Objectives: Recently, ACC/AHA and ESC/ESH guidelines defined different office blood pressure measurement (OBPM) procedures and ranges. We aimed to describe the effect of the different methods to calculate OBPM on BP classification.
Methods and results: Four standardised OBPM were performed in 802 patients within a single visit. BP values were calculated (EUR-/US-BPM) and categorised (EUR-/US-Ranges) according to ACC/AHA and ESC/ESH guidelines. Comparing the BPM procedures, the mean absolute difference of systolic and diastolic BP was 4 (SD ± 5) and 3 (SD ± 3) and a difference ≥ 5 mmHg was found in 35% and 16%, respectively. There was an increase of grade 1/2 arterial hypertension of 87% and 120% comparing BP values categorised according to US-Ranges with EUR-Ranges after applying EUR- or US-BPM to all (p < 0.0001), of 25% and 6% comparing BP values calculated according to US-BPM with EUR-BPM applying EUR- or US-Ranges to all (p = 0.006 and p = 0.17), and of 134% comparing US-Ranges/US-BPM with EUR-Ranges/EUR-BPM (p < 0.0001), respectively. Overall, 16% were reclassified to higher categories when applying US-BPM, and 42-45% of patients classified as "high normal" applying EUR-BPM procedures were reclassified when applying US-BPM procedure, 76-77% of them to "hypertensive" categories.
Conclusion: Besides the effect of the redefinition of BP categories by ACC/AHA, the calculation method of US-BPM compared to EUR-BPM leads to a further relevant increase of patients classified as "hypertensive". In addition to the definition of uniform outcome-oriented target BP values, there is an urgent need for a universal definition of an OBPM procedure as prerequisite for proper BP classification and patient management.
Keywords: Blood pressure; Blood pressure determination; Epidemiology; Hypertension; Methodology; Prevalence.