Cited by 42Blood Pressure and Hypertension StudiesCardiovascular Health and Disease PreventionSodium Intake and Health

A Comparison of Home Measurement and Ambulatory Monitoring of Blood Pressure in the Adjustment of Antihypertensive Treatment

NIIRANEN, T, KANTOLA, I, VESALAINEN, R, JOHANSSON, J, RUUSKA, M·2006·American Journal of Hypertension

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare home and ambulatory blood pressure (BP) in the adjustment of antihypertensive treatment. METHODS: After a 4-week washout period, patients whose untreated daytime diastolic ambulatory BP averaged > or = 85 mm Hg were randomized to be treated according to their ambulatory or home BP. Antihypertensive treatment was adjusted at 6-week intervals according to the mean daytime ambulatory diastolic BP or the mean home diastolic BP, depending on the patient's randomization group. If the diastolic BP stayed above 80 mm Hg, the physician blinded to randomization intensified hypertensive treatment. RESULTS: Ninety-eight patients completed the study. During the 24-week follow-up period both systolic and diastolic BP decreased significantly within both groups (P < .001). At the end of the study, the systolic/diastolic differences between ambulatory (n = 46) and home (n = 52) BP groups in home, daytime ambulatory, night-time ambulatory, and 24-h ambulatory BP changes averaged 2.6/2.6 mm Hg, 0.6/1.7 mm Hg, 1.0/1.4 mm Hg, and 0.6/1.5 mm Hg, respectively (P range .06 to .75) A nonsignificant trend to more intensive drug therapy in the ambulatory BP group and a nonsignificant trend to larger share of patients reaching (57.7% v 43.5%, P = .16) the target pressure in the home BP group was observed due to the 3.8 mm Hg difference in ambulatory and home diastolic BP at randomization. CONCLUSIONS: The adjustment of antihypertensive treatment based on either ambulatory or home BP measurement led to good BP control. No significant between-group differences in BP changes were seen at the end of the study. Additional research is needed to provide more conclusive results.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.amjhyper.2005.10.017

Cites

33 of 33 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 34 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
NIIRANEN, T., KANTOLA, I., VESALAINEN, R., JOHANSSON, J., & RUUSKA, M.
Affiliations
University of Turku (FI)
Corresponding author
NIIRANEN, T
Venue
American Journal of Hypertension
Published
2006-05
Volume
19
Issue
5
Pages
468-474
ISSN
0895-7061 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2056679958
Cited by
42
References
34
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 4
FWCI
3.09
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • American Journal of Hypertension (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Turun Yliopistollinen Keskussairaala
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Blood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiovascular Health and Disease Prevention
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Sodium Intake and Health
Keywords
home blood pressure monitoring, ambulatory blood pressure monitoring, hypertension, diastolic blood pressure, blood pressure control, treatment intensification, self-monitoring
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Antihypertensive Agents, Blood Pressure, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Hypertension, Male, Middle Aged, Retrospective Studies, Treatment Outcome, Blood Pressure Monitoring, Ambulatory

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review