This Article Abstract Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Web of Science (17) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Verberk, W. J. Articles by de Leeuw, P. W. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Verberk, W. J. Articles by de Leeuw, P. W.

Home Blood Pressure Measurement

A Systematic Review

Willem J. Verberk, MSc^_*, Abraham A. Kroon, MD, PhD^_*, Alfons G.H. Kessels, MD, MSc and Peter W. de Leeuw, MD, PhD^_*,_*

^_* Department of Medicine, University Hospital Maastricht and Cardiovascular Research Institute Maastricht (CARIM), Maastricht, the Netherlands
Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Technology Assessment, University Hospital Maastricht, Maastricht, the Netherlands

View larger version (11K): [in a new window]   Figure 1 Differences between systolic (left) and diastolic (right) office blood pressure measurement (OBPM) and home blood pressure measurement (HBPM) as a function of age in patients without antihypertensive treatment. Results were derived from 18 studies with a total of 6,979 subjects (Table 3). The relationship was statistically significant for systolic pressure only (p = 0.036). The regression line was calculated for equal proportions of men and women, and studies were weighted for the number of subjects.

View larger version (14K): [in a new window]   Figure 2 Bland-Altman plots for the differences between systolic office blood pressure measurement (OBPM) and home blood pressure measurement (HBPM) as a function of the average of OBPM and HBPM in patients without (left) or with (right) antihypertensive treatment. Results were derived from the studies mentioned in Tables 3 and 4. The relationship was statistically significant for untreated subjects only (p = 0.007). Studies were weighted for the number of subjects.

View larger version (14K): [in a new window]   Figure 3 Differences between pretreatment and treatment pressures for both office blood pressure measurement (OBPM) and home blood pressure measurement (HBPM) as derived from eight studies with a total of 3,256 subjects (Table 5). Results for systolic (closed symbols, S) and diastolic (open symbols, D) blood pressure are presented as the mean difference with the 95% confidence interval; OBPM differences were significantly greater than HBPM differences for both systolic and diastolic blood pressure (p < 0.001).