• Decrease font size
  • Return font size to normal
  • Increase font size
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

Scientific Publications by FDA Staff

  • Print
  • Share
  • E-mail
-

Search Publications



Fields



Centers











Starting Date


Ending Date


Order by

Entry Details

Clin Physiol 1998 May;18(3):215-23

Office and laboratory blood pressures as predictors of daily blood pressure level in normotensive subjects and borderline and mild hypertensive subjects.

Majahalme S, Turjanmaa V, Weder AB, Lu H, Tuomisto M, Uusitalo A

Abstract

A series of standardized laboratory tests [10 min sitting and supine, 9 min standing, dynamic; cycle ergometer (ERG) and isometric exercise; handgrip (HG)] were performed during intra-arterial blood pressure (BP) recording in 97 healthy unmedicated men, initially classified as normotensive (NT, n = 34), borderline hypertensive (BHT, n = 29) or mildly hypertensive (HT, n = 34) by repeated office blood pressure (OBP) measurements. After testing, a 24-h intra-arterial ambulatory BP (IABP) recording was obtained while subjects performed their normal activities. Day and night periods were analysed as well as 24-h averages for systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP) using Pearson correlations and multiple linear regressions. In normotensive subjects, the supine SBP predicted IABP measurements best (r range 0.39-0.69, P < 0.05-0.001). In multiple regression, supine SBP explained 49% of 24-h SBP variance (F = 12.4, P = 0.001). For BHT, supine SBP was also the best predictor (r range 0.09-0.64, P NS to P < 0.001), and it explained 37% of 24-h SBP variance (F = 15.6, P = 0.0005). In HT, ERG DBP correlated best with IABP (r range 0.52-0.75, P < 0.01-0.001). ERG SBP explained 49% of 24-h SBP (F = 31.0, P = 0.0000) and ERG DBP explained 56% of 24-h DBP (F = 35.4, P = 0.0000) variance. Laboratory BP correlations were generally better with day than with night measurements. OSBP correlated moderately well with IABP in NT, and weakly in BHT and HT; ODBP instead correlated with IABP in NT and HT but not significantly in BHT. In conclusion, OBP is less closely related to IABP than laboratory BP, but even laboratory BP generally explains less than 50% of IABP variance. Stressors such as exercise are useful only in HT. For BHT, the prediction of IABP with laboratory measures was even weaker than in other groups, and thus ambulatory measurements cannot be replaced by short-duration laboratory measurements and stress tests.


Category: Journal Article
PubMed ID: #9649909 DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2281.1998.00095.x
Includes FDA Authors from Scientific Area(s): Drugs
Entry Created: 2012-12-28
Feedback
-
-