Atencion primaria · 2006
[Home blood pressure self-monitoring. Influence of the mean calculation used on the diagnosis of white-coat hypertension].
Сравнительное исследованиеАннотация на английскомСтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Bayó Llibre Joan, Roca Saumell Carmen, Dalfó Baqué Antoni, Martín-Baranera M Montserrat, Naberan Toña Karlos Xavier, Botey Puig Albert
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To describe the variations in the diagnosis performance of home blood pressure self-monitoring (hBPSM) with different methods for mean calculation, in order to diagnose white-coat hypertension (WCH).
DESIGN: Multi-centre, descriptive, and comparative study to assess the diagnosis performance of a test method.
SETTING: Four primary health care centres.
PARTICIPANTS: A total of 157 recently-diagnosed, untreated patients with mild-moderate hypertension took part in the study.
METHODS: The results obtained with hBPSM (3 consecutive days with readings in triplicate, morning-night) were compared with a "gold standard" out-patient blood pressure reading (OutBP).
RESULTS: Systolic and diastolic BP values of the first day and first reading (morning-night) were higher than the remaining days and readings (linear trend P< .001). Results in hBPSM diagnostic performance using all readings to calculate the mean were: sensitivity (S), 47.6%; specificity (Sp), 77.4%; positive and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV), 58.8% and 68.6%, with positive and negative probability coefficients (PPC and NPC), 2.10 and 0.67. When readings with greater patient alarm reaction (first day and first reading, morning-night) were removed, greater values of S (61.9%) were obtained, albeit at expense of an excessive loss in Sp (64.5%) and without improvement in PPC (1.74).
CONCLUSIONS: The diagnostic performance of hBPSM in WCH was low and failed to improve with the use of different systems to calculate mean BP.
DESIGN: Multi-centre, descriptive, and comparative study to assess the diagnosis performance of a test method.
SETTING: Four primary health care centres.
PARTICIPANTS: A total of 157 recently-diagnosed, untreated patients with mild-moderate hypertension took part in the study.
METHODS: The results obtained with hBPSM (3 consecutive days with readings in triplicate, morning-night) were compared with a "gold standard" out-patient blood pressure reading (OutBP).
RESULTS: Systolic and diastolic BP values of the first day and first reading (morning-night) were higher than the remaining days and readings (linear trend P< .001). Results in hBPSM diagnostic performance using all readings to calculate the mean were: sensitivity (S), 47.6%; specificity (Sp), 77.4%; positive and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV), 58.8% and 68.6%, with positive and negative probability coefficients (PPC and NPC), 2.10 and 0.67. When readings with greater patient alarm reaction (first day and first reading, morning-night) were removed, greater values of S (61.9%) were obtained, albeit at expense of an excessive loss in Sp (64.5%) and without improvement in PPC (1.74).
CONCLUSIONS: The diagnostic performance of hBPSM in WCH was low and failed to improve with the use of different systems to calculate mean BP.