首页> 外文期刊>Journal of the American Society of Hypertension : >Home, automated office, and conventional office blood pressure as predictors of cardiovascular risk
【24h】

Home, automated office, and conventional office blood pressure as predictors of cardiovascular risk

机译:家庭,自动化办公室和传统的办公室血压作为心血管风险的预测因素

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

Automated office blood pressure (AOBP) has recently been shown to closely predict cardiovascular (CV) events in the elderly. Home blood pressure (HBP) has also been accepted as a valuable method in the prediction of CV disease. This study aimed to compare conventional office BP (OBP), HBP, and AOBP in order to evaluate their value in predicting CV events and deaths in hypertensives. We assessed 236 initially treatment naive hypertensives, examined between 2009 and 2013. The end points were any CV and non-CV event including mortality, myocardial infarction, coronary heart disease, hospitalization for heart failure, severe arrhythmia, stroke, and intermittent claudication. We fitted proportional hazards models using the different modalities as predictors and evaluated their predictive performance using three metrics: time-dependent receiver operating characteristics curves, the Akaike's Information Criterion, and Harrell's C-index. After a mean follow-up of 7 years, 23 participants (39% women) had experienced >= 1 CV event. Conventional office systolic (hazard ratio [HR] per 1 mm Hg increase in BP, 1.028; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.009-1.048), automated office systolic (HR per 1 mm Hg increase in BP, 1.031; 95% CI, 1.008-1.054), and home systolic (HR, 1.025; 95% CI, 1.003-1.047) were predictive of CV events. All systolic BP measurements were predictive after adjustment for other CV risk factors (P < .05). The predictive performance of the different modalities was similar. Conventional OBP was significantly higher than AOBP and average HBP. AOBP predicts equally well to OBP and HBP CV events. It appears to be comparable to HBP in the assessment of CV risk, and therefore, its introduction into guidelines and clinical practice as the reference method for assessing BP in the office seems reasonable after verification of these findings by randomized trials. Copyright (C) 2017 American Society of Hypertension. All rights reserved.
机译:自动办公室血压(AOBP)最近被证明可以密切预测老年人的心血管(CV)事件。家庭血压(HBP)也被认为是预测心血管疾病的一种有价值的方法。本研究旨在比较常规办公室血压(OBP)、HBP和AOBP,以评估它们在预测高血压患者心血管事件和死亡方面的价值。我们在2009年至2013年间评估了236名最初未接受治疗的高血压患者。终点是任何CV和非CV事件,包括死亡率、心肌梗死、冠心病、心力衰竭住院、严重心律失常、中风和间歇性跛行。我们使用不同的模式作为预测因子来拟合比例风险模型,并使用三个指标来评估其预测性能:依赖时间的接收器工作特性曲线、Akaike的信息标准和Harrell的C指数。平均随访7年后,23名参与者(39%为女性)经历了>=1次CV事件。常规办公室收缩功能(血压每增加1毫米汞柱的风险比[HR]为1.028;95%可信区间[CI]为1.009-1.048)、自动办公室收缩功能(血压每增加1毫米汞柱的HR为1.031;95%可信区间为1.008-1.054)和家庭收缩功能(HR为1.025;95%可信区间为1.003-1.047)可预测心血管事件。调整其他心血管危险因素后,所有收缩压测量值均具有预测性(P<0.05)。不同模式的预测性能相似。常规OBP显著高于AOBP和平均HBP。AOBP对OBP和HBP CV事件的预测同样准确。在CV风险评估方面,它似乎与HBP相当,因此,在通过随机试验验证这些发现后,将其作为办公室评估血压的参考方法引入指南和临床实践似乎是合理的。版权所有(C)2017美国高血压学会。版权所有。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号