Abstract:Objective:To explore the difference of blood pressure control rate recommended in Chinese type 2 diabetes guidelines ver. 2013 and ver. 2017 based on home blood pressure monitoring (HBPM) and automated office blood pressure (AOBP) in type 2 diabetes patients with hypertension.Methods:Subjects were enrolled according to the following criteria: (1) type 2 diabetes patients with hypertension who were regularly followed in the Internet Plus Diabetes Shared Cared Clinic of Peking University First Hospital and whose AOBP was measured twice with an arm sphygmomanometer, with the mean value recorded; and (2) using an intelligent arm sphygmomanometer, the patients automatically uploaded their HBPM through APP ≥3 times/quarter, each time they monitored blood pressure in the resting state on the morning or before dinner on separate days. The AOBP and the mean value of HBPM before visit were compared. The difference of the control rate of AOBP and HBPM based on the recommendations of the two versions of guidelines [＜130/80 mmHg, ＜140/80 mmHg (1 mmHg=0.133 kPa)] was analyzed. Chi-square test was used to determine the difference between the blood pressure control rate of AOBP and HBPM; paired t-test was used to analyze the difference between the two sources of blood pressure in the same patient.Results:Forty patients met the inclusion criteria, and they had 9.5 (5.0, 25.0) times of HBPM in the first quarter before the last visit. The systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) of AOBP were (140.9±17.2) mmHg and (82.8±9.3) mmHg, respectively. The SBP and DBP of HBPM were (128.5±11.1) mmHg and (76.0±9.3) mmHg, respectively (P＜0.001). Based on the results of AOBP, the blood pressure control rates of ＜140/80 mmHg and ＜130/80 mmHg were 32.5% and 5.0% respectively, while the blood pressure control rates of ＜140/80 mmHg and ＜130/80 mmHg were 60.0% and 52.5% respectively based on the results of HBPM. There was a statistically significant difference between the two groups (χ2=17.425, P=0.002). The SBP and DBP of AOBP were overestimated by (15.7±18.9) mmHg and (9.6±9.3) mmHg, respectively (P＜0.001), compared with the mean value of HBPM in patients whose blood pressure of AOBP was ≥140/80 mmHg. The SBP and DBP of AOBP were overestimated by (18.2±14.1) mmHg and (10.4±9.4) mmHg respectively (P＜0.001), compared with the mean value of HBPM in patients whose blood pressure of HBPM was＜130/80 mmHg.Conclusion:Compared with the HBPM, AOBP significantly overestimates the blood pressure of type 2 diabetes patients with hypertension by about 12.3/6.8 mmHg. When the AOBP is taken as the judgment of blood pressure not reaching the target, the blood pressure may be more overestimated.

THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN HEART RATE MEASURED USING UNATTENDED AUTOMATED BLOOD PRESSURE MEASUREMENT AND OTHER METHODS OF BLOOD PRESSURE ASSESSMENT

Agreement between resting heart rate measured by unattended automated office and office blood pressure measurement, ambulatory blood pressure monitoring, or electrocardiography

ACCURACY AND BLOOD PRESSURE THRESHOLD CONTROL ANALYSIS OF UNATTENDED AUTOMATED OFFICE BLOOD PRESSURE MEASUREMENT: A CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY BASED ON MULTICENTER POPULATIONS

Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring versus office blood pressure measurement: Are there sex differences?

Simultaneous 24-h ambulatory blood pressure measurement on both arms: a consideration for improving hypertension management

Conventional versus automated measurement of blood pressure in the office (CAMBO) trial

Unattended automatic blood pressure measurements versus conventional office readings in predicting hypertension-mediated organ damage

Intelligent Assist Office Blood Pressures (IOBP) versus awake ambulatory monitoring and conventional auscultatory office readings in Chinese primary medical institutions

Agreement between attended home and ambulatory blood pressure measurements in adolescents with chronic kidney disease

Comparison of blood pressure values—self-measured at home, measured at an unattended office, and measured at a conventional attended office

Ambulatory blood pressure using 60 rather than 20-min intervals may better reflect the resting blood pressure

Comparison of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring and office blood pressure in primary health care of populations at a high risk of hypertension

COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF THE AKTIIA CUFFLESS MONITOR AND STANDARD 24-H AMBULATORY BLOOD PRESSURE MONITOR

METHODOLOGICAL AND DIAGNOSTIC RELIABILITY OF 24-H ABPM: A PARADIGM SHIFT IN DAILY CLINICAL PRACTICE?

Evaluating Novel Approaches for Estimating Awake and Sleep Blood Pressure: Design of the Better BP Study – a Randomised, Crossover Trial

Validation of oscillometric ratio and maximum gradient methods for non-invasive blood pressure measurement with intra-arterial blood pressure measurements as reference

Comparison of blood pressure control standards based on home blood pressure monitoring and automated office blood pressure in patients with type 2 diabetes and hypertension in Shared Care Clinic

O20 CURRENT 24-HOUR AMBULATORY BLOOD PRESSURE TECHNOLOGIES SHOULD BE RECONSIDERED AS THE REFERENCE STANDARD FOR VALIDATION OF CUFFLESS BLOOD PRESSURE DEVICES

Comparisons of an automated oscillometric device with a hybrid manual auscultatory device for the Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey

Wrist-worn optical and chest strap heart rate comparison in a heterogeneous sample of healthy individuals and in coronary artery disease patients

S-56-2: HOME BLOOD PRESSURE MEASUREMENT FOR HYPERTENSION MANAGEMENT IN THE REAL WORLD: THE IMPORTANCE OF REPORTING HOME BLOOD PRESSURE TO DOCTORS