Office blood pressure: overcoming the problems of diagnosis and control of arterial hypertension treatment

Abstract

Some national guidelines since 2017 considered the most common method for diagnosing and controlling hypertension (HTN) (office blood pressure (OBP) measurement) as screening only. Automated OBP (AOBP) measurement claims to be a unique method by obtaining a standardized result, even in primary health care. AOBP improves the reliability of data by reducing the influence of various errors on result. However, although the level of AOBP is on average lower than similar OBP in clinical and research practice and is comparable to the mean 24-hour BP monitoring, at present, all international guidelines emphasize the mandatory use of ambulatory BP measurements for diagnostic purposes. Whether the results of AOBP and the reference level ≥130/80 mm Hg are equivalent with the same OBP level, the use of which is associated with an increase in the prevalence of hypertension and insufficient control of antihypertensive therapy, is a question for research. Compared with conventional OBP, the use of AOBP in conjunction with outpatient measurement leads to a reduction in the proportion and timing of initiation of treatment in patients with masked HTN, whose cardiovascular risk is similar to that of patients with stable HTN. However, the widespread implementation of AOBP is hindered by the high cost and lack of accumulated data. The review analyzes in detail the limitations and advantages of various types of BP measurement, as well as the potential of using AOBP in modern clinical and research practice.

Keywords

• office blood pressure
• 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring
• reference value
• masked hypertension
• white coat hypertension
• effectiveness of antihypertensive therapy