Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Comparative study of home and office blood pressure in hypertensive patients treated with enalapril/HCTZ 20/6 mg: the ESPADA study.
Blood Press 2000; 9(6):355-62BP

Abstract

The introduction and generalization of 24-h ambulatory blood pressure (BP) monitoring has shown the clinical relevance of home BP. The aim of this study was to assess the validity of home-measured BP for monitoring and controlling patients with arterial hypertension while on a homogeneous treatment. An additional objective was to establish the degree of office BP control obtained. This was a prospective, longitudinal, observational and multicenter study in a cohort of 156 patients of both sexes, aged over 18 years and with essential hypertension. All of them received the fixed combination enalapril/HCTZ 20/6 mg as the only hypertensive agent for at least 4 weeks previously. Office BP was the average of three measurements. For home BP, a semi-automated device (OMRON HEM 705 CP) was used. The patients measured their BP twice a day for 2 consecutive days. The average differences between the two measuring methods were low, but significant: 3.99 mmHg for systolic BP (SBP; p < 0.05), 2.02 mmHg for diastolic BP (DBP; p < 0.05). Pearson's regression coefficient between the office and home values was highly significant (p < 0.0001) for SBP, DBP and heart rate. Home BP measurement was highly reproducible as shown by the high within-class correlation coefficient for individual measurements on the first day compared with the second: 0.88 (95% confidence interval, CI 0.82-0.92; p < 0.00001) for SBP and 0.89 for DBP (95% CI 0.83-0.93; p < 0.00001). The percentage of patients with strict office DBP and SBP control (< 140/90 mmHg) was 61.3% and with DBP control (<90 mmHg) 92%. In conclusion, in the ESPADA study, the application of home BP measurement is valid, reproducible and shows a high correlation with office BP.

Authors+Show Affiliations

Hypertension Unit, 12 de Octubre Hospital, Madrid, Spain. campo@bbvnet.comNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info available

Pub Type(s)

Comparative Study
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Validation Study

Language

eng

PubMed ID

11212065

Citation

Campo, C, et al. "Comparative Study of Home and Office Blood Pressure in Hypertensive Patients Treated With enalapril/HCTZ 20/6 Mg: the ESPADA Study." Blood Pressure, vol. 9, no. 6, 2000, pp. 355-62.
Campo C, Fernández G, González-Esteban J, et al. Comparative study of home and office blood pressure in hypertensive patients treated with enalapril/HCTZ 20/6 mg: the ESPADA study. Blood Press. 2000;9(6):355-62.
Campo, C., Fernández, G., González-Esteban, J., Segura, J., & Ruilope, L. M. (2000). Comparative study of home and office blood pressure in hypertensive patients treated with enalapril/HCTZ 20/6 mg: the ESPADA study. Blood Pressure, 9(6), pp. 355-62.
Campo C, et al. Comparative Study of Home and Office Blood Pressure in Hypertensive Patients Treated With enalapril/HCTZ 20/6 Mg: the ESPADA Study. Blood Press. 2000;9(6):355-62. PubMed PMID: 11212065.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Comparative study of home and office blood pressure in hypertensive patients treated with enalapril/HCTZ 20/6 mg: the ESPADA study. AU - Campo,C, AU - Fernández,G, AU - González-Esteban,J, AU - Segura,J, AU - Ruilope,L M, AU - ,, PY - 2001/2/24/pubmed PY - 2001/5/22/medline PY - 2001/2/24/entrez SP - 355 EP - 62 JF - Blood pressure JO - Blood Press. VL - 9 IS - 6 N2 - The introduction and generalization of 24-h ambulatory blood pressure (BP) monitoring has shown the clinical relevance of home BP. The aim of this study was to assess the validity of home-measured BP for monitoring and controlling patients with arterial hypertension while on a homogeneous treatment. An additional objective was to establish the degree of office BP control obtained. This was a prospective, longitudinal, observational and multicenter study in a cohort of 156 patients of both sexes, aged over 18 years and with essential hypertension. All of them received the fixed combination enalapril/HCTZ 20/6 mg as the only hypertensive agent for at least 4 weeks previously. Office BP was the average of three measurements. For home BP, a semi-automated device (OMRON HEM 705 CP) was used. The patients measured their BP twice a day for 2 consecutive days. The average differences between the two measuring methods were low, but significant: 3.99 mmHg for systolic BP (SBP; p < 0.05), 2.02 mmHg for diastolic BP (DBP; p < 0.05). Pearson's regression coefficient between the office and home values was highly significant (p < 0.0001) for SBP, DBP and heart rate. Home BP measurement was highly reproducible as shown by the high within-class correlation coefficient for individual measurements on the first day compared with the second: 0.88 (95% confidence interval, CI 0.82-0.92; p < 0.00001) for SBP and 0.89 for DBP (95% CI 0.83-0.93; p < 0.00001). The percentage of patients with strict office DBP and SBP control (< 140/90 mmHg) was 61.3% and with DBP control (<90 mmHg) 92%. In conclusion, in the ESPADA study, the application of home BP measurement is valid, reproducible and shows a high correlation with office BP. SN - 0803-7051 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/11212065/Comparative_study_of_home_and_office_blood_pressure_in_hypertensive_patients_treated_with_enalapril/HCTZ_20/6_mg:_the_ESPADA_study_ L2 - http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/080370500300000941 DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -