ArticleHypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension2021
Differences in oscillometric blood pressure readings between unsupported and supported back conditions.
Article in Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Appropriate body posture is important for accurate blood pressure (BP) measurement. However, the impact of an unsupported back on BP readings is currently controversial. This study included 224 subjects (18-86 years old, 54.5 ± 15.5 years old, 105 males). BP was measured with an oscillometric BP device randomly following one of two protocols for back support conditions: (1) supported-unsupported-supported-unsupported, or (2) unsupported-supported-unsupported-supported. The average of the two systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP) readings in the same position was recorded as the final BP value. The differences in BP between the unsupported and supported back conditions were calculated as delta BP. Moreover, the percentage variation in BP (PV) was calculated with the formula delta BP/BP with an unsupported back. Multivariable regression analysis evaluated the impact of age, sex, hypertension history and supported BP level on PV. The SBP/DBP levels measured with an unsupported back were slightly higher than those when the back was supported (132.7 ± 19.5/79.6 ± 12.9 mmHg vs. 130.3 ± 20.0/78.5 ± 14.3 mmHg), and the delta SBP (2.3 mmHg) was statistically significant. The multivariable regression analysis showed that age was a positive factor but supported SBP level as a negative factor for systolic PV, while age and supported DBP level were positive factors, but hypertension history was a negative factor for diastolic PV. For a group participant, the mean difference in oscillometric SBP/DBP in the unsupported back position was 2.3/1.0 mmHg higher than that in the supported back position.
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.