Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 30, 2025
Measuring the Carotid to Femoral Pulse Wave Velocity Cf-PWV to Evaluate Arterial Stiffness
Published on: May 3, 2018
Unattended automatic blood pressure measurements vs conventional office readings in predicting hypertension-mediated
Marek Stopa1,2, Katarzyna Zięba3, Anna Tofilska3
1First Department of Cardiology, Interventional Electrocardiology and Hypertension, Institute of Cardiology, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Kraków, Poland
Introduction:
Hypertension is a leading cardiovascular risk factor. Accurate blood pressure (BP) measurement is pivotal in hypertension diagnosis and management. Conventional office blood pressure measurements (OBPMs) are error‑prone, exacerbated by the white‑coat effect. Unattended automated office blood pressure measurement (UAOBPM) is emerging as an alternative, mitigating the white‑coat effect. However, its ability to predict hypertension‑mediated organ damage (HMOD) remains disputable.
Objectives:
This study compares UAOBPM with OBPM in terms of their association with various types of HMOD, including left ventricular hypertrophy, left atrial enlargement, left ventricular systolic and diastolic dysfunction, intima‑media complex thickening, microalbuminuria, and abnormal pulse wave velocity.
Patients And Methods:
A total of 219 hypertensive patients were recruited, interviewed, and examined. Subsequently, BP measurements were conducted in a randomized manner: 1) UAOBPM, after 5 minutes of solitary rest in an examination room, BP was automatically measured 3 times at 1‑minute intervals; 2) OBPM, after 5 minutes of rest, a physician performed 3 consecutive BP measurements at 1‑minute intervals. Subsequent evaluations aimed to detect HMOD and included echocardiography, carotid artery ultrasound, pulse wave velocity assessment, and laboratory tests.
Results:
UAOBP values were lower than the OBP ones (mean [SD], 124.7 [14.4] vs 128.2 [14.2] mm Hg; P <0.001 for systolic BP, and 73.3 [10.2] vs 75.2 [10.6] mm Hg; P <0.001 for diastolic BP). Correlation and receiver operating characteristic curve analyses revealed no superiority of either method in predicting HMOD.
Conclusions:
The UAOBPM did not prove superior to OBPM in predicting HMOD. Further research is warranted to determine the role of UAOBPM in clinical practice.
Related Concept Videos
01:10Pre-Procedural Guidelines for Assessing Blood Pressure
01:30Equipments Used To Measure Blood Pressure
This invasive approach involves cannulating a peripheral artery. During each cardiac contraction, pressure generates mechanical motion within the catheter, transmitted through rigid, fluid-filled tubing to a transducer. This transducer converts mechanical motion into electrical signals displayed as waveforms on a monitor. An automatic flushing system prevents blood backflow. Due to the potential risk of unexpected arterial blood loss, this method is primarily used in intensive...
01:28Special considerations while measuring blood pressure
Monitoring Both Arms:
Monitoring BP in both arms during the initial assessment is advisable, as the systolic value may differ by five to ten mm Hg between arms. For subsequent BP assessments, use the arm with the higher reading.
01:25Errors occurring during blood pressure monitoring
Several factors...
01:17Measurement of Blood Pressure
01:21Sites for measruring blood pressure
The Brachial Artery: Primary Site for Blood Pressure Measurement