Defining the hemodynamic response of hypertensive and normotensive subjects through serial timed blood pressure readings in the clinic
2
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Background: Every third patient in the clinic is misdiagnosed due to white-coat phenomenon, necessitating needless and costly treatment. We aimed to study the hemodynamic response of the physician’s visit on hypertensive and normotensive patients by investigating the trend of blood pressure (BP) before, during and 15 min after the physician-patient encounter. Methods: A descriptive, cross-sectional study was conducted over a period of 8 months in the cardiology clinics at the Aga Khan University Hospital, Karachi. Both hypertensive and normotensive patients, aged ≥18 years, were recruited. Pregnant females or those with a history of volume loss were excluded. BP readings were taken using an automated, validated device (Omron-HEM7221-E) at three points: pre-clinic BP by the assessment nurse, in-clinic BP by the attending physician and post-clinic BP 15-min after the physician-patient encounter by a research assistant. Independent samples t-test was used to calculate the statistical difference between hypertensive and normotensive BP values. Results: Of 180 participants, 71% (n = 128) were hypertensive and 57% (n = 103) of all were males. The mean age of the participants was 57 ± 15 years. The mean and standard deviation(±SD) systolic BP (SBP) taken pre-clinic, inclinic and 15-min post-clinic for hypertensive population was 128.7 ± 20 mmHg, 137.1 ± 21 mmHg and 127.9 ± 19 mmHg. The mean and standard deviation(±SD) SBP taken pre-clinic, in-clinic and 15 min post-clinic for normotensive population was 112 ± 16 mmHg, 115.8 ± 20 mmHg and 111.8 ± 15 mmHg. The hypertensive SBP values showed statistically significant difference from the normotensive values (difference in pre-clinic SBP: 16. 7 mmHg, p-value < 0.001; in-clinic SBP: 21.3 mmHg, p-value < 0.001; and 15 min post-clinic: 16.1 mmHg, p-value < 0.001). Conclusions: Hypertensive and normotensive patients display congruent hemodynamics upon visiting the physician, the alert response being accentuated amongst the hypertensive group. In-clinic BP readings are higher for both hypertensive and normotensive patients making them unreliable for screening and management of hypertension amongst both the groups.
Abstract
Background: Every third patient in the clinic is misdiagnosed due to white-coat phenomenon, necessitating needless and costly treatment. We aimed to study the hemodynamic response of the physician’s visit on hypertensive and normotensive patients by investigating the trend of blood pressure (BP) before, during and 15 min after the physician-patient encounter. Methods: A descriptive, cross-sectional study was conducted over a period of 8 months in the cardiology clinics at the Aga Khan University Hospital, Karachi. Both hypertensive and normotensive patients, aged ≥18 years, were recruited. Pregnant females or those with a history of volume loss were excluded. BP readings were taken using an automated, validated device (Omron-HEM7221-E) at three points: pre-clinic BP by the assessment nurse, in-clinic BP by the attending physician and post-clinic BP 15-min after the physician-patient encounter by a research assistant. Independent samples t-test was used to calculate the statistical difference between hypertensive and normotensive BP values. Results: Of 180 participants, 71% (n = 128) were hypertensive and 57% (n = 103) of all were males. The mean age of the participants was 57 ± 15 years. The mean and standard deviation(±SD) systolic BP (SBP) taken pre-clinic, inclinic and 15-min post-clinic for hypertensive population was 128.7 ± 20 mmHg, 137.1 ± 21 mmHg and 127.9 ± 19 mmHg. The mean and standard deviation(±SD) SBP taken pre-clinic, in-clinic and 15 min post-clinic for normotensive population was 112 ± 16 mmHg, 115.8 ± 20 mmHg and 111.8 ± 15 mmHg. The hypertensive SBP values showed statistically significant difference from the normotensive values (difference in pre-clinic SBP: 16. 7 mmHg, p-value < 0.001; in-clinic SBP: 21.3 mmHg, p-value < 0.001; and 15 min post-clinic: 16.1 mmHg, p-value < 0.001). Conclusions: Hypertensive and normotensive patients display congruent hemodynamics upon visiting the physician, the alert response being accentuated amongst the hypertensive group. In-clinic BP readings are higher for both hypertensive and normotensive patients making them unreliable for screening and management of hypertension amongst both the groups.
참고문헌 (18)
- Lawes CM, "Global burden of blood-pressurerelated disease, 2001", Lancet, 371(9623), pp.1513~1518 (2008)
- Shafi ST, "A survey of hypertension prevalence, awareness, treatment, and control in health screening camps of rural Central Punjab, Pakistan", J Epidemiol Glob Health, 7(2), pp.135~140 (2017)
- Hyder AA, "Applying burden of disease methods in developing countries : a case study from Pakistan", Am J Public Health, 90(8), pp.1235~ (2000)
- Jafar TH, "Determinants of uncontrolled hypertension in rural communities in South Asia - Bangladesh, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka", Am J Hypertens (2018)
- Pickering TG, "When and how to use self(home)and ambulatory blood pressure monitoring", J Am Soc Hypertens, 2(3), pp.119~124 (2008)
- Elliott WJ, "High prevalence of white-coat hypertension in Spanish resistant hypertensive patients", Hypertension, 57(5), pp.889~890 (2011)
- Pickering TG, "How common is white coat hypertension?", Jama, 259(2), pp.225~228 (1988)
- Shahab H, "The post clinic ambulatory blood pressure(PC-ABP)study correlates post clinic blood pressure(PCBP)with the gold standard ambulatory blood pressure", BMC research notes, 11(1), pp.460~ (2018)
- Spruill TM, "The impact of perceived hypertension status on anxiety and the white coat effect", Annals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine, 34(1), pp.1~9 (2007)
- Shahab H, "Are BP readings taken after a patient-physician encounter in a real-world clinic scenario the lowest of all the readings in a clinic visit", JCPSP : Journal of the College of Physicians and Surgeons--Pakistan, 25(3), pp.206~ (2015)
- Chobanian AV, "The seventh report of the joint national committee on prevention, detection, evaluation, and treatment of high blood pressure : the JNC 7report", Jama, 289(19), pp.2560~2571 (2003)
- van der Wel MC, "A novel approach to office blood pressure measurement : 30-minute office blood pressure vs daytime ambulatory blood pressure", Ann Fam Med, 9(2), pp.128~135 (2011)
- Topouchian J, "Validation of four devices : Omron M6 comfort, Omron HEM-7420, Withings BP-800, and Polygreen KP-7670 for home blood pressure measurement according to the European Society of Hypertension International Protocol", Vasc Health Risk Manag, 10, pp.33~ (2014)
- Ogedegbe G, "The misdiagnosis of hypertension : the role of patient anxiety", Arch Intern Med, 168(22), pp.2459~2465 (2008)
- Stergiou GS, "White coat effect in treated versus untreated hypertensive individuals : a case-control study using ambulatory and home blood pressure monitoring", Am J Hypertens, 17(2), pp.124~128 (2004)
- Pickering TG, "What is the white-coat effect and how should it be measured?", Blood pressure monitoring, 7(6), pp.293~300 (2002)
- Donner-Banzhoff N, "Is the 'clinic-home blood pressure difference' associated with psychological distress? A primary carebased study", J Hypertens, 15(6), pp.585~590 (1997)
- Reiff S, "Classical conditioning of the human blood pressure response", Int J Psychophysiol, 34(2), pp.135~145 (1999)