Correlation between ambulatory blood pressure monitoring and office blood pressure measurement in patients with hypertension: a community study

Background: The current gold standard for blood pressure (BP) measurements is based on office BP measurements (OBPMs) by a sphygmomanometer or a digital device. Ambulatory BP measurement (ABPM) is a noninvasive method for continuous monitoring of BP over a period during routine activities of the patient. Thus, ABPM offers multiple BP readings during the patients’ daily routine as compared to the single reading by OBPM at rest. A good correlation exists between mean 24-hour BP readings and the prediction of cardiovascular events. The present multicenter observational study was aimed to assess the correlation between ABPM and OBPM in patients with newly diagnosed, controlled, or uncontrolled hypertension in the community setting. Our hypothesis was to test if ABPM provides any further value in those hypertensive patients in whom the office blood pressure levels are controlled. A supplementary hypothesis was whether obtaining ABPM in patients with newly diagnosed or uncontrolled hypertension yields any value over and beyond OBPM. Another objective was to find out the applicability of ABPM in the community setting where the medical care is provided by primary care family physicians and not by specialists. Materials and Methods: Materials and Methods A total of 1000 patients were analysed for this study. Those with controlled hypertension were assigned to Group A, and those with newly diagnosed/untreated hypertension comprised Group B. Group A was followed up during Visit 2 and Group B was followed up during Visit 2 and either Visit 3 or Visit 4 to assess the BP measurements by ABPM and OBPM. Results: The correlation between ABPM and OBPM showed minimal variation in the BP readings of Group A subjects at Visit 2. A variation in BP readings was observed in Group B at Visit 2. Furthermore, the correlation was established between ABPM and OBPM noted for Group B subjects during Visit 3, and minimal variation was noted during Visit 4. Conclusions: A good correlation was observed between ABPM and OBPM during both visits in patients in Groups A and B. However, a notable variation was noted in the diastolic BP readings. Thus, large-scale clinical studies are required to detect the prevalence of hypertension, masked hypertension, and dipping patterns associated with hypertension and other related medical co-morbidities.