Managing White‐Coat Effect

J. Handler
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-7176.2008.08064.x
2008-08-01
Abstract:The JOUrNAL Of CLiNiCAL hyperTeNSiON 649 A 68-year-old woman was referred to the hypertension clinic for evaluation of resistant hypertension. She had been receiving antihypertensive medication for approximately 30 years. Good control had been demonstrated on 2 and 3 medications until the prior year. After that, her blood pressure was consistently elevated in the clinic despite an increasing drug regime; home blood pressure was controlled. A few years before her referral, intolerance to hydrochlorothiazide with hyponatremia had been noted, and she was placed on lisinopril and atenolol. however, her serum potassium level rose to 6.4 meq/dL, and lisinopril was discontinued. felodipine was added to atenolol, with office systolic blood pressure levels in the 150and 160-mm hg range. hydralazine and clonidine were not effective. There was no history of diabetes mellitus or target organ damage. On evaluation, blood pressure measured by a medical assistant was 178/102 mm hg, and levels measured by a physician were 152/98 mm hg (both arms, supine) and 150/104 mm hg (right arm, standing). results of physical examination were unremarkable. The patient indicated complete adherence to her regime of felodipine 10 mg/d and atenolol 50 mg/d. Laboratory tests revealed a creatinine level of 1.1 mg (normal, 0.6–1.1 mg), a fasting glucose level of 124 mg/dL (normal, 70–125 mg/dL), and a low-density lipoprotein cholesterol level of 128 mg/dL (normal, <130 mg/dL). findings on electrocardiography were normal. felodipine was increased to 20 mg/d, atenolol was maintained at 50 mg/d, and furosemide 10 mg twice daily was initiated and increased to 20 mg twice daily. The patient steadfastly indicated complete adherence to her medical regimen, and a record of medication refills showed timely pickups. Systolic blood pressure levels in the clinic continued mostly in the 160-mm hg range. her 2-year-old home blood pressure apparatus was validated in the office, and a mean of 18 home recordings, mostly in the morning after awakening, was 112/66 mm hg. A mean of 44 blood pressure readings taken from a 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure recording was 113/63 mm hg. On clinic follow-up, an initial blood pressure measured by a medical assistant was 172/64 mm hg, followed by readings of 154/74 mm hg, 149/72 mm hg, 148/74 mm hg, and 152/76 mm hg.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?