ArticleArquivos brasileiros de cardiologia2017
Impact of Different Normality Thresholds for 24-hour ABPM at the Primary Health Care Level.
Article in Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Normality thresholds for ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) in the European, American and Brazilian guidelines: is there a need for revision?International journal of cardiology. Cardiovascular risk and prevention · 2022Article
- Diabetic patients with chronic kidney disease: Non-invasive assessment of cardiovascular risk.World journal of diabetes · 2021Review
- Evaluation of percutaneous renal biopsy complications based on outcomes and indicators of the Nursing Outcomes Classification.Revista latino-americana de enfermagem · 2021Article
- Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring over 24 h: A Latin American Society of Hypertension position paper-accessibility, clinical use and cost effectiveness of ABPM in Latin America in year 2020.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background: Hypertension is an important risk factor for cardiovascular outcomes. Primary health care (PHC) physicians should be prepared to act appropriately in the prevention of cardiovascular risk factors. However, the rates of patients with control of blood pressure (BP) remain low. The impact of the reclassification of high BP by 24-hour ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) can lead to different medical decisions in PHC.
objective: To evaluate the agreement between the BP measured by a conventional method by PHC physicians and by 24-hour ABPM, considering different BP normal thresholds for the 24-hour ABPM according to the V Brazilian ABPM Guidelines and the European Society of Hypertension Guidelines.
methods: A cross-sectional study including 569 hypertensive patients. The BP was initially measured by the PHC physicians and, later, by 24-hour ABPM. The BP measurements were obtained independently between the two methods. The therapeutic targets for the conventional BP followed the guidelines by the Eighth Joint National Committee (JNC 8), the V ABPM Brazilian Guidelines, and the 2013 European Hypertension Guidelines.
results: There was an accuracy of 54.8% (95% confidence interval [95%CI] 0.51 - 0.58%) for the BP measured with the conventional method when compared with the 24-hour ABPM, with a sensitivity of 85% (95%CI 80.8 - 88.6%), specificity of 31.9% (95%CI 28.7 - 34.7%), and kappa value of 0.155, when considering the European Hypertension Guidelines. When using more stringent thresholds to characterize the BP as "normal" by ABPM, the accuracy was 45% (95%CI 0.41 - 0.47%) for conventional measurement when compared with 24-hour ABPM, with a sensitivity of 86.7% (95%CI 0.81 - 0.91%), specificity of 29% (95%CI 0.26 - 0.30%), and kappa value of 0.103.
conclusion: The BP measurements obtained by PHC physicians showed low accuracy when compared with those obtained by 24-hour ABPM, regardless of the threshold set by the different guidelines. FUNDAMENTOS:: A hipertensão arterial sistêmica é um fator de risco importante para desfechos cardiovasculares. Médicos da atenção primária à saúde (APS) devem estar preparados para atuar adequadamente na prevenção de fatores de risco cardiovascular. No entanto, as taxas de pacientes com pressão arterial (PA) controlada continuam baixas. O impacto da reclassificação do diagnóstico de hipertensão pela utilização da monitorização ambulatorial da PA (MAPA) de 24 horas pode levar a diferentes decisões médicas na APS. OBJETIVO:: Avaliar a concordância entre as PAs medidas por método convencional por médicos da APS e por MAPA de 24 horas, considerando diferentes limiares de normalidade para a MAPA de 24 horas de acordo com as recomendações da V Diretriz Brasileira de MAPA e da Diretriz da Sociedade Europeia de Hipertensão. MÉTODOS:: Estudo transversal com 569 pacientes hipertensos. A PA foi medida inicialmente por médicos da APS e, posteriormente, pela MAPA de 24 horas. As medidas foram obtidas de forma independente entre os dois métodos. Os alvos terapêuticos para a PA convencional seguiram as orientações do Eighth Joint National Committee (JNC 8), das V Diretrizes Brasileiras de MAPA e das Diretrizes Europeias de Hipertensão de 2013. RESULTADOS:: Foi observada uma acurácia de 54,8% (intervalo de confiança de 95% [IC95%] 0,51 - 0,58%) para a PA aferida de forma convencional quando comparada à obtida com a MAPA de 24 horas, além de uma sensibilidade de 85% (IC95% 80,8 - 88,6%), especificidade de 31,9% (IC95% 28,7 - 34,7%) e kappa de 0,155, quando consideradas as Diretrizes Europeias de Hipertensão. Quando utilizados limiares mais rígidos para caracterizar a PA como "normal" pela MAPA, foi identificada uma acurácia de 45% (IC95% 0,41 - 0,47%) pela medida convencional quando comparada à obtida pela MAPA de 24 horas, além de uma sensibilidade de 86,7% (IC95% 0,81 - 0,91%), especificidade de 29% (IC95% 0,26 - 0,30%) e kappa de 0,103. CONCLUSÃO:: As medidas de PA avaliadas pelos médicos da APS apresentaram baixa acurácia quando comparadas às medidas pela MAPA de 24 horas, independente do limiar utilizado pelas diferentes diretrizes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.