Choosing blood pressure thresholds to inform pregnancy care in the community: An analysis of cluster trials
- PMID: 37092252
- DOI: 10.1111/1471-0528.17465
Choosing blood pressure thresholds to inform pregnancy care in the community: An analysis of cluster trials
Abstract
Objective: To inform digital health design by evaluating diagnostic test properties of antenatal blood pressure (BP) outputs and levels to identify women at risk of adverse outcomes.
Design: Planned secondary analysis of cluster randomised trials.
Setting: India, Pakistan, Mozambique.
Population: Women with in-community BP measurements and known pregnancy outcomes.
Methods: Blood pressure was defined by its outputs (systolic and/or diastolic, systolic only, diastolic only or mean arterial pressure [calculated]) and level: normotension-1 (<135/85 mmHg), normotension-2 (135-139/85-89 mmHg), non-severe hypertension (140-149/90-99 mmHg; 150-154/100-104 mmHg; 155-159/105-109 mmHg) and severe hypertension (≥160/110 mmHg). Dose-response (adjusted risk ratio [aRR]) and diagnostic test properties (negative [-LR] and positive [+LR] likelihood ratios) were estimated.
Main outcome measures: Maternal/perinatal composites of mortality/morbidity.
Results: Among 21 069 pregnancies, different BP outputs had similar aRR, -LR, and +LR for adverse outcomes. No BP level (even normotension-1) was associated with low risk (all -LR ≥0.20). Across outcomes, risks rose progressively with higher BP levels above normotension-1. For each of maternal central nervous system events and stillbirth, BP ≥155/105 mmHg showed at least good diagnostic test performance (+LR ≥5.0) and BP ≥135/85 mmHg at least fair performance, similar to BP ≥140/90 mmHg (+LR 2.0-4.99).
Conclusions: In the community, normal BP values do not provide reassurance about subsequent adverse outcomes. Given the similar performance of BP cut-offs of 135/85 and 140/90 mmHg for hypertension, and 155/105 and 160/110 mmHg for severe hypertension, digital decision support for women in the community should consider using these lower thresholds.
Keywords: blood pressure thresholds; community; digital health; pregnancy.
© 2023 The Authors. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
References
REFERENCES
-
- Magee LA, Nicolaides KH, von Dadelszen P. Preeclampsia. N Engl J Med. 2022;386(19):1817-32.
-
- Payne BA, Hutcheon JA, Ansermino JM, Hall DR, Bhutta ZA, Bhutta SZ, et al. A risk prediction model for the assessment and triage of women with hypertensive disorders of pregnancy in low-resourced settings: the miniPIERS (pre-eclampsia integrated estimate of RiSk) multi-country prospective cohort study. PLoS Med. 2014;11(1):e1001589. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1001589
-
- Saudan P, Brown MA, Buddle ML, Jones M. Does gestational hypertension become pre-eclampsia? Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1998;105(11):1177-84. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.1998.tb09971.x
-
- von Dadelszen P, Payne B, Li J, Ansermino JM, Broughton Pipkin F, Cote AM, et al. Prediction of adverse maternal outcomes in pre-eclampsia: development and validation of the fullPIERS model. Lancet. 2011;377(9761):219-27. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(10)61351-7
-
- Wen T, Schmidt CN, Sobhani NC, Guglielminotti J, Miller EC, Sutton D, et al. Trends and outcomes for deliveries with hypertensive disorders of pregnancy from 2000 to 2018: a repeated cross-sectional study. BJOG. 2022;129(7):1050-60. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.17038
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical