. RESULTS: Interpretation of home BP readings is complex, and is often characterised by uncertainty. People seek to assess value normality using 'rules of thumb', and often aim to identify the potential causes of the readings. This is done by drawing on lay models of BP function and by contextualising the readings to personal circumstances. Based on the perceived causes of the problematic readings, actions are initiated, mostly relating to changes in daily routines. Contacting the doctor was more likely when the problematic readings persisted and could not be easily explained, or when participants did not succeed in regulating their BP through their other interventions. Most users had notified their doctor of the practice of home monitoring, but medical involvement varied, with some participants reporting disinterest or reservations by doctors. CONCLUSIONS: Involvement from doctors can help people overcome difficulties and resolve uncertainties around the interpretation of home readings, and ensure that the rules of thumb are appropriate. Home monitoring can be used to strengthen the patient-clinician relationship.
| S-EPMC3726339 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVE:Simple forms of blood pressure (BP) telemonitoring require patients to text readings to central servers creating an opportunity for both entry error and manipulation. We wished to determine if there was an apparent preference for particular end digits and entries which were just below target BPs which might suggest evidence of data manipulation. DESIGN:Prospective cohort study SETTING: 37 socioeconomically diverse primary care practices from South East Scotland. PARTICIPANTS:Patients were recruited with hypertension to a telemonitoring service in which patients submitted home BP readings by manually transcribing the measurements into text messages for transmission ('patient-texted system'). These readings were compared with those from primary care patients with uncontrolled hypertension using a system in which readings were automatically transmitted, eliminating the possibility of manipulation of values ('automatic-transmission system'). METHODS:A generalised estimating equations method was used to compare BP readings between the patient-texted and automatic-transmission systems, while taking into account clustering of readings within patients. RESULTS:A total of 44?150?BP readings were analysed on 1068 patients using the patient-texted system compared with 20?705 readings on 199 patients using the automatic-transmission system. Compared with the automatic-transmission data, the patient-texted data showed a significantly higher proportion of occurrences of both systolic and diastolic BP having a zero end digit (OR 2.1, 95%?CI 1.7 to 2.6) although incidence was <2% of readings. Similarly, there was a preference for systolic 134 and diastolic 84 (the threshold for alerts was 135/85) (134 systolic BP OR 1.5, 95%?CI 1.3 to 1.8; 84 diastolic BP OR 1.5, 95%?CI 1.3 to 1.9). CONCLUSION:End-digit preference for zero numbers and specific-value preference for readings just below the alert threshold exist among patients in self-reporting their BP using telemonitoring. However, the proportion of readings affected is small and unlikely to be clinically important. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:ISRCTN72614272; Post-results.
| S-EPMC5878245 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Purpose:To compare invasive blood pressure (IBP) readings obtained from an arterial cannula with non-invasive blood pressure (NIBP) measurements from oscillometric cuffs on the upper and lower extremities of infants and children under general anesthesia. Patients and methods:Patients under 10 years of age were enrolled in our study if they were to receive general anesthesia with planned placement of a radial arterial cannula. At 5 mins intervals, IBP was measured using a fluid-coupled pressure transducer and NIBP was measured with two oscillometers with appropriately sized cuffs placed on the upper arm and lower leg, for 10 readings per patient. Results:The study enrolled 18 boys and 12 girls, ranging in age from 0 to 8 years. Across 300 data points, the absolute difference between the arm and invasive mean arterial pressure (MAP) measurements was 7±7 mmHg (range: 0-52 mmHg). The absolute difference between the leg and invasive MAP measurements was 8±8 mmHg (range: 0-52 mmHg). Although both non-invasive measurement sites demonstrated frequent deviation from invasive measurement, large deviations were more common when BP was measured at the leg (81 of 298 observations (27%) deviating by >10 mmHg) compared to the arm (60 of 300 observations (20%) deviating by >10 mmHg). Conclusion:The frequency of clinically significant NIBP deviation in children under general anesthesia supports the importance of IBP monitoring when hemodynamic fluctuations are likely and would be particularly detrimental. NIBP measured at the lower leg is more likely to result in clinically significant deviation from invasively measured MAP than NIBP values obtained from an upper arm.
| S-EPMC6709812 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe agreement between invasive and non-invasive blood pressure (BP) readings in the first days of life of preterm infants is contentiously debated.ObjectiveTo compare mean, systolic and diastolic invasive (IBP) and non-invasive BP (NBP) readings obtained during routine care in the first four weeks of life of extremely preterm infants.MethodsWe extracted pairs of IBP and NBP readings obtained from preterm infants born below 28 weeks of gestation from the local database. After exclusion of erroneous measurements, we investigated the repeated measures correlation and analyzed the agreement (bias) and precision adjusted for multiple measurements per individual.ResultsAmong 335 pairs of IBP and NBP readings obtained from 128 patients, we found correlation coefficients >0.65 for mean, systolic and diastolic BP values. The bias for mean BP readings was -0.4 mmHg (SD 6.1), for systolic BP readings 6.2 mmHg (SD 8.1), and for diastolic BP readings -4.3 mmHg (SD 6.5). Overestimation of systolic IBP and underestimation of diastolic IBP by the non-invasive measurement were found both in the group with gestational age from 23 to 25.9 weeks and in the group with gestational age from 26 to 27.9 weeks. Systolic NBP readings tended to exceed invasive readings in the range <50 mmHg (bias 9.9 mmHg) whereas diastolic NBP readings were lower than invasive values particularly in the range >30 mmHg (bias -5.5 mmHg).ConclusionThe disagreement between invasive and non-invasive BP readings in infants extends to the first four weeks of life. Biases differ for mean, systolic and diastolic BP values. Our observation implies that they may depend on the range of the blood pressure. Awareness of these biases and preemptive concomitant use of IBP and NPB readings may contribute to reducing over- or under-treatment.
| S-EPMC6310249 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveAlthough high visit-to-visit blood pressure variability (BPV) is an independent risk factor for cardiovascular events, the frequency of high BPV is unknown. We conducted this study to define the frequency of high BPV in primary care patients, clinical correlates, and association with antihypertensive therapies.MethodsRetrospective cohort study using electronic medical record data (with previously validated case definitions based on billing codes, free text analysis of progress notes, and prescribing data) from the Canadian Primary Care Sentinel Surveillance Network of 221,803 adults with multiple clinic visits over a 2-year period. We a priori defined a standard deviation>13.0 mm Hg in visit-to-visit systolic blood pressure (SBP) as "high BPV" based on prior literature.ResultsOverall, 85,455 (38.5%) patients had hypertension (mean 6.56 visits with SBP measurement, mean SBP 134.4 with Standard Deviation [SD] 11.3, 33.2% exhibited high BPV) and 136,348 did not (mean 3.96 visits with SBP measurement, mean SBP 120.9 with SD 8.2, 16.5% had high BPV). BPV increased with age regardless of whether individuals had hypertension or not; at all ages BPV varied across antihypertensive treatment regimens and was greater in those receiving renin angiotensin blockers or beta-blockers (p<0.001). High BPV was more frequent in patients with diabetes, chronic kidney disease, dementia, depression, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, or Parkinson's disease.ConclusionsHigh visit-to-visit BPV is present in one sixth of non-hypertensive adults and one third of hypertensive individuals and is more common in those with comorbidities. The frequency of high BPV varies across antihypertensive treatment regimens.
| S-EPMC8018659 | biostudies-literature
Project description:American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines describe the perioperative evaluation as "a unique opportunity to identify patients with hypertension"; however, factors such as anticipatory stress or medication noncompliance may induce a bias toward higher blood pressure, leaving clinicians unsure about how to interpret preoperative hypertension. Information describing the relationship between preoperative intake blood pressure and primary care measurements could help anesthesiologists make primary care referrals for improved blood pressure control in an evidence-based fashion. We hypothesized that the preoperative examination provides a useful basis for initiating primary care blood pressure referral.We analyzed retrospective data on 2807 patients who arrived from home for surgery and who were subsequently evaluated within 6 months after surgery in the primary care center of the same institution. After descriptive analysis, we conducted multiple linear regression analysis to identify day-of-surgery (DOS) factors associated with subsequent primary care blood pressure. We calculated the sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive value of different blood pressure referral thresholds using both a single-measurement and a 2-stage screen incorporating recent preoperative and DOS measurements for identifying patients with subsequently elevated primary care blood pressure.DOS systolic blood pressure (SBP) was higher than subsequent primary care SBP by a mean bias of 5.5 mm Hg (95% limits of agreement + 43.8 to -32.8). DOS diastolic blood pressure (DBP) was higher than subsequent primary care DBP by a mean bias of 1.5 mm Hg (95% limits of agreement +13.0 to -10.0). Linear regression of DOS factors explained 19% of the variability in primary care SBP and 29% of the variability in DBP. Accounting for the observed bias, a 2-stage SBP referral screen requiring preoperative clinic SBP ?140 mm Hg and DOS SBP ?146 mm Hg had 95.9% estimated specificity (95% confidence interval [CI] 94.4 to 97.0) for identifying subsequent primary care SBP ?140 mm Hg and estimated sensitivity of 26.8% (95% CI 22.0 to 32.0). A similarly high specificity using a single DOS SBP required a threshold SBP ?160 mm Hg, for which estimated specificity was 95.2% (95% CI 94.2 to 96.1). For DBP, a presenting DOS DBP ?92 mm Hg had 95.7% specificity (95% CI 94.8 to 96.4) for subsequent primary care DBP ?90 mm Hg with a sensitivity of 18.8% (95% CI 14.4 to 24.0).A small bias toward higher DOS blood pressures relative to subsequent primary care measurements was observed. DOS factors predicted only a small proportion of the observed variation. Accounting for the observed bias, a 2-stage SBP threshold and a single-reading DBP threshold were highly specific though insensitive for identifying subsequent primary care blood pressure elevation.
| S-EPMC3282161 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPoorly controlled hypertension is independently associated with mortality, cardiovascular risk and disease progression in chronic kidney disease (CKD). In the UK, CKD stage 3 is principally managed in primary care, including blood pressure (BP) management. Controlling BP is key to improving outcomes in CKD. This study aimed to investigate associations of BP control in people with CKD stage 3.Methods1,741 patients with CKD 3 recruited from 32 general practices for the Renal Risk in Derby Study underwent medical history, clinical assessment and biochemistry testing. BP control was assessed by three standards: National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE), National Kidney Foundation Kidney Disease Outcome Quality Initiative (KDOQI) and Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) guidelines. Descriptive statistics were used to compare characteristics of people achieving and not achieving BP control. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with BP control.ResultsThe prevalence of hypertension was 88%. Among people with hypertension, 829/1426 (58.1%) achieved NICE BP targets, 512/1426 (35.9%) KDOQI targets and 859/1426 (60.2%) KDIGO targets. Smaller proportions of people with diabetes and/or albuminuria achieved hypertension targets. 615/1426 (43.1%) were only taking one antihypertensive agent. On multivariable analysis, BP control (NICE and KDIGO) was negatively associated with age (NICE odds ratio (OR) 0.27; 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.17-0.43) 70-79 compared to <60), diabetes (OR 0.32; 95% CI 0.25-0.43)), and albuminuria (OR 0.56; 95% CI 0.42-0.74)). For the KDOQI target, there was also association with males (OR 0.76; 95% CI 0.60-0.96)) but not diabetes (target not diabetes specific). Older people were less likely to achieve systolic targets (NICE target OR 0.17 (95% CI 0.09,0.32) p < 0.001) and more likely to achieve diastolic targets (OR 2.35 (95% CI 1.11,4.96) p < 0.001) for people >80 compared to < 60).ConclusionsSuboptimal BP control was common in CKD patients with hypertension in this study, particularly those at highest risk of adverse outcomes due to diabetes and or albuminuria. This study suggests there is scope for improving BP control in people with CKD by using more antihypertensive agents in combination while considering issues of adherence and potential side effects.
| S-EPMC3701497 | biostudies-literature