Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 9, 2026

Measuring the Carotid to Femoral Pulse Wave Velocity (Cf-PWV) to Evaluate Arterial Stiffness
Published on: May 3, 2018
Discrepancies in office blood pressure measurement protocols across international guidelines: "Houston, we've got a
Vanildo S Guimarães-Neto1,2, Annelise M G Paiva3, Rodrigo Bezerra1,4
1Keizo Asami Institute, Federal University of Pernambuco.
Insights
Different office blood pressure (OBP) measurement protocols recommended by hypertension guidelines lead to clinically significant variations in results. Standardization is needed before setting optimal OBP targets.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Hypertension Management
- Clinical Trials
Background:
- Office blood pressure (OBP) is crucial for hypertension management.
- Current hypertension guidelines propose diverse OBP measurement protocols.
- The clinical impact of these varying protocols is not well understood.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare eight guideline-recommended OBP measurement protocols.
- To assess the clinical implications of differing OBP measurement protocols in treated hypertensive patients.
Main Methods:
- Compared eight OBP protocols (Japanese, Korean, ISH, NICE, ESC/Brazilian, ESH, Chinese, ACC/AHA).
- Utilized data from 826 treated hypertensive outpatients in Brazil.
- Employed aneroid and oscillometric devices for OBP assessment with consecutive 1-min readings and guideline-specific algorithms.
Main Results:
- Systolic OBP varied by up to 2.8 mmHg across protocols.
- Prevalence of uncontrolled hypertension ranged from 30.0% to 41.3% (threshold <140/90 mmHg).
- Prevalence of uncontrolled hypertension ranged from 60.8% to 70.6% (threshold <130/80 mmHg).
Conclusions:
- Guideline-recommended OBP protocols produce clinically meaningful differences.
- Current protocols are not interchangeable, impacting hypertension management.
- Protocol standardization is essential for defining optimal OBP targets.
Abstract:
Office blood pressure (OBP) remains a cornerstone of hypertension management. However, contemporary hypertension guidelines recommend different OBP measurement protocols, which vary in procedural details and analytical approaches, and the clinical implications of these differences remain unclear. We compared eight guideline-recommended OBP protocols (Japanese, Korean, ISH, NICE, ESC/Brazilian, ESH, Chinese, and ACC/AHA) in 826 treated hypertensive outpatients (age = 60.2 ± 14.3 years; 40.4% men) from two Brazilian cohorts, using aneroid ( n = 394) and oscillometric devices ( n = 432). OBP was assessed with consecutive 1-min readings and guideline-specific algorithms. Mean systolic/diastolic OBP and uncontrolled hypertension were analyzed using repeated measures. Systolic OBP differed by up to 2.8 mmHg across protocols, while the prevalence of uncontrolled hypertension ranged from 30.0 to 41.3% using the less than 140/90 mmHg threshold and from 60.8 to 70.6% using the less than 130/80 mmHg threshold. In conclusion, guideline-recommended OBP protocols yield clinically meaningful differences, limiting their interchangeability and highlighting the need for protocol standardization before defining optimal OBP targets.
Related Concept Videos
Errors occurring during blood pressure monitoring
Several factors...
Pre-Procedural Guidelines for Assessing Blood Pressure
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.
Measurement of Blood Pressure
Assessment of blood pressure in brachial artery(one-step method)
Prepare for the Procedure:
Assessment of blood pressure in brachial artery(two-step method)
