[Different uses of home blood pressure measurement in the diagnosis and monitoring of hypertension].

Autor:	Divisón JA; Grupo de Estudio de Enfermedades Vasculares de Albacete (GEVA), Albacete, España. jdivisong@medynet.com, Sanchis Doménech C, Carrión Valero L, Massó Orozco J, Carbayo Herencia J, López de Coca E, Artigao LM, Rodríguez Paños B
Jazyk:	Spanish; Castilian
Zdroj:	Atencion primaria [Aten Primaria] 2006 Oct 31; Vol. 38 (7), pp. 399-404.
DOI:	10.1016/s0212-6567(06)70532-7
Abstrakt:	Objective: To find differences between measurements of clinical blood pressure and self-monitored home blood pressure measurement (HBPM). Design: Descriptive study developed in a general population census. Setting: Primary care. Subjects: A total of 1411 subjects > or =18 years old were selected by stratified randomized sampling. Methods: A skilled nurse made 3 clinical blood pressure (CBP) measurements, and trained patients or their relatives in HBPM, doing 12 in one day. CBP and HBPM employed an electronic device (OMRON 705CP). Results: A total of 12 HBPM from 1184 subjects (52% women) were completed, with a mean age of 47.6 (SD, 17.2); 195 subjects were known to have hypertension. White-coat effect was diagnosed in 14.9% of subjects with normal pressure, 22.3% of hypertense patients treated and 57.6% of subjects with suspicion of isolated clinical hypertension. Possible isolated clinical hypertension was diagnosed in 10% of subjects without hypertension. White Coat normal pressure was found in 2.3% of untreated subjects and 4.7% of subjects with treated hypertension. 20.7% of subjects with hypertension poorly controlled in the clinic were considered pseudo-refractory (11.4% at the end of dosage interval). 77% of subjects conducted HBPM on their own and 89% thought it easy to do so. Conclusion: Incorporation of HBPM into daily medical practice could avoid 20%-30% of possible mistakes in diagnosis and monitoring of hypertense patients.
Databáze:	MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:	Zobrazit plný text záznamu