First Thomas Pickering memorial lecture*: ambulatory blood pressure measurement is essential for the management of hypertension

Adherence to proper blood pressure measurements among interns at the university of Gondar specialized referral hospital

Introduction

Blood pressure is a lateral force exerted on the wall of arteries and is critical for the normal distribution of blood containing nutrients and oxygen to metabolic tissues. It is one of the vital signs often measured by interns, nurses, and physicians at doctor's offices, at bedside, and possibly at home. Accurate blood pressure measurement is essential for proper diagnosis and management of patients, especially those with hypertension. The aim of this cross-sectional survey study is to assess the practice of measuring blood pressure by interns.

Methods

This study was conducted in the form of a survey administered through face-to-face interviews. All the interns at the Univeristy of Gondar Specialized Referral Hospital were approached. The survey included questions about devices used, patient's information, and blood pressure measurement techniques. Epi-Data version 3.1 was used for data entry and exported to STATA 17 for data management and analysis. The Chi-square test was checked to assess the eligibility of variables for logistic regression. Finally, in the multivariable binary logistic regression analysis, variables with P-value < 0.05 were considered to be statistically significantly associated. The Adjusted Odds Ratio (AOR) with 95% CI was reported to declare the statistical significance and strength of association between blood pressure measurement and independent variables.

Result

The magnitude of appropriate measurement of blood pressure among interns was 10.1 (95% CI: 7.19, 13.9). A total of 318 interns participated in the current study. Of these study participants, 65.4% (208) were males. A increase in participants age (AOR: 1.48, 95% CI: 1.09, 2.01), being male interns (AOR: 5.51, 95% CI: 1.51, 8.97), and having patients who were familiar with the procedure (AOR: 2.95, 95% CI: 1.19, 7.03) were factors significantly associated with appropriate adherence to blood pressure measurement.

Conclusion and recommendation

Only 10% of six-year medical students (Interns) were successful in appropriately assessing blood pressure. Age, being male, and patient understanding were factors significantly associated to the adherence of blood pressure measurement. Considering the frequency of BP measurement and the impact of hypertension on morbidity and mortality, efforts are needed to maximize the quality of BP measurement by health professionals. This process should begin early during training and be consistent throughout their clinical practice, supplemented by ongoing education.

Pathophysiology, Diagnosis, and Management of Hypertension in the Elderly

There is a high prevalence of systemic arterial hypertension in the elderly; 70% of adults >65 years have this disease. A key mechanism in the development of hypertension in the elderly is increased arterial stiffness. This accounts for the increase in systolic blood pressure and pulse pressure and fall in diastolic blood pressure (isolated systolic hypertension) that are commonly seen in the elderly, compared with younger persons. The diagnosis of hypertension is made on the basis of in-office blood pressure measurements together with ambulatory and home blood pressure recordings. Lifestyle changes are the cornerstone of management of hypertension. Comprehensive guidelines regarding blood pressure threshold at which to start pharmacotherapy as well as target blood pressure levels have been issued by both European and American professional bodies. In recent years, there has been considerable interest in intensive lowering of blood pressure in older patients with hypertension. Several large, randomized controlled trials have suggested that a strategy of aiming for a target systolic blood pressure of <120 mm Hg (intensive treatment) rather than a target of <140 mm Hg (standard treatment) results in significant reduction in the incidence of adverse cardiovascular events and total mortality. A systolic blood pressure treatment of <130 mm Hg should be considered favorably in non-institutionalized, ambulatory, free living older patients. In contrast, in the older patient with a high burden of comorbidities and limited life expectancy, an individualized team-based approach, based on clinical judgment and patient preference should be adopted. An increasing body of evidence for older adults with hypertension suggests that intensive blood pressure lowering may prevent or at least partially prevent cognitive decline.

Blood Pressure Control Among US Adults, 2009 to 2012 Through 2017 to 2020

BACKGROUND

The National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey data indicate that the proportion of US adults with hypertension that had controlled blood pressure (BP) declined from 2013 to 2014 through 2017 to 2018. We analyzed data from National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2009 to 2012, 2013 to 2016, and 2017 to 2020 to confirm this finding.

METHODS

Hypertension was defined as systolic BP ≥140 mm Hg or diastolic BP ≥90 mm Hg or antihypertensive medication use. BP control among those with hypertension was defined as systolic BP <140 mm Hg and diastolic BP <90 mm Hg.

RESULTS

The age-adjusted prevalence of hypertension was 31.5% (95% CI, 30.3%-32.8%), 32.0% (95% CI, 30.6%-33.3%), and 32.9% (95% CI, 31.0%-34.7%) in 2009 to 2012, 2013 to 2016, and 2017 to 2020, respectively (P trend=0.218). The age-adjusted prevalence of hypertension increased among non-Hispanic Asian adults from 27.0% in 2011 to 2012 to 33.5% in 2017 to 2020 (P trend=0.003). Among Hispanic adults, the age-adjusted prevalence of hypertension increased from 29.4% in 2009 to 2012 to 33.2% in 2017 to 2020 (P trend=0.029). In 2009 to 2012, 2013 to 2016, and 2017 to 2020, 52.8% (95% CI, 50.0%-55.7%), 51.3% (95% CI, 47.9%-54.6%), and 48.2% (95% CI, 45.7%-50.8%) of US adults with hypertension had controlled BP (P trend=0.034). Among US adults taking antihypertensive medication, 69.9% (95% CI, 67.8%-72.0%), 69.3% (95% CI, 66.6%-71.9%), and 67.7% (95% CI, 65.2%-70.3%) had controlled BP in 2009 to 2012, 2013 to 2016, and 2017 to 2020, respectively (P trend=0.189). Among all US adults with hypertension and those taking antihypertensive medication, a decline in BP control between 2009 to 2012 and 2017 to 2020 occurred among those ≥75 years, women, and non-Hispanic black adults.

CONCLUSIONS

These data confirm that the proportion of US adults with hypertension who have controlled BP has declined.

Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring to Diagnose and Manage Hypertension

This review portrays how ambulatory blood pressure (BP) monitoring was established and recommended as the method of choice for the assessment of BP and for the rational use of antihypertensive drugs. To establish much-needed diagnostic ambulatory BP thresholds, initial statistical approaches evolved into longitudinal studies of patients and populations, which demonstrated that cardiovascular complications are more closely associated with 24-hour and nighttime BP than with office BP. Studies cross-classifying individuals based on ambulatory and office BP thresholds identified white-coat hypertension, an elevated office BP in the presence of ambulatory normotension as a low-risk condition, whereas its counterpart, masked hypertension, carries a hazard almost as high as ambulatory combined with office hypertension. What clinically matters most is the level of the 24-hour and the nighttime BP, while other BP indexes derived from 24-hour ambulatory BP recordings, on top of the 24-hour and nighttime BP level, add little to risk stratification or hypertension management. Ambulatory BP monitoring is cost-effective. Ambulatory and home BP monitoring are complimentary approaches. Their interchangeability provides great versatility in the clinical implementation of out-of-office BP measurement. We are still waiting for evidence from randomized clinical trials to prove that out-of-office BP monitoring is superior to office BP in adjusting antihypertensive drug treatment and in the prevention of cardiovascular complications. A starting research line, the development of a standardized validation protocol for wearable BP monitoring devices, might facilitate the clinical applicability of ambulatory BP monitoring.

Comparison of 3 Devices for 24-Hour Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring in a Nonclinical Environment Through a Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND

The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommends the use of 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) as part of screening and diagnosis of hypertension. The optimal ABPM device for population-based surveys is unknown.

METHODS

We compared the proportion of valid blood pressure (BP) readings, mean awake and asleep BP readings, differences between awake ABPM readings and initial standardized BP readings, and sleep experience among three ABPM devices. We randomized a convenience sample of 365 adults to 1 of 3 ABPM devices: Welch Allyn Mobil-O-Graph (WA), Sun Tech Classic Oscar2 (STO) and Spacelabs 90227 (SL). Participants completed sleep quality questionnaires on the nights before and during ABPM testing.

RESULTS

The proportions of valid BP readings were not different among the 3 devices (P > 0.45). Mean awake and asleep systolic BP were significantly higher for STO device (WA vs. STO vs. SL: 126.65, 138.09, 127.44 mm Hg; 114.34, 120.34, 113.13 mm Hg; P < 0.0001 for both). The difference between the initial average standardized mercury systolic BP readings and the ABPM mean awake systolic BP was larger for STO device (WA vs. STO. vs. SL: -5.26, -16.24, -5.36 mm Hg; P < 0.0001); diastolic BP mean differences were ~ -6 mm Hg for all 3 devices (P = 0.6). Approximately 55% of participants reported that the devices interfered with sleep; however, there were no sleep differences across the devices (P > 0.4 for all).

CONCLUSION

Most of the participants met the threshold of 70% valid readings over 24 hours. Sleep disturbance was common but did not interfere with completion of measurement in most of the participants.

Twenty-four-hour versus clinic blood pressure levels as predictors of long-term cardiovascular and renal disease outcomes among African Americans

In Caucasian and Asian populations, evidence suggests that 24-h blood pressures (BP) are more predictive of long-term cardiovascular events than clinic BP. However, few long-term studies have evaluated the predictive value of 24-h BP phenotypes (24-h, daytime, nighttime) among African Americans (AA). The purpose of this study is to evaluate the added value of 24-h BP phenotypes compared to clinic BP in predicting the subsequent fatal and non-fatal cardiovascular/renal disease events in AA subjects. AA subjects (n = 270) were initially studied between 1994 and 2006 and standardized clinic BP measurements were obtained during screening procedures for a 3-day inpatient clinical study during which 24-h BP measurements were obtained. To assess the subsequent incidence of cardiovascular and renal disease events, follow-up information was obtained and confirmed by review of paper and electronic medical records between 2015 and 2017. During a mean follow-up of 14 ± 4 years, 50 subjects had one or more fatal or non-fatal cardiovascular/renal disease events. After adjustment for covariates, clinic systolic and diastolic BP were strongly associated with cardiovascular/renal disease events and all-cause mortality (p < 0.0001). Twenty-four-hour BP phenotypes conferred a small incremental advantage over clinic BP in predicting cardiovascular/renal events, which was limited to making a difference of one predicted event in 250-1,000 predictions depending on the 24-h BP phenotype. Nocturnal BP was no more predictive than the other 24-h BP phenotypes. In AA, 24-h BP monitoring provides limited added value as a predictor of cardiovascular/renal disease events. Larger studies are needed in AA to confirm these findings.

Factors Associated With Hypertension Control in US Adults Using 2017 ACC/AHA Guidelines: National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 1999-2016

BACKGROUND

Factors and trends associated with hypertension control (BP < 130/80 mm Hg) and mean blood pressure (BP) among hypertensive adults (BP ≥1 30/80 mm Hg or medicated for hypertension).

METHOD

Data on 22,911 hypertensive US adults from the 1999-2016 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey.

RESULTS

For men, hypertension control prevalence increased from 8.6% in 1999-2000 to 16.2% in 2003-2004 (P < 0.001), and continued the increasing trend afterwards to 23.2% in 2011-2012 (P < 0.001) and then plateaued. For women, hypertension control prevalence increased from 1999-2000 to 2009-2010 (10.8-26.3%, P < 0.001) and then plateaued. For men with hypertension, systolic BP decreased from 1999-2000 to 2011-2012 (135.7-132.8 mm Hg, P < 0.001) and then increased to 135.3 mm Hg in 2015-2016 (P < 0.001). For women with hypertension, systolic BP decreased from 1999-2000 to 2009-2010 (139.7-131.9 mm Hg; P < 0.001) and then increased to 134.4 mm Hg in 2015-2016 (P = 0.003). Diastolic BP decreased from 1999-2000 to 2015-2016 (men: 79.1-75.5 mm Hg and women: 76.4-73.7 mm Hg, P < 0.001 for both). In 2011-2016, hypertension control was 22.0% for men and 25.2% for women. The adjusted prevalence ratio (PR) of hypertension control were lower for non-Hispanic black men and women (PR = 0.72, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.61-0.86; PR = 0.83, 95% CI = 0.70-0.99, respectively; non-Hispanic white (NHW) as reference), Hispanic and non-Hispanic Asian men (PR = 0.70, 95% CI = 0.54-0.92; PR = 0.59, 95% CI = 0.39-0.86; respectively; NHW as reference).

CONCLUSION

Hypertension control significantly increased from 1999-2000 to 2011-2012 (men) and 2009-2010 (women) and then plateaued. About a quarter of US adults with hypertension were controlled in 2011-2016.

Patient Barriers and Facilitators to Ambulatory and Home Blood Pressure Monitoring: A Qualitative Study

BACKGROUND

Guidelines recommend that patients with newly elevated office blood pressure undergo ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) or home blood pressure monitoring (HBPM) to rule-out white coat hypertension before being diagnosed with hypertension. We explored patients' perspectives of the barriers and facilitators to undergoing ABPM or HBPM.

METHODS

Focus groups were conducted with twenty English- and Spanish-speaking individuals from underserved communities in New York City. Two researchers analyzed transcripts using a conventional content analysis to identify barriers and facilitators to participation in ABPM and HBPM.

RESULTS

Participants described favorable attitudes toward testing including readily understanding white coat hypertension, agreeing with the rationale for out-of-office testing, and believing that testing would benefit patients. Regarding ABPM, participants expressed concerns over the representativeness of the day the test was performed and the intrusiveness of the frequent readings. Regarding HBPM, participants expressed concerns over the validity of the monitoring method and the reliability of home blood pressure devices. For both tests, participants noted that out-of-pocket costs may deter patient participation and felt that patients would require detailed information about the test itself before deciding to participate. Participants overwhelmingly believed that out-of-office testing benefits outweighed testing barriers, were confident that they could successfully complete either testing if recommended by their provider, and described the rationale for their testing preference.

CONCLUSIONS

Participants identified dominant barriers and facilitators to ABPM and HBPM testing, articulated testing preferences, and believed that they could successfully complete out-of-office testing if recommended by their provider.

Thirty-Minute Office Blood Pressure Monitoring in Primary Care

PURPOSE

Automated office blood pressure monitoring during 30 minutes (OBP30) may reduce overtreatment of patients with white-coat hypertension in primary health care. OBP30 results approximate those of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring, but OBP30 is much more convenient. In this study, we compared OBP30 with routine office blood pressure (OBP) readings for different indications in primary care and evaluated how OBP30 influenced the medication prescribing of family physicians.

METHODS

All consecutive patients who underwent OBP30 for medical reasons over a 6-month period in a single primary health care center in the Netherlands were enrolled. We compared patients' OBP30 results with their last preceding routine OBP reading, and we asked their physicians why they ordered OBP30, how they treated their patients, and how they would have treated their patients without it.

RESULTS

We enrolled 201 patients (mean age 68.6 years, 56.7% women). The mean systolic OBP30 was 22.8 mm Hg lower than the mean systolic OBP (95% CI, 19.8-26.1 mm Hg). The mean diastolic OBP30 was 11.6 mm Hg lower than the mean diastolic OBP (95% CI, 10.2-13.1 mm Hg). Considerable differences between OBP and OBP30 existed in patients with and without suspected white-coat hypertension, and differences were larger in individuals aged 70 years or older. Based on OBP alone, physicians said they would have started or intensified medication therapy in 79.1% of the studied cases (95% CI, 73.6%-84.6%). In fact, with the results of OBP30 available, physicians started or intensified medication therapy in 24.9% of cases (95% CI, 18.9%-30.9%).

CONCLUSIONS

OBP30 yields considerably lower blood pressure readings than OBP in all studied patient groups. OBP30 is a promising technique to reduce overtreatment of white-coat hypertension in primary health care.

Abnormal Pulsatile Hemodynamics in Hypertensive Patients With Normalized 24-Hour Ambulatory Blood Pressure by Combination Therapy of Three or More Antihypertensive Agents

It remains uncertain whether intensive antihypertensive therapy can normalize pulsatile hemodynamics resulting in minimized residual cardiovascular risks. In this study, office and 24-hour ambulatory systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), pulse pressure, carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity (PWV), and forward (Pf) and reflected (Pb) pressure wave from a decomposed carotid pressure wave were measured in hypertensive participants. Among them, 57 patients whose 24-hour SBP and DBP were normalized by three or more classes of antihypertensive medications were included. Another 57 age- and sex-matched normotensive participants were randomly selected from a community survey. The well-treated hypertensive patients had similar 24-hour SBP, lower DBP, and higher PP values. The treated patients had higher PWV (11.7±0.3 vs 8.3±0.2 m/s, P<.001), Pf, Pb, Pb/Pf, and left ventricular mass index values. After adjustment for age, sex, body mass index, and office SBP, the differences for PWV, Pb, and Pb/Pf remained significant. Hypertensive patients whose 24-hour SBP and DBP are normalized may still have markedly increased arterial stiffness and wave reflection.

Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in clinical practice: a review

Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring offers the ability to collect blood pressure readings several times an hour across a 24-hour period. Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring facilitates the identification of white-coat hypertension, the phenomenon whereby certain individuals who are not taking antihypertensive medication show elevated blood pressure in a clinical setting but show nonelevated blood pressure averages when assessed by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. In addition, readings can be segmented into time windows of particular interest, for example, mean daytime and nighttime values. During sleep, blood pressure typically decreases, or dips, such that mean sleep blood pressure is lower than mean awake blood pressure. A nondipping pattern and nocturnal hypertension are strongly associated with increased cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Approximately 70% of individuals have blood pressure dips of ≥10% at night, whereas 30% have nondipping patterns, when blood pressure remains similar to daytime average or occasionally increases above daytime average. The various blood pressure categorizations afforded by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring are valuable for clinical management of high blood pressure because they increase the accuracy for diagnosis and the prediction of cardiovascular risk.