Comparison of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring and conventional office measurement in the workers of a chemical company

Abstract

The aim of the present study was to define the different prevalence of hypertension when conventional office measurement and ambulatory monitoring are performed in a population of unselected workers. All the workers of a Florentine chemical company were invited to participate in the study. Enrolled subjects underwent blood pressure measurement using a conventional sphygmomanometer and ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. Of 191 workers, 145 agreed to participate in the study (76%). Six of the 145 were excluded from further analysis because they were undergoing antihypertensive therapy. Confidence limits for ambulatory monitoring were defined at 95% on normotensive workers. Thirty-five (25%) workers were found to be hypertensive according to World Health Organization parameters (diastolic pressure > 90 mmHg) but only 14 of the 35 had higher 24-h diastolic ambulatory blood pressure than the 95% confidence limits of controls.

Prevalence of hypertension in acromegalic patients: clinical measurement versus 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring

“…The clinical prevalence of hypertension in this series of acromegalics was 42·5%, a result consistent with previous large reports (Nabarro, 1987;Ezzat et al, 1994;Rajasoorya et al, 1994). Only 40% of the patients defined as hypertensive by clinical measurement were also found to be hypertensive according to ABPM, thereby significantly decreasing the prevalence of hypertension in acromegalics-Hypertension in acromegaly 151 ᭧ 1998 Blackwell Science Ltd, Clinical Endocrinology, 48, 149-152 17·5% in this series-as reported in non-acromegalic patients (Enstrom et al, 1991;Modesti et al, 1994). In contrast, all patients defined as normotensive by clinical BP measurement were also normotensive by ABPM, indicating that ABPM is generally unnecessary when clinical BP values fall into the normal range, although a few exceptions have been reported (Modesti et al, 1994).…”

Relative effectiveness of clinic and home blood pressure monitoring compared with ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in diagnosis of hypertension: systematic review

“…Table 1 gives details of the population of each study34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 and table 2 gives details of their methodological quality. The studies differed markedly in terms of age (mean age ranged from <33 to 60), sex (percentage of men ranged from 16% to 69%), sample size (from 16 to 2370), and whether a primary care or specialist population was used.…”

Prevalence of hypertension in acromegalic patients: clinical measurement versus 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring

“…The clinical prevalence of hypertension in this series of acromegalics was 42.5%, a result consistent with previous large reports (Nabarro, 1987; Ezzat et al ., 1994; Rajasoorya et al ., 1994). Only 40% of the patients defined as hypertensive by clinical measurement were also found to be hypertensive according to ABPM, thereby significantly decreasing the prevalence of hypertension in acromegalics—17.5% in this series—as reported in non‐acromegalic patients (Enstrom et al ., 1991; Modesti et al ., 1994). In contrast, all patients defined as normotensive by clinical BP measurement were also normotensive by ABPM, indicating that ABPM is generally unnecessary when clinical BP values fall into the normal range, although a few exceptions have been reported (Modesti et al ., 1994).…”