ImPact of 24-hourS non-InvaSIve blood PreSSure monItorIng on hyPertenSIon management In general PractIce
background Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) gives important additional information to office blood-pressure measurements in diagnostic and treatment of patients with high blood pressure. The aim of our survey is to find out the impact of ABPM on management of arterial hypertension in p...
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Slovenian Medical Association
2009-06-01
|
| Series: | Zdravniški Vestnik |
| Online Access: | http://vestnik.szd.si/index.php/ZdravVest/article/view/358 |
| Summary: | background Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) gives important additional information
to office blood-pressure measurements in diagnostic and treatment of patients with high
blood pressure. The aim of our survey is to find out the impact of ABPM on management
of arterial hypertension in primary care.
Patients and We included 339 consecutive patients with uncontrolled arterial hypertension, treated with
methods at least two different antihypertensive drug classes in 38 general practitioner’s offices in
Slovenia. We randomly divided patients into the test (ABPM) and the control group (office
measurements only). After 12 weeks we assessed the impact of ABPM on management of
arterial hypertension.
results We analysed data of 339 patients: 160 in the testing and 179 in the control group, aged from
34 to 80 years (mean 61.4 years, SD 9.8 years) with mean systolic blood pressure 159.2 (SD
12.5) mm Hg and mean diastolic blood pressure 92.1 (SD 8.7) mm Hg.
45 (28.1 %) of patients after ABPM have controlled blood pressure. Possibility for controlled
blood pressure is higher in female (OR = 5.445, 95 % CI: 2.16–13.76) and patients with lower
mean office blood pressure (OR = 0.931, 95 % CI: 0.84–0.97).
Performance of ABPM did not have impact on the number of hypertension related office
visits (1.6 in tested vs. 1.7 in control group, p = 0.306). Patients in the testing group less often underwent changes of antihypertensive drug therapy (52.5 % vs. 66.5 % in the control
group, p = 0.009).
conclusions White coat effect is common in patients on combined antihypertensive therapy in primary
care. APBM did not reduce the number of office visits, but reduced the probability of antihypertensive drug changes. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1318-0347 1581-0224 |