Abstract
Self-measurement of blood pressure (BP) is regularly used to diagnose hypertension and to monitor BP at home. We recently showed that self-measurement of BP may elicit a pressor or ‘auto-cuff’ response. In this study we examined whether the pressor response is different between self-initiated and fully-automated BP measurement. We performed two randomized crossover studies in outpatients visiting a hypertension clinic. The first cohort of 52 participants performed six unattended self-initiated and six fully-automated BP measurements, while continuously monitoring BP and central haemodynamics using finger photoplethysmography. The second cohort consisted of 120 patients who performed three self-initiated and three fully-automated BP measurements. In the first cohort (mean age 61.2 ± 10.4 years, mean office BP 142.0 ± 19.9/82.5 ± 12.2 mmHg, 36.7% female) average systolic and diastolic BP increased by 7.3 ± 8.5/3.3 ± 4.0 mmHg in the group with self-initiated BP measurements, while BP increased by 3.3 ± 6.3/1.4 ± 3.0 mmHg during fully-automated measurements (p = 0.002/p = 0.002 for difference between groups). The higher BP increase during self-initiated BP measurements resulted from an increase in heart rate and cardiac output. In the second cohort (mean age 58.0 ± 14.1 years, mean office BP 153.6 ± 23.8/86.3 ± 14.0 mmHg, 44.1% female) self-initiated BP measurement resulted in a 2.1 ± 6.8/0.9 ± 4.0 mmHg higher systolic and diastolic BP compared with fully-automated self-measurement (p = 0.001/0.018). In conclusion, our findings suggest that self-initiated BP measurement using a fully-automated method results in a more reliable BP compared with a self-initiated semi-automated method by attenuating the auto-cuff response. These findings may have implications for the self-measurement of BP.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 12 digital issues and online access to articles
$119.00 per year
only $9.92 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on Springer Link
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Whelton PK, Carey RM, Aronow WS, Ovbiagele B, Casey DE, Smith SC, et al. 2017 ACC/AHA/AAPA/ABC/ACPM/AGS/APhA/ASH/ASPC/NMA/PCNA guideline for the prevention, detection, evaluation, and management of high blood pressure in adults a report of the American college of cardiology/American heart association task force on clinical practice guidelines. Hypertension. 2018;71:13–115.
Viera AJ, Cohen LW, Mitchell CM, Sloane PD. How and why do patients use home blood pressure monitors? Blood Press Monit. 2008;13:133–7.
Baral-Grant S, Haque MS, Nouwen A, Greenfield SM, McManus RJ. Self-monitoring of blood pressure in hypertension: a UK primary care survey. Int J Hypertens. 2012. https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/582068
Cuspidi C, Meani S, Lonati L, Fusi V, Magnaghi G, Garavelli G, et al. Prevalence of home blood pressure measurement among selected hypertensive patients: results of a multicenter survey from six hospital outpatient hypertension clinics in Italy. Blood Press. 2005;14:251–6.
Logan AG, Dunai A, McIsaac WJ, Irvine MJ, Tisler A. Attitudes of primary care physicians and their patients about home blood pressure monitoring in Ontario. J Hypertens. 2008;26:446–52.
Bancej CM, Campbell N, McKay DW, Nichol M, Walker RL, Kaczorowski J. Home blood pressure monitoring among Canadian adults with hypertension: results from the 2009 survey on living with chronic diseases in Canada. Can J Cardiol. 2010;26:152–7.
Dolan E, Stanton A, Thijs L, Hinedi K, Atkins N, McClory S, et al. Superiority of ambulatory over clinic blood pressure measurement in predicting mortality: the Dublin outcome study. Hypertension. 2005;46:156–61.
Ohkubo T, Hozawa A, Nagai K, Kikuya M, Tsuji I, Ito S, et al. Prediction of stroke by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring versus screening blood pressure measurements in a general population: the Ohasama study. J Hypertens. 2000;18:847–54.
Clement D, De Buyzere M, De Bacquer D. Prognostic value of ambulatory blood pressure recordings in patients with treated hypertension. New Engl J Med. 2003;348:2407–15.
Verdecchia P, Schillaci G, Borgioni C, Ciucci A, Pede S, Porcellati C. Ambulatory pulse pressure. A potent predictor of total cardiovascular risk in hypertension. Hypertension. 1998;32:983–8.
Bliziotis IA, Destounis A, Stergiou GS. Home versus ambulatory and office blood pressure in predicting target organ damage in hypertension: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Hypertens. 2012;30:1289–99.
Niiranen TJ, Hänninen MR, Johansson J, Reunanen A, Jula AM. Home-measured blood pressure is a stronger predictor of cardiovascular risk than office blood pressure: the finn-home study. Hypertension. 2010;55:1346–51.
Mancia G, Bombelli M, Brambilla G, Facchetti R, Sega R, Toso E, et al. Long-term prognostic value of white coat hypertension: an insight from diagnostic use of both ambulatory and home blood pressure measurements. Hypertension. 2013;62:168–74.
Hodgkinson J, Mant J, Martin U, Guo B, Hobbs FDR, Deeks JJ, et al. Relative effectiveness of clinic and home blood pressure monitoring compared with ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in diagnosis of hypertension: systematic review. Brit Med J. 2011;342:d3621–d3621.
Niiranen TJ, Mäki J, Puukka P, Karanko H, Jula AM. Office, home, and ambulatory blood pressures as predictors of cardiovascular risk. Hypertension. 2014;64:281–6.
Gazzola K, Cammenga M, van der Hoeven NV, van Montfrans GA, van den Born B. Prevalence and reproducibility of differences between home and ambulatory blood pressure and their relation with hypertensive organ damage. J Hum Hypertens. 2017;31:555–60.
Gazzola K, Honingh M, Truijen J, Zuliani G, van den Born BJH. Effect of anticiptation and cuff inflation on blood pressure during self-measurement. J Hypertens. 2018;36:1798–802.
Wright JT, Williamson JD, Whelton PK, Snyder JK, Kaycee MA. A randomized trial of intensive versus standard blood-pressure control. N Engl J Med. 2015;373:2103–16.
Myers MG, Godwin M, Dawes M, Kiss A, Tobe SW, Grant FC, et al. Conventional versus automated measurement of blood pressure in primary care patients with systolic hypertension: randomised parallel design controlled trial. Brit Med J. 2011;342:d286–d286.
Wesseling KH. Finger arterial pressure measurement with Finapres. Z Kardiol. 1996;85(Suppl 3):38–44.
Guelen I, Westerhof BE, van der Sar GL, van Montfrans GA, Kiemeneij F, Wesseling KH. et al. Validation of brachial artery pressure reconstruction from finger arterial pressure. J Hypertens. 2008;26:1321–7.
Martina JR, Westerhof BE, van Goudoever J, de Beaumont EMFH, Truijen J, Kim Y-S. et al. dNoninvasive continuous arterial blood pressure monitoring with Nexfin®. Anesthesiology. 2012;116:1092–103.
Bogert LWJ, Wesseling KH, Schraa O, Van Lieshout EJ, De Mol BAJM, Van Goudoever J. et al. Pulse contour cardiac output derived from non-invasive arterial pressure in cardiovascular disease. Anaesthesia. 2010;65:1119–25.
Myers MG, Valdivieso M, Kiss A. Use of automated office blood pressure measurement to reduce the white coat response. J Hypertens. 2009;27:280–6.
Charmoy A, Würzner G, Ruffieux C, Hasler C, Cachat F, Waeber B, et al. Reactive rise in blood pressure upon cuff inflation: cuff inflation at the arm causes a greater rise in pressure than at the wrist in hypertensive patients. Blood Press Monit. 2007;12:275–80.
Veerman DP, van Montfrans GA, Wieling W. Clinical Practice. Effects of cuff inflation on self recorded blood pressure. Lancet. 1990;335:451–3.
Julius S, Li Y, Brant D, Krause L, Buda AJ. Laboratory studies neurogenic pressor episodes fail to cause hypertension, but do induce cardiac hypertrophy. Hypertension. 1989;13:422–9.
Myers M, Valdivieso M, Chessman M, Kiss A. Can sphygmomanometers designed for self-measurement of blood pressure in the home be used in office practice? Blood Press Monit. 2010;15:300–4.
Filipovský J, Seidlerová J, Ceral J, Vysočanová P, Špác J, Souček M, et al. A multicentre study on unattended automated office blood pressure measurement in treated hypertensive patients. Blood Press. 2018;27:188–93.
Filipovský J, Seidlerová J, Kratochvíl Z, Karnosová P, Jr OM, Filipovsky J. Automated compared to manual office blood pressure and to home blood pressure in hypertensive patients. Blood Press. 2016;25:228–34.
Godwin M, Birtwhistle R, Delva D, Lam M, Casson I, MacDonald S, et al. Manual and automated office measurements in relation to awake ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. Fam Pr. 2011;28:110–7.
Beckett L, Godwin M. The BpTRU automatic blood pressure monitor compared to 24 h ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in the assessment of blood pressure in patients with hypertension. BMC Cardiovasc Disord. 2005;5:18.
Myers MG. A proposed algorithm for diagnosing hypertension using automated office blood pressure measurement. J Hypertens. 2010;28:703–8.
Johnson K, Whelton P, Cushman W, Cutler J, Evans GW, Snyder JK. et al. Blood Pressure Measurement in SPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial). Hypertension. 2018;71:848–57.
Al-Karkhi I, Al-Rubaiy R, Rosenqvist U, Falk M, Nystrom FH. Comparisons of automated blood pressures in a primary health care setting with self-measurements at the office and at home using the Omron i-C10 device. Blood Press Monit. 2014;20:98–103.
Acknowledgements
We are greatly indebted to all the participants of the study and to Lotte Zandbergen for her help with the measurements.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary information
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Berkhof, R.T., Gazzola, K. & van den Born, BJ.H. Effect of self-initiated and fully-automated self-measurement on blood pressure. J Hum Hypertens 34, 176–183 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41371-019-0256-1
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41371-019-0256-1