Low Concordance Between Blood Pressures Measured in Periodic Health Examinations and in a Workplace-Based...

Area of Science:

• Cardiology
• Public Health
• Clinical Measurement

Background:

• Routine clinical practice often shows poor adherence to standard blood pressure (BP) measurement protocols.
• This can lead to higher BP readings compared to research-quality measurements.
• It remains unclear if this discrepancy exists in periodic health examinations.

Purpose of the Study:

• To investigate the concordance between BP measurements taken during periodic health examinations and those obtained using a standard measurement protocol.
• To assess potential overestimation of hypertension in routine settings.

Main Methods:

• Utilized data from the Kailuan Study, a longitudinal cohort in China.
• Compared BP readings from biennial health examinations with measurements from a workplace-based hypertension management program using standard protocols.
• Employed generalized linear mixed-effects models and Bland-Altman analyses for comparison.

Main Results:

• A total of 3988 men were included, with a mean age of 44.9 years.
• Mean systolic BP (SBP) was 4.2 mm Hg higher and mean diastolic BP (DBP) was 3.3 mm Hg higher in health examinations compared to the management program.
• Bland-Altman analysis revealed wide agreement intervals for both SBP and DBP.

Conclusions:

• BP measurements in periodic health examinations tend to be higher than those taken under standard protocols.
• Findings underscore the necessity of adhering to standard BP measurement techniques.
• Standardization is vital to avoid inaccurate hypertension prevalence estimates and inappropriate treatment initiation.