A Comparison of Casual In-Clinic Blood Pressure Measurements to Standardized Guideline-Concordant Measurements in Severely Obese Individuals
- PMID: 26294966
- PMCID: PMC4532941
- DOI: 10.1155/2015/801709
A Comparison of Casual In-Clinic Blood Pressure Measurements to Standardized Guideline-Concordant Measurements in Severely Obese Individuals
Abstract
Background/Objectives. The objective of this study was to compare casual BP taken in a bariatric clinic to standardized guideline-concordant BP. Subjects/Methods. A cross sectional analysis was performed using baseline data from a weight management trial. Patients were recruited from a Canadian bariatric care program. Standardized BP was performed using a Watch BP oscillometric device. Casual in-clinic BP single readings, taken using a Welch Allyn oscillometric device, were chart-abstracted. Paired t-tests, Bland-Altman plots, and Pearson's correlations were used for analysis. Results. Data from 134 patients were analyzed. Mean age was 41.5 ± 8.9 y, mean BMI was 46.8 ± 6.5 kg/m(2), and 40 (30%) had prior hypertension. Mean casual in-clinic BP was 128.8 ± 14.1/81.6 ± 9.9 mmHg and mean standardized BP was 133.2 ± 15.0/82.0 ± 10.3 mmHg (difference of -4.3 ± 12.0 for systolic (p < 0.0001) and -0.4 ± 10.0 mmHg for diastolic BP (p = 0.6)). Pearson's coefficients were 0.66 (p < 0.0001) for SBP and 0.50 (p < 0.0001) for DBP. 28.4% of casual versus 26.9% of standardized measurements were ≥140/90 mmHg (p < 0.0001). Conclusion. In this bariatric clinic, casual BP was unexpectedly lower than standardized BP. This could potentially lead to the underdiagnosis of hypertension.
Figures
Similar articles
-
Variation between pragmatic and standardised blood pressure measurements in a Nigerian primary care clinic.S Afr Fam Pract (2004). 2020 Mar 12;62(1):e1-e11. doi: 10.4102/safp.v62i1.5035. S Afr Fam Pract (2004). 2020. PMID: 32242434 Free PMC article.
-
Comparability of two commonly used automated office blood pressure devices in the severely obese.Blood Press Monit. 2016 Oct;21(5):313-5. doi: 10.1097/MBP.0000000000000196. Blood Press Monit. 2016. PMID: 27100401 Clinical Trial.
-
Comparison and correlation between self-measured blood pressure, casual blood pressure measurement and ambulatory blood pressure monitoring.Arq Bras Cardiol. 2011 Aug;97(2):148-55. doi: 10.1590/s0066-782x2011005000076. Epub 2011 Jun 17. Arq Bras Cardiol. 2011. PMID: 21691677 English, Portuguese, Spanish.
-
Validation of the Microlife Watch BP Office professional device for office blood pressure measurement according to the International protocol.Blood Press Monit. 2008 Oct;13(5):299-303. doi: 10.1097/MBP.0b013e3283057af6. Blood Press Monit. 2008. PMID: 18799957
-
Blood pressure level and variability in the prediction of blood pressure after 5-year follow-up.Hypertension. 1996 Nov;28(5):725-31. doi: 10.1161/01.hyp.28.5.725. Hypertension. 1996. PMID: 8901815 Clinical Trial.
Cited by
-
Variation between pragmatic and standardised blood pressure measurements in a Nigerian primary care clinic.S Afr Fam Pract (2004). 2020 Mar 12;62(1):e1-e11. doi: 10.4102/safp.v62i1.5035. S Afr Fam Pract (2004). 2020. PMID: 32242434 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Shields M., Carroll M. D., Ogden C. L. Adult obesity prevalence in Canada and the United States. NCHS Data Brief. 2011;(56):1–8. - PubMed
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources