impact of 24-hours non-invasive blood pressure monitoring on hypertension management in general practice

Clicks: 214
ID: 162690
2009
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Steady

Ranked #100 of 231 articles by views in planta medica

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 231 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
background Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) gives important additional information to office blood-pressure measurements in diagnostic and treatment of patients with high blood pressure. The aim of our survey is to find out the impact of ABPM on management of arterial hypertension in primary care. Patients and We included 339 consecutive patients with uncontrolled arterial hypertension, treated with methods at least two different antihypertensive drug classes in 38 general practitioner’s offices in Slovenia. We randomly divided patients into the test (ABPM) and the control group (office measurements only). After 12 weeks we assessed the impact of ABPM on management of arterial hypertension. results We analysed data of 339 patients: 160 in the testing and 179 in the control group, aged from 34 to 80 years (mean 61.4 years, SD 9.8 years) with mean systolic blood pressure 159.2 (SD 12.5) mm Hg and mean diastolic blood pressure 92.1 (SD 8.7) mm Hg. 45 (28.1 %) of patients after ABPM have controlled blood pressure. Possibility for controlled blood pressure is higher in female (OR = 5.445, 95 % CI: 2.16–13.76) and patients with lower mean office blood pressure (OR = 0.931, 95 % CI: 0.84–0.97). Performance of ABPM did not have impact on the number of hypertension related office visits (1.6 in tested vs. 1.7 in control group, p = 0.306). Patients in the testing group less often underwent changes of antihypertensive drug therapy (52.5 % vs. 66.5 % in the control group, p = 0.009). conclusions White coat effect is common in patients on combined antihypertensive therapy in primary care. APBM did not reduce the number of office visits, but reduced the probability of antihypertensive drug changes.
Reference Key
ter2009zdravnikiimpact Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors ;Marija Petek Šter;Janko Kersnik
Journal planta medica
Year 2009
DOI
DOI not found
URL
Keywords

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.