Home |
Current Issue |
Past Issues |
In the Clinic |
ACP Journal Club |
CME |
Collections |
Audio/Video |
Mobile |
Subscribe |
Tools |
Help |
ACP Online
|
1 June 1993 | Volume 118 Issue 11 | Pages 833-837
Objective: To study the test-ordering behavior of practicing physicians regarding ambulatory monitoring of blood pressure and to assess changes in patient management after this study.
Design: Cross-sectional assessment of physicians' practice habits regarding the ordering of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring and a longitudinal study of patient management after monitoring.
Setting: Physicians' offices in central Connecticut.
Participants: Two hundred thirty-seven consecutive patients referred by 65 community- and hospital-based physicians.
Measurements: Indications for ambulatory blood pressure monitoring, changes in diagnosis and therapy, and office blood pressures before and after the ambulatory blood pressure study.
Results: The main indications for ordering the test included borderline hypertension (27% of studies ordered), assessment of blood pressure control during drug therapy (25%), evaluation for "white coat" or "office" hypertension (22%), and drug-resistant hypertension (16%). After the ambulatory blood pressure study, only 13% of the patients had further testing (for example, echocardiography); the diagnosis was changed in 41% of the patients, and antihypertensive therapy was changed in 46%. In 122 patients for whom data were complete, office blood pressure measured by the referring physician decreased from 161/96 ± 22/12 mm Hg before the ambulatory blood pressure study to 151/86 ± 27/12 mm Hg 3 months after the study (P = 0.004 for systolic blood pressure and P < 0.001 for diastolic blood pressure). One to 2 years after the study, office blood pressure was 149/86 ± 24/12 mm Hg (P > 0.2 compared with 3 months after the study). Seventy-two percent of the patients had a lower office blood pressure within 3 months of the ambulatory blood pressure study.
Conclusions: Practicing physicians use ambulatory blood pressure recordings for appropriate indications, and data from the monitoring studies affected the management of patients with hypertension.
Author and Article Information
From the University of Connecticut School of Medicine, Farmington, Connecticut.
ARTICLE
Management of Hypertension after Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring
![]()
Requests for Reprints: William B. White, MD, Section of Hypertension and Vascular Diseases, University of Connecticut Health Center, Mail Code 3940, Farmington, CT 06032.
Related articles in Annals:
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
I. Z. Ben-Dov, J. D. Kark, D. Ben-Ishay, J. Mekler, L. Ben-Arie, and M. Bursztyn Predictors of All-Cause Mortality in Clinical Ambulatory Monitoring: Unique Aspects of Blood Pressure During Sleep Hypertension, June 1, 2007; 49(6): 1235 - 1241. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
W. B. White Expanding the Use of Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring for the Diagnosis and Management of Patients With Hypertension Hypertension, January 1, 2006; 47(1): 14 - 15. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
L. R. Krakoff Cost-Effectiveness of Ambulatory Blood Pressure: A Reanalysis Hypertension, January 1, 2006; 47(1): 29 - 34. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
W. B. White Ambulatory Blood-Pressure Monitoring in Clinical Practice N. Engl. J. Med., June 12, 2003; 348(24): 2377 - 2378. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||