View
218
Download
2
Category
Tags:
Preview:
Citation preview
LONG TERM BLOOD PRESSURE MONITORING
J. Dušek1, B. Fišer1, J. Siegelová1, P. Vank1, G. Cornelissen2, F. Halberg2
1Masaryk University, Brno2Halberg Chronobiology Center, University
of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA
AIM OF THE STUDY
is comparison between casual blood pressure measurements and 7-day blood pressure monitoring.
METHODS
Ninety- one subjects without antihypertensive therapy (age between 20 and 80 years) were recruited for 7-day ambulatory BP monitoring (Collins Japan).
METHODS
The obtained data were fitted with sinusoid curve (wave length 24 hours) by the least square method and mean value, so called MESOR (M) was determined.
METHODS The data of M of systolic blood pressure and diastolic blood pressure were compared with the values of one measurement at 10 a.m. (representative of casual blood pressure measurement). Further we compared M with mean values of 7 days 10 a.m. measurements.
RESULTS
SBP
y = 1,0305x - 1,219R2 = 0,3687
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160
MESOR (mmHg)
ON
E B
LOO
D P
RE
SS
UR
E
ME
AS
UR
EM
EN
T (m
mH
g)
DBP
y = 1,0838x - 2,9439
R2 = 0,4838
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
MESOR (mmHg)
ON
E M
EA
SU
RE
MN
T (m
mH
g)
The comparison of M with one 10 a.m. value of the 4 day of the monitoring revealed correlation (SBP: r=0.61, DBP: r=0.70) but the difference between measured values and expected values was in 70 % subjects higher than 6 mmHg of SBP. The corresponding proportion of subjects for DBP was 49 %. This indicates the low reliability of one measurement.
SBP
y = 0,9747x + 9,0004R2 = 0,7123
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160
MESOR (mmHg)
ME
AN
OF
7 M
EA
SU
RE
ME
NTS
(m
mH
g)
DBP
y = 1,0472x + 0,747
R2 = 0,7148
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
MESOR (mmHg)
ME
AN
OF
7 M
EA
SU
RE
ME
NTS
(m
mH
g)
Using the 7 days mean 10 a.m. values the reliability increased (SBP: r=0.84, DBP: r=0.85) but despite the high correlation the difference higher than 6 mmHg was found in 32 % subjects (SBP), respective in 19 % (DBP).
CONCLUSION
Our results clearly indicate the advantage of the long term blood pressure monitoring over casual blood pressure measurement for the blood pressure evaluation.
Support: MSM0021622402
Recommended