2005
DOI: 10.1097/01.mbp.0000172709.05158.59
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The reproducibility of dipping status: beyond the cutoff points

Abstract: A limited reproducibility has been ascribed to 24-h ambulatory blood pressure monitoring, especially in relation to the dipper and nondipper phenomena. This study examined the reproducibility of 24-h ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in three recordings of pressure at intervals of 8-15 days in 101 study participants (73% treated hypertensive patients) residing in the city of Recife, Pernambuco, Brazil. SpaceLabs 90207 monitors were used, and the minimum number of valid measurements was 80. No significant di… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
18
0

Year Published

2007
2007
2014
2014

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 26 publications
(21 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
3
18
0
Order By: Relevance
“…On repeated ABPM, expressing the decline in BP during sleep as a continuous variable (eg, percentage fall in nocturnal BP) was shown to be far more reproducible than its expression as a categorical variable (ie,using the traditionally adopted 10% cut-off), given a loss of information. 10 This is particularly an issue for defining abnormalities of dipping status as definitions rest on a difference score of individual daytime and night-time BP levels. [10][11][12][13] In a study of repeated ABPM, agreement in diagnosing nocturnal hypertension on the basis of two measurements was greater using an absolute nocturnal BP threshold value (Cohen's kappa = 0.485 systolic BP) rather than the percentage nocturnal BP fall (Cohen's kappa = 0.378 systolic BP).…”
Section: Diagnostic Limitationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…On repeated ABPM, expressing the decline in BP during sleep as a continuous variable (eg, percentage fall in nocturnal BP) was shown to be far more reproducible than its expression as a categorical variable (ie,using the traditionally adopted 10% cut-off), given a loss of information. 10 This is particularly an issue for defining abnormalities of dipping status as definitions rest on a difference score of individual daytime and night-time BP levels. [10][11][12][13] In a study of repeated ABPM, agreement in diagnosing nocturnal hypertension on the basis of two measurements was greater using an absolute nocturnal BP threshold value (Cohen's kappa = 0.485 systolic BP) rather than the percentage nocturnal BP fall (Cohen's kappa = 0.378 systolic BP).…”
Section: Diagnostic Limitationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Considering that the short-term reproducibility of the non-dipping pattern in DM patients is better than in non-DM hypertensive patient [49], BP monitoring may provide an opportunity for a better risk assessment in DM patients. However, consideration of a cut-point rather than using a continuous value in the BP dipping definition is criticized by some authors [22].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although HSM did not include sleeping BP, the average of two evening BP measurements in the period of monitoring was used as a surrogate for nighttime BP in the group A, because European Society of Hypertension clearly suggested that nocturnal hypertension may be suspected on the basis of increased evening home blood pressure [3]. Nocturnal dipping was calculated as [(mean daytime BP -mean nighttime BP)/ mean daytime BP] and patients with less than 10% SBP dipping were identified as non-dippers [3,22]. Also the absolute white coat effect and nighttime BP reduction were considered in the analysis.…”
Section: Measurementsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, our operating definition was applied throughout the study and all definitions appear to be adequately reliable (51). Third, because dipping is defined by a difference score, its reproducibility falls short of the individual daytime and nighttime BP levels (29,52,53); on repeated ABPM, agreement in diagnosing nocturnal hypertension on the basis of the two measurements was greater using an absolute nocturnal BP cut-off rather than the percentage nocturnal BP fall (54). Also, one would anticipate a regression to the mean effect had we repeated measurements.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%