Automated Office-Based Blood Pressure Measurement: an Overview and Guidance for Implementation in Primary Care
- 59 Downloads
Purpose of Review
The purposes of this study are to review evidence supporting the use of automated office blood pressure (AOBP) measurement and to provide practical guidance for implementing it in clinical settings.
Mean AOBP readings correlate with awake ambulatory blood pressure monitor (ABPM) values and predict cardiovascular outcomes better than conventional techniques. However, heterogeneity among readings suggests that AOBP does not replace ABPM. Blood pressure (BP) measurement protocols differ among commonly described AOBP devices, but all produce valid BP estimates. Rest periods should not precede AOBP with BpTRU devices but should occur before use with Omron HEM-907 and Microlife WatchBP Office devices. Attended and unattended AOBP appear to produce similar results. This review also describes a framework to aid AOBP’s implementation in clinical practice.
Evidence supports AOBP as the preferred method for measuring BP in office settings, but this approach should be a complement to out-of-office measurements, such as self-measured BP monitoring or 24-h ABPM, not a substitute for it.
KeywordsBlood pressure measurement Automated office blood pressure AOBP Hypertension Implementation science Primary care
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare no conflicts of interest relevant to this manuscript.
Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent
This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.
Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance
- 1.• Kallioinen N, et al. Sources of inaccuracy in the measurement of adult patients’ resting blood pressure in clinical settings: a systematic review. J Hypertens. 2017;35(3):421–41 A comprehensive review of factors that influence the quality of office-based BP measurement, which summarizes how each specific factor contributes to inaccurate readings. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 2.•• Banegas JR, et al. Relationship between clinic and ambulatory blood-pressure measurements and mortality. N Engl J Med. 2018;378(16):1509–20 A often-cited, rigorous cohort study showing that ABPM readings are a stronger predictor of cardiovascular and all-cause mortality than office blood pressure measurements. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 3.• Piper MA, et al. Diagnostic and predictive accuracy of blood pressure screening methods with consideration of rescreening intervals: a systematic review for the U.S Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med. 2015;162(3):192–204 A systematic review of studies comparing SMBP and ABPM with office BP monitoring. It forms the basis for the U.S. Preventative Services Task Force recommendation that hypertension diagnosis be made with out-of-office BP measurement. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 6.•• Whelton PK, et al. 2017 ACC/AHA/AAPA/ABC/ACPM/AGS/APhA/ASH/ASPC/NMA/PCNA Guideline for the Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Management of High Blood Pressure in Adults: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines. Hypertension. 2018;71(6):e13–e115 This comprehensive guideline statement establishes the standards by which hypertension is diagnosed and managed in the United States. It emphasizes the importance of obtaining out-of-office BP measurements when establishing a hypertension diagnosis and in assessing the effects of therapy. PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 7.• O’Brien E, et al. European Society of Hypertension recommendations for conventional, ambulatory and home blood pressure measurement. J Hypertens. 2003;21(5):821–48 Widely respected international hypertension guidelines that emphasize the importance of obtaining out-of-office BP measurements but also give preference to the AOBP approach when estimating blood pressure in office settings. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 8.• Leung AA, et al. Hypertension Canada’s 2016 Canadian hypertension education program guidelines for blood pressure measurement, diagnosis, assessment of risk, prevention, and treatment of hypertension. Can J Cardiol. 2016;32(5):569–88 These well regarded and annually updated hypertension guidelines emphasize the importance of out-of-office BP measurements but also describe AOBP as the preferred approach for measuring BP in medical office settings. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 11.Pickering TG, et al. Recommendations for blood pressure measurement in humans and experimental animals: part 1: blood pressure measurement in humans: a statement for professionals from the Subcommittee of Professional and Public Education of the American Heart Association Council on high blood pressure research. Hypertension. 2005;45(1):142–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 16.•• Jegatheswaran J, et al. Are automated blood pressure monitors comparable to ambulatory blood pressure monitors? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Can J Cardiol. 2017;33(5):644–52 A comprehensive meta-analysis demonstrating that mean AOBP readings are similar to awake ABPM readings, but also that AOBP measurements can be highly variable relative to ABPM readings. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 21.Stergiou GS, Lin CW, Lin CM, Chang SL, Protogerou AD, Tzamouranis D, et al. Automated device that complies with current guidelines for office blood pressure measurement: design and pilot application study of the microlife WatchBP office device. Blood Press Monit. 2008;13(4):231–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 24.Ostchega Y, et al. Blood pressure randomized methodology study comparing automatic oscillometric and mercury sphygmomanometer devices: National Health and nutrition examination survey, 2009-2010. Natl Health Stat Report. 2012;(59):1–15. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24984529.
- 25.•• Wright JT Jr, Whelton PK, Reboussin DM. A randomized trial of intensive versus standard blood-pressure control. N Engl J Med. 2016;374(23):2294 This study found that targeting systolic BP < 120 mmHg improves cardiovascular outcomes. It has influenced treatment recommendations in the ACC/AHA guidelines but also generated considerable debate over how to translate the results into clinical practice. PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 29.• Parati G, Ochoa JE, Bilo G. Moving beyond office blood pressure to achieve a personalized and more precise hypertension management: which way to go? Hypertension. 2017. A concise summary of the different approaches for measuring blood pressure. It provides a useful perspective for clinicians who use BP measurements from various sources, such as conventional, AOBP and out-of-office methods.;70. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28760937.
- 30.Dufort and Lavigne Ltd, The end of bptru blood press monitors. October 30, 2017: https://www.dufortlavigne.com/en/billets/129-the-end-of-bptru-blood-pressure-monitors. Accessed 16 Jan 2019
- 44.Agarwal R. Implications of blood pressure measurement technique for implementation of systolic blood pressure intervention trial (SPRINT). J Am Heart Assoc. 2017;6(2). https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28159816.
- 47.Andreadis EA, Geladari CV, Angelopoulos ET, Savva FS, Georgantoni AI, Papademetriou V. Attended and unattended automated office blood pressure measurements have better agreement with ambulatory monitoring than conventional office readings. J Am Heart Assoc. 2018;7(8). https://doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.118.008994.
- 49.Drawz PE, Pajewski NM, Bates JT, Bello NA, Cushman WC, Dwyer JP, et al. Effect of intensive versus standard clinic-based hypertension management on ambulatory blood pressure: results from the SPRINT (systolic blood pressure intervention trial) ambulatory blood pressure study. Hypertension. 2017;69(1):42–50.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 52.Kollias A, et al. Validation of the professional device for blood pressure measurement microlife WatchBP office in adults and children according to the American National Standards Institute/Association for the Advancement of medical instrumentation/International Organization for Standardization standard. Blood Press Monit. 2018;23(2):112–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 59.• Kronish IM, Edmondson D, Shimbo D, Shaffer JA, Krakoff LR, Schwartz JE. A comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of common office blood pressure monitoring protocols. Am J Hypertens. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajh/hpy053 This carefully conducted study examined the relative value of various combinations of obtaining up to 5 BP meaurements in a visit and obtaining BP measurements over the course of up to 5 separate office visits. The authors concluded that averaging 2 BP measurements over 2 visits yielded optimal results but acknowledged that averaging 2–3 readings in one visit may be more efficient. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 60.Boonyasai RT, Rakotz MK, Lubomski LH, Daniel DM, Marsteller JA, Taylor KS, et al. Measure accurately, act rapidly, and partner with patients: an intuitive and practical three-part framework to guide efforts to improve hypertension control. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2017;19(7):684–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 64.Chambers LW, Kaczorowski J, O’Rielly S, Ignagni S, Hearps SJC. Comparison of blood pressure measurements using an automated blood pressure device in community pharmacies and family physicians’ offices: a randomized controlled trial. CMAJ Open. 2013;1(1):E37–42.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 66.Allison C. BpTRU(tm) blood pressure monitor for use in a physician’s office. Issues Emerg Health Technol. 2006;86:1–4.Google Scholar
- 69.Kollias A, Stambolliu E, Kyriakoulis KG, Gravvani A, Stergiou GS. Unattended versus attended automated office blood pressure: systematic review and meta-analysis of studies using the same methodology for both methods. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2018. https://doi.org/10.1111/jch.13462 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 79.• Handler J, Lackland DT. Translation of hypertension treatment guidelines into practice: a review of implementation. J Am Soc Hypertens. 2011;5(4):197–207 This article provides helpful guidance for implementing a hypertension improvement program within medium-sized and large primary care practice groups. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar