Automated office blood pressure (AOBP) is better predictor of arterial stiffness then manual office blood pressure (MOBP)

PLUHÁČEK, Zdeněk, Radka ŠTĚPÁNOVÁ, Jindřich FIALA, Petr DOBŠÁK, Francesco LOPEZ-JIMENEZ a Ondřej SOCHOR. Automated office blood pressure (AOBP) is better predictor of arterial stiffness then manual office blood pressure (MOBP). In ESC Congress 2014, Barcelona - Spain. 2014.

Základní údaje

Originální název

Automated office blood pressure (AOBP) is better predictor of arterial stiffness then manual office blood pressure (MOBP)

Název česky

Automatizované měření krevního tlaku (AOBP) je lepším prediktorem tepenné tuhosti než klasické měření krevního tlaku (MOBP)

Autoři

PLUHÁČEK, Zdeněk, Radka ŠTĚPÁNOVÁ, Jindřich FIALA, Petr DOBŠÁK, Francesco LOPEZ-JIMENEZ a Ondřej SOCHOR

Vydání

ESC Congress 2014, Barcelona - Spain, 2014

---

Další údaje

Jazyk

angličtina

Typ výsledku

Konferenční abstrakt

Obor

30201 Cardiac and Cardiovascular systems

Stát vydavatele

Česká republika

Utajení

není předmětem státního či obchodního tajemství

Organizační jednotka

Lékařská fakulta

Klíčová slova anglicky

blood pressure bptru

Příznaky

Mezinárodní význam

---

Anotace

V originále

Introduction and aim: AOBP monitors allow measuring of blood pressure (BP) in ambulant setting without presence of medical staff with the accuracy near to 24h ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. The recommended cut-off point for defining hypertension using AOBP is the same as for awake ambulatory BP or home BP. Arterial stiffness is one of the markers of cardiovascular health and reflects subclinical target organ damage. Our aim was to compare the automated and manual BP values with measured equivalent of arterial stiffness. Methods: During 11 months we investigated 1101 people (47% male) aged 25-65 years (47.3 ± 11.4). We measured BP using sphygmomanometer according to the guidelines (10 minutes rest, average of 2nd and 3rd measurement), measurement was performed by a trained nurse. Then the volunteer was sent to a separate quiet room, where after 10 minutes of sitting, BP was measured automatically 5 times in 1 minute interval by AOBP monitor, during the measurement, the volunteer was resting alone on a chair. Equivalent of arterial stiffness (cardio-ankle vascular index) was measured using vascular screening system. Results: According to AOBP, resp. to MOBP there was 14.7 %, resp. 12.4 % hypertensive volunteers (BP>135/85 mmHg, resp. BP>140/90 mmHg). There was a significant difference between AOBP and MOBP (p<0.001). AOBP was lower than MOBP in the majority of people. Arterial stiffness correlated with systolic blood pressure in both AOBP and MOBP (R=0.415, p<0.001 resp. R=0.306, p<0.001), the relationship with diastolic blood pressure was weak (R=0.280, p<0.001, resp. R=0.217 p<0.001). Discussion and conclusion: There was a significant difference between AOBP and MOBP, which confirms, that any interaction with medical staff makes the volunteer`s BP higher, known as the white coat effect. CAVI correlates slightly stronger with AOBP then with MOBP, suggesting that AOBP is better predictor of arterial stiffness.

Česky

Introduction and aim: AOBP monitors allow measuring of blood pressure (BP) in ambulant setting without presence of medical staff with the accuracy near to 24h ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. The recommended cut-off point for defining hypertension using AOBP is the same as for awake ambulatory BP or home BP. Arterial stiffness is one of the markers of cardiovascular health and reflects subclinical target organ damage. Our aim was to compare the automated and manual BP values with measured equivalent of arterial stiffness. Methods: During 11 months we investigated 1101 people (47% male) aged 25-65 years (47.3 ± 11.4). We measured BP using sphygmomanometer according to the guidelines (10 minutes rest, average of 2nd and 3rd measurement), measurement was performed by a trained nurse. Then the volunteer was sent to a separate quiet room, where after 10 minutes of sitting, BP was measured automatically 5 times in 1 minute interval by AOBP monitor, during the measurement, the volunteer was resting alone on a chair. Equivalent of arterial stiffness (cardio-ankle vascular index) was measured using vascular screening system. Results: According to AOBP, resp. to MOBP there was 14.7 %, resp. 12.4 % hypertensive volunteers (BP>135/85 mmHg, resp. BP>140/90 mmHg). There was a significant difference between AOBP and MOBP (p<0.001). AOBP was lower than MOBP in the majority of people. Arterial stiffness correlated with systolic blood pressure in both AOBP and MOBP (R=0.415, p<0.001 resp. R=0.306, p<0.001), the relationship with diastolic blood pressure was weak (R=0.280, p<0.001, resp. R=0.217 p<0.001). Discussion and conclusion: There was a significant difference between AOBP and MOBP, which confirms, that any interaction with medical staff makes the volunteer`s BP higher, known as the white coat effect. CAVI correlates slightly stronger with AOBP then with MOBP, suggesting that AOBP is better predictor of arterial stiffness.