Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 7, 2026

Author Spotlight: Assessing the Reliability of Doppler Ultrasound in Measuring Leg Blood Flow
Published on: December 15, 2023
Reproducibility of blood pressure variability assessed by home blood pressure monitoring
Vanildo S Guimarães-Neto1, Rodrigo Bezerra2, Audes D M Feitosa2
1Keizo Asami Institute, Federal University of Pernambuco, Recife, PE, Brazil.
Objective:
Although blood pressure (BP) variability (BPV) derived from home BP monitoring (HBPM) is a recognized cardiovascular risk marker, limited data on its reproducibility hinder its clinical application. This study aimed to address this gap.
Methods:
We compared HBPM-derived BPV at two time points using three metrics [standard deviation (SDVar), coefficient of variation (CoV), and variability independent of the mean (VIM)] among 495 individuals not using antihypertensive medications (No-AH) (median time-span between HBPM exams = 392 [308-519] days) and 588 individuals using antihypertensive medications (AH) (time-span between HBPM exams = 400 [319-510] days).
Results:
No significant changes were observed across the time points in systolic HBPM-derived BPV metrics: SDVar (8.55 ± 3.14 vs. 8.71 ± 3.52 in No-AH; 9.67 ± 3.62 vs. 9.50 ± 3.47 in AH), CoV (7.01 ± 2.47 vs. 7.10 ± 2.65 in No-AH; 7.65 ± 2.77 vs. 7.57 ± 2.62 in AH), and VIM (5.76 ± 2.10 vs. 5.87 ± 2.35 in No-AH; 6.29 ± 2.34 vs. 6.18 ± 2.24 in AH) (all p >.05). Similarly, diastolic HBPM-derived BPV metrics remained stable between the time points: SDVar-DBP (5.65 ± 2.32 vs. 5.62 ± 2.33 in No-AH; 5.99 ± 2.50 vs. 5.90 ± 2.37 in AH), CoV-DBP (7.26 ± 3.03 vs. 7.24 ± 3.13 in No-AH; 7.66 ± 3.20 vs. 7.63 ± 3.06 in AH) and VIM-DBP (4.78 ± 1.96 vs. 4.75 ± 1.97 in No-AH; 4.64 ± 1.93 vs. 4.58 ± 1.83 in AH) (all p >.05). However, the test-re-test correlation of all HBPM-derived BPV metrics was only modest (r ≈ .27-.45), revealing substantial intra-individual variability. In addition, similar results were obtained in an alternative sample of 498 individuals (265 using AH and 233 not using AH) who underwent OBP and HBPM measurements at four different time points.
Conclusion:
These findings demonstrate that BPV parameters derived from HBPM had high reproducibility at the population level, but limited reproducibility at the individual level.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Errors occurring during blood pressure monitoring
Several factors...
Special 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.
Assessment of blood pressure in brachial artery(two-step method)
Measurement of Blood Pressure
Sites for measruring blood pressure
The Brachial Artery: Primary Site for Blood Pressure Measurement
Pre-Procedural Guidelines for Assessing Blood Pressure

