Dataset Information

Stress-Induced Blood Pressure Elevation Self-Measured by a Wearable Watch-Type Device.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Psychological stress contributes to blood pressure (BP) variability, which is a significant and independent risk factor for cardiovascular events. We compared the effectiveness of a recently developed wearable watch-type BP monitoring (WBPM) device and an ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) device for detecting ambulatory stress-induced BP elevation in 50 outpatients with 1 or more cardiovascular risk factors.

Methods

The WBPM and ABPM were both worn on the subject's nondominant arm. ABPM was measured automatically at 30-minute intervals, and each ABPM measurement was followed by a self-measured WBPM measurement. We also collected self-reported information about situational conditions, including the emotional state of subjects at the time of each BP measurement. We analyzed 642 paired BP readings for which the self-reported emotional state in the corresponding diary entry was happy, calm, anxious, or tense.

Results

In a mixed-effect analysis, there were significant differences between the BP values measured during negative (anxious, tense) and positive (happy, calm) emotions in both the WBPM (systolic BP [SBP]: 9.3 ± 2.1 mm Hg, P < 0.001; diastolic BP [DBP]: 8.4 ± 1.4 mm Hg, P < 0.001) and ABPM (SBP: 10.7 ± 2.1 mm Hg, P < 0.001; DBP: 5.6 ± 1.4 mm Hg, P < 0.001). The absolute BP levels induced by emotional stress self-measured by the WBPM were similar to those automeasured by the ABPM (SBP, WBPM: 141.1 ± 2.7 mm Hg; ABPM: 140.3 ± 2.7 mm Hg; P = 0.724). The subject's location at the BP measurement was also significantly associated with BP elevation.

Conclusions

The self-measurement by the WBPM could detect BP variability induced by multiple factors, including emotional stress, under ambulatory conditions as accurately as ABPM.

SUBMITTER: Tomitani N

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8057129 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe paucity of evidence on longitudinal and consecutive recordings of physical activity (PA) and blood pressure (BP) under real-life conditions and their relationships is a vital research gap that needs to be addressed.ObjectiveThis study aims to (1) investigate the short-term relationship between device-measured step volume and BP; (2) explore the joint effects of step volume and variability on BP; and (3) examine whether the association patterns between PA and BP varied across sex, hypertension status, and chronic condition status.MethodsThis study used PA data of a prospective cohort of 3070 community-dwelling older adults derived from a mobile health app. Daily step counts, as a proxy of step volume, were derived from wearable devices between 2018 and 2022 and categorized into tertiles (low, medium, and high). Step variability was assessed using the SD of daily step counts. Consecutive daily step count recordings within 0 to 6 days preceding each BP measurement were analyzed. Generalized estimation equation models were used to estimate the individual and joint associations of daily step volume and variability with BP. Stratified analyses by sex, the presence of hypertension, and the number of morbidities were further conducted.ResultsA total of 3070 participants, with a median age of 72 (IQR 67-77) years and 71.37% (2191/3070) women, were included. Participants walked a median of 7580 (IQR 4972-10,653) steps and 5523 (IQR 3590-7820) meters per day for a total of 592,597 person-days of PA monitoring. Our results showed that higher levels of daily step volume were associated with lower BP (systolic BP, diastolic BP, mean arterial pressure, and pulse pressure). Compared with participants with low step volume (daily step counts <6000/d) and irregular steps, participants with high step volume (≥9500/d) and regular steps showed the strongest decrease in systolic BP (-1.69 mm Hg, 95% CI -2.2 to -1.18), while participants with medium step volume (6000/d to <9500/d) and regular steps were associated with the lowest diastolic BP (-1.067 mm Hg, 95% CI -1.379 to -0.755). Subgroup analyses indicated generally greater effects on women, individuals with normal BP, and those with only 1 chronic disease, but the effect pattern was varied and heterogeneous between participants with different characteristics.ConclusionsIncreased step volume demonstrated a substantial protective effect on BP among older adults with chronic conditions. Furthermore, the beneficial association between step volume and BP was enhanced by regular steps, suggesting potential synergistic protective effects of both increased step volume and step regularity. Targeting both step volume and variability through PA interventions may yield greater benefits in BP control, particularly among participants with hypertension and a higher chronic disease burden.

Project description:BackgroundThe Global Burden of Diseases Study 2010 reported that hypertension is worldwide the leading risk factor for cardiovascular disease, causing 9.4 million deaths annually. We examined to what extent self-measurement of home blood pressure (HBP) refines risk stratification across increasing categories of conventional blood pressure (CBP).Methods and findingsThis meta-analysis included 5,008 individuals randomly recruited from five populations (56.6% women; mean age, 57.1 y). All were not treated with antihypertensive drugs. In multivariable analyses, hazard ratios (HRs) associated with 10-mm Hg increases in systolic HBP were computed across CBP categories, using the following systolic/diastolic CBP thresholds (in mm Hg): optimal, <120/<80; normal, 120-129/80-84; high-normal, 130-139/85-89; mild hypertension, 140-159/90-99; and severe hypertension, ?160/?100. Over 8.3 y, 522 participants died, and 414, 225, and 194 had cardiovascular, cardiac, and cerebrovascular events, respectively. In participants with optimal or normal CBP, HRs for a composite cardiovascular end point associated with a 10-mm Hg higher systolic HBP were 1.28 (1.01-1.62) and 1.22 (1.00-1.49), respectively. At high-normal CBP and in mild hypertension, the HRs were 1.24 (1.03-1.49) and 1.20 (1.06-1.37), respectively, for all cardiovascular events and 1.33 (1.07-1.65) and 1.30 (1.09-1.56), respectively, for stroke. In severe hypertension, the HRs were not significant (p?0.20). Among people with optimal, normal, and high-normal CBP, 67 (5.0%), 187 (18.4%), and 315 (30.3%), respectively, had masked hypertension (HBP?130 mm Hg systolic or ?85 mm Hg diastolic). Compared to true optimal CBP, masked hypertension was associated with a 2.3-fold (1.5-3.5) higher cardiovascular risk. A limitation was few data from low- and middle-income countries.ConclusionsHBP substantially refines risk stratification at CBP levels assumed to carry no or only mildly increased risk, in particular in the presence of masked hypertension. Randomized trials could help determine the best use of CBP vs. HBP in guiding BP management. Our study identified a novel indication for HBP, which, in view of its low cost and the increased availability of electronic communication, might be globally applicable, even in remote areas or in low-resource settings.