The Benefit of Unattended Automated Office Blood Pressure Measurement on the White-coat Effect: A Cross-sectional Study

Chavalit Chotruangnapa; Piyawan Thongdang

doi:10.33192/smj.v75i6.261881

Authors

Chavalit Chotruangnapa Division of Hypertension, Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok
Piyawan Thongdang Division of Hypertension, Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.33192/smj.v75i6.261881

Keywords:

attended automated blood pressure measurement, unattended automated blood pressure measurement, home blood pressure, white-coat hypertension, masked hypertension

Abstract

Objective: To compare blood pressure (BP) and heart rate measured by attended and unattended automated office blood pressure measurement (AOBPM) versus home blood pressure measurement (HBPM) and the effect of unattended AOBPM on the classification of BP phenotypes.

Materials and Methods: The cross-sectional study was conducted at the outpatient department in Siriraj Hospital, Thailand. All participants measured their office BP using attended and unattended techniques in random order and recorded home BP twice a day for consecutive 7 days. The agreement between office BP from both AOBPM methods and that from HBPM was analyzed using the Bland-Altman plot. The change in the proportion of each BP phenotype was also analyzed.

Results: We included 114 participants. The mean age was 57.96 + 15.07 years. The average BP from attended AOBPM, unattended AOBPM, and HBPM were 150.52 + 16.12/81.77 + 11.04, 139.68 + 13.80/78.55 + 11.71, and 126.91 + 9.80/76.40 + 8.37 mmHg, respectively. The BP and heart rate measured by these techniques were significantly different (p-value of <0.001). Bland-Altman analysis showed the biases of attended and unattended SBP versus home SBP were 23.61 and 12.77 mmHg, respectively. Unattended AOBPM significantly decreased the numbers of patients classified as white-coat and sustained hypertension regardless of BP thresholds (p-value of <0.001 for both groups).

Conclusion: Unattended AOBPM significantly minimizes the white-coat effect in real-life clinical practice and may help physicians avoid overdiagnosis of hypertension. Nevertheless, it does not replace HBPM.

References

Global, regional, and national comparative risk assessment of 84 behavioural, environmental and occupational, and metabolic risks or clusters of risks for 195 countries and territories, 1990-2017: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017. Lancet. 2018;392(10159):1923-94.

Sivén SS, Niiranen TJ, Langén VL, Puukka PJ, Kantola IM, Jula AM. Home versus office blood pressure: longitudinal relations with left ventricular hypertrophy: the Finn-Home study. J Hypertens. 2017;35(2):266-71.

Bliziotis IA, Destounis A, Stergiou GS. Home versus ambulatory and office blood pressure in predicting target organ damage in hypertension: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Hypertens. 2012;30(7):1289-99.

Whelton PK, Carey RM, Aronow WS, Casey DE, Collins KJ, Himmelfarb CD, et al. 2017 ACC/AHA/AAPA/ABC/ACPM/AGS/APhA/ASH/ASPC/NMA/PCNA Guideline for the Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Management of High Blood Pressure in Adults: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines. Hypertension. 2018;71(6):e13-e115.

Williams B, Mancia G, Spiering W, Agabiti Rosei E, Azizi M, Burnier M, et al. 2018 ESC/ESH Guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension. Eur Heart J. 2018;39(33):3021-104.

Kunanon S, Chattranukulchai P, Chotruangnapa C, Kositanurit W, Methavigul K, Boonyasirinant T, Rawdaree P, et al. 2019 Thai Guidelines on the Treatment of Hypertension: Executive Summary. J Med Assoc Thai 2021;104:1729-38.

Unger T, Borghi C, Charchar F, Khan NA, Poulter NR, Prabhakaran D, et al. 2020 International Society of Hypertension Global Hypertension Practice Guidelines. Hypertension. 2020;75(6):1334-57.

Asayama K, Ohkubo T, Imai Y. In-office and out-of-office blood pressure measurement. J Hum Hypertens. 2021.

Kallioinen N, Hill A, Horswill MS, Ward HE, Watson MO. Sources of inaccuracy in the measurement of adult patients' resting blood pressure in clinical settings: a systematic review. J Hypertens. 2017;35(3):421-41.

A Randomized Trial of Intensive versus Standard Blood-Pressure Control. N Engl J Med. 2015;373(22):2103-16.

Johnson KC, Whelton PK, Cushman WC, Cutler JA, Evans GW, Snyder JK, et al. Blood Pressure Measurement in SPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial). Hypertension. 2018;71(5):848-57.

Agarwal R. Implications of Blood Pressure Measurement Technique for Implementation of Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT). J Am Heart Assoc. 2017;6(2):e004536.

Drawz PE, Agarwal A, Dwyer JP, Horwitz E, Lash J, Lenoir K, et al. Concordance Between Blood Pressure in the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial and in Routine Clinical Practice. JAMA Intern Med. 2020;180(12):1655-63.

Andreadis EA, Thomopoulos C, Geladari CV, Papademetriou V. Attended Versus Unattended Automated Office Blood Pressure: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. High Blood Press Cardiovasc Prev. 2019;26(4):293-303.

Andreadis EA, Geladari CV, Angelopoulos ET, Savva FS, Georgantoni AI, Papademetriou V. Attended and Unattended Automated Office Blood Pressure Measurements Have Better Agreement With Ambulatory Monitoring Than Conventional Office Readings. J Am Heart Assoc. 2018;7(8):e008994.

Palomba C, Donadio S, Canciello G, Losi MA, Izzo R, Manzi MV, et al. Unattended Automated Office Blood Pressure Measurement and Cardiac Target Organ Damage, A Pilot Study. High Blood Press Cardiovasc Prev. 2019;26(5):383-9.

Bauer F, Seibert FS, Rohn B, Bauer KAR, Rolshoven E, Babel N, et al. Attended Versus Unattended Blood Pressure Measurement in a Real Life Setting. Hypertension. 2018;71(2):243-9.

Keeley EC, Villanueva M, Chen YE, Gong Y, Handberg EM, Smith SM, et al. Attended vs unattended systolic blood pressure measurement: A randomized comparison in patients with cardiovascular disease. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2020;22(11):1987-92.

Fanelli E, Di Monaco S, Pappaccogli M, Eula E, Fasano C, Bertello C, et al. Comparison of nurse attended and unattended automated office blood pressure with conventional measurement techniques in clinical practice. J Hum Hypertens. 2022;36(9):833-8.

Grassi G, Quarti-Trevano F, Seravalle G, Dell’Oro R, Vanoli J, Perseghin G, et al. Sympathetic Neural Mechanisms Underlying Attended and Unattended Blood Pressure Measurement. Hypertension. 2021;78(4):1126-33.

Grassi G, Turri C, Vailati S, Dell’Oro R, Mancia G. Muscle and Skin Sympathetic Nerve Traffic During the “White-Coat” Effect. Circulation. 1999;100(3):222-5.

Smith PA, Graham LN, Mackintosh AF, Stoker JB, Mary DA. Sympathetic neural mechanisms in white-coat hypertension. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2002;40(1):126-32.

Pappaccogli M, Monaco SD, Perlo E, Burrello J, D’Ascenzo F, Veglio F, et al. Comparison of Automated Office Blood Pressure With Office and Out-Off-Office Measurement Techniques. Hypertension. 2019;73(2):481-90.

Höller J, Villagomez Fuentes LE, Matthias K, Kreutz R. The Impact of Measurement Methods on Office Blood Pressure and Management of Hypertension in General Practice. High Blood Press Cardiovasc Prev. 2019;26(6):483-91.

Asayama K, Ohkubo T, Rakugi H, Miyakawa M, Mori H, Katsuya T, et al. Comparison of blood pressure values-self-measured at home, measured at an unattended office, and measured at a conventional attended office. Hypertens Res. 2019;42(11):1726-37.

Zhang Y, Agnoletti D, Safar ME, Blacher J. Effect of Antihypertensive Agents on Blood Pressure Variability. Hypertension. 2011;58(2):155-60.

Levi-Marpillat N, Macquin-Mavier I, Tropeano A-I, Parati G, Maison P. Antihypertensive drug classes have different effects on short-term blood pressure variability in essential hypertension. Hypertens Res. 2014;37(6):585-90.