Document Detail

A cross-over evaluation of different methods and devices to measure blood pressure in type 1 diabetic patients with nephropathy.
MedLine Citation:
PMID:  10915231     Owner:  NLM     Status:  MEDLINE    
BACKGROUND: In type 1 diabetic patients with nephropathy, tight blood pressure control has been shown to prevent the progression of the disease. Up until now, self-monitoring, ambulatory and office blood pressure values have not been compared in these patients. Thus, we have evaluated blood pressure values obtained in the office by a physician and at home by self-monitoring with those measured under ambulatory conditions in these patients. Additionally, for blood pressure self-monitoring, three different devices (the sphygmomanometer, upper-arm oscillometer and wrist oscillometer) were compared. METHODS: Twenty-one treated hypertensive type 1 diabetic patients [age 45+/-9 years, duration of diabetes 33+/-12 years (mean+/-SD)] with overt diabetic nephropathy participated in this study. At both baseline and the end of the study, daytime ambulatory blood pressure measurement was performed. Office blood pressure was measured at baseline. Additionally, all the patients measured their blood pressure over a 3-week period using each of the three different devices, in random order, for 1 week. RESULTS: The mean office blood pressure values (135+/-21/85+/-12mmHg) were higher than both the ambulatory (131+/-23/80+/-12, P<0.05) and self-monitoring values (130+/-14/78+/-10; P<0.05 for systolic and P<0.02 for diastolic values). The difference between the ambulatory and self-monitoring values were not statistically significant. Diastolic blood pressure values measured with the oscillometric wrist device showed a trend towards higher values when compared to those measured with the sphygmomanometer and with the oscillometric upper-arm device (P=0.065 for diastolic values). CONCLUSION: Office blood pressure measurements may over-estimate blood pressure in patients with type 1 diabetes and diabetic nephropathy. Because the oscillometric wrist device tends to over-estimate diastolic values, upper-arm devices should be preferred for blood pressure self-monitoring in these patients.
T Heise; K Magnusson; B Gröbel; L Heinemann; K Rave; R Bender; P T Sawicki
Publication Detail:
Type:  Clinical Trial; Comparative Study; Controlled Clinical Trial; Journal Article; Randomized Controlled Trial    
Journal Detail:
Title:  Blood pressure monitoring     Volume:  5     ISSN:  1359-5237     ISO Abbreviation:  Blood Press Monit     Publication Date:  2000 Jun 
Date Detail:
Created Date:  2000-09-29     Completed Date:  2000-09-29     Revised Date:  2007-11-15    
Medline Journal Info:
Nlm Unique ID:  9606438     Medline TA:  Blood Press Monit     Country:  ENGLAND    
Other Details:
Languages:  eng     Pagination:  175-80     Citation Subset:  IM    
Department of Metabolic Diseases and Nutrition, Heinrich-Heine University, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Export Citation:
APA/MLA Format     Download EndNote     Download BibTex
MeSH Terms
Blood Pressure Determination / instrumentation,  methods*
Blood Pressure Monitoring, Ambulatory
Blood Pressure Monitors
Cross-Over Studies
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1 / physiopathology*
Diabetic Nephropathies / complications,  physiopathology*
Equipment Design
Evaluation Studies as Topic
Hypertension / etiology,  physiopathology*
Predictive Value of Tests
Self Care

From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine

Previous Document:  Ambulatory blood pressure variation in normotensive subjects in relation to the sitting or standing ...
Next Document:  Effects of diltiazem retard on ambulatory blood pressure and heart rate variability in patients with...