Could self-measured office blood pressure be a hypertension screening tool for limited-resources settings?

Blood pressure (BP) was assessed by patients themselves in recently published trials. Self-measured office blood pressure (SMOBP) seems particularly interesting for limited health resources regions. The aim of our study was to evaluate the relationship between SMOBP values and those estimated by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM). Six hundred seventy-seven patients were evaluated using both, SMOBP and ABPM. The differences between SMOBP and daytime ABPM were evaluated with paired "t" test. The correlations among SMOBP and ABPM were estimated using Pearson's r. The accuracy of SMOBP to identify abnormal ABPM was determined using area under ROC curve (AUC). Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were calculated for different SMOBP cut-points. Using the average of three readings, systolic SMOBP was higher (3.7 (14.2) mmHg, p < 0.001) and diastolic SMOBP lower (1.5 (8.1) mmHg, p < 0.001) than ABPM. Both BP estimates had a significant correlation, r = 0.67 and r = 0.75 (p < 0.01) for systolic and diastolic BP, respectively. Systolic SMOBP predicted systolic abnormal ABPM; the AUC were 0.80 (0.77-0.84) and 0.78 (0.74-0.81) for daytime and 24 h hypertension, respectively. Diastolic SMOBP predicted diastolic hypertension, AUC 0.86 (0.83-0.88) for both daytime and 24 h hypertension. Neither correlations nor AUCs improved significantly using the average of five readings. SMOBP ≥ 160/90 mmHg was highly specific (>95%) to identify individuals with hypertension in the ABPM; SMOBP < 130/80 mmHg reasonably discarded abnormal ABPM. In conclusion, a high proportion of individuals could be classified adequately using SMOBP, reducing the necessity of healthcare resources and supporting its utility for screening purposes.

Significance of masked and nocturnal hypertension in normotensive women coursing a high-risk pregnancy.

OBJECTIVE: The aim was to evaluate the prevalence of nocturnal and masked hypertension and the prognostic values of these blood pressure (BP) abnormalities in normotensive women coursing a high-risk pregnancy. METHODS: The study was performed in pregnant women with 20 or more weeks of gestation coursing a high-risk pregnancy, sent to a specialized hypertension department to perform a prospective defined protocol of BP evaluation. Women with office BP at least 140/90 mmHg were excluded. An ambulatory monitoring of BP was performed to identify masked and nocturnal hypertension (defined according to the current guidelines). The adjusted risk for development of preeclampsia/eclampsia (PEEC) was estimated using logistic regression. The ability of SBP and DBP to identify risk of PEEC was estimated using area under the receiver-operating characteristic curves. RESULTS: Eighty-seven women (29 ±â€Š7 years old, 30 ±â€Š5 weeks of pregnancy) were included in this analysis. The prevalence of masked hypertension was 33.3%. Nocturnal hypertension was found in 42.5% of the women. Remarkably, 27.0% of the women with nocturnal hypertension had normal 24-h values according to ambulatory BP monitoring. Twenty-two patients developed PEEC; adjusted relative risks increased with the presence of nocturnal (odds ratio = 4.72, 95% confidence interval 1.25-19.43, P = 0.023) or masked hypertension (odds ratio = 7.81, 95% confidence interval 2.6-22.86, P = 0.001). Nocturnal SBP and DBP had the highest abilities to predict PEEC (area under the curve = 0.77 and 0.80, respectively). CONCLUSION: Masked and nocturnal hypertension are frequent findings in normotensive women coursing a high-risk pregnancy, and their presence implies an increased risk to develop PEEC.