Associations between various attended automated office blood pressure estimations and all-cause and cardiovascular mortality: Minhang study
Associations between various attended automated office blood pressure estimations and all-cause and cardiovascular mortality: Minhang study
复制标题
各种有人值守的自动办公室血压估算与全因死亡率和心血管死亡率之间的关联：闵行研究
DOI：
10.1097/hjh.0000000000002384
复制
发表时间：
2020
影响因子：
4.9
通讯作者：
Zhu Dingliang
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Wang Yan;Chen Ling;Fu Chen;Wang Yajuan;An Dewei;Zhang Jin;Tang Xiaofeng;Li Yan;Zhu Dingliang
背景：评估办公室血压（OBP）的方法在不同guidelines. Objective. We进行了一项队列研究，以比较各种直接转移参加的自动OBP（AOBP）估计与全因和心血管mortless.Methods的关联：总体而言，475 181套OBP从35岁或以上的35 622名参与者中提取的电子健康档案的莘庄镇医院在闵行区，上海，中国。每组OBP包含三个连续的AOBP，这些AOBP被直接传输到电子健康记录。结果：第一次OBP与平均OBP之差沿着而变化，12月最高（5.3/2.1 mmHg），7月最低（3.8/2.0 mmHg）;根据首次OBP或平均OBP，年龄大于80岁的受试者血压控制率差异最大（12.1%）。在3.9年的随访期间，发生了1055例死亡。替代平均SBP与全因死亡率[风险比：1.07，95%置信区间（CI）：1.04-1.11]和心血管死亡率（风险比：1.17，95% CI：1.11-1.23）相关。未控制的替代平均OBP与全因风险增加显著相关，（风险比：1.24，95% CI：1.09-1.40）和心血管（风险比：1.53，95%CI：1.25-1.86）死亡率，但不是最后两个读数的平均值或三个读数的平均值。根据不同的AOBP估计值，OBP水平和OBP控制率存在明显差异。替代平均OBP在预测全因死亡率和心血管死亡率方面似乎比最后两个读数的平均值或三个读数的平均值更有效。
Background:The method of evaluating office blood pressure (OBP) varies greatly among different guidelines.Objectives:We performed a cohort study to compare the association of various directly transferred attended automated OBP (AOBP) estimations with all-cause and cardiovascular mortalities.Methods:Overall, 475 181 sets of OBPs from 35 622 participants aged 35 years or older were extracted from the electronic health record of the Xinzhuang town hospital in the Minhang District, Shanghai, China. Each set of OBPs contained three consecutive AOBPs that were transferred directly to the electronic health record. The mean of three OBPs, mean of the last two OBPs, and alternative average OBP were calculated.Results:The difference between the first and average OBPs changed along with the calendar month, and it was highest in December (5.3/2.1 mmHg) and lowest in July (3.8/2.0 mmHg). The subjects older than 80 years of age displayed the largest discrepancy in the blood pressure control rate according to the first OBP or average OBP (12.1%). During the 3.9-year follow-up, 1055 deaths occurred. The alternative average SBP was associated with both all-cause [hazard ratio: 1.07, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.04–1.11] and cardiovascular (hazard ratio: 1.17, 95% CI: 1.11–1.23) mortalities. The uncontrolled alternative average OBP remained significantly associated with an increasing risk of all-cause (hazard ratio: 1.24, 95% CI: 1.09–1.40) and cardiovascular (hazard ratio: 1.53, 95% CI: 1.25–1.86) mortality, but not the average of the last two or mean of three readings.Conclusion:We observed an obvious discrepancy in the OBP level and OBP control rate according to different AOBP estimations. The alternative average OBP seemed to be more powerful in predicting both all-cause and cardiovascular mortalities than the average of the last two or mean of three readings.