J Assoc Physicians India. 2022 Aug;70(8):11-12. doi: 10.5005/japi-11001-0069.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Hypertension and cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality in patients on dialysis. Blood pressure (BP) control is of paramount importance in reducing morbidity and mortality in this high-risk population, although there is no consensus on target BP. Ambulatory BP recording is considered gold standard in estimating the BP among patients on dialysis. But, ambulatory BP recording is cumbersome, not economical, and not easily available to Indian patients. Therefore, an easier and more convenient method has to be implemented to monitor the BP. Some studies demonstrated that home BP recordings may be promising in making a more accurate diagnosis of hypertension in hemodialysis patients. However, there is paucity of research that compares home-based BP monitoring with ambulatory BP recordings in patients on hemodialysis. The present study was thus planned to examine the hypothesis that out-of-dialysis unit BP measurement in the form of home-based measurement of BP is as efficacious as ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) in evaluating hypertension among patients on hemodialysis.
AIM: To assess the accuracy of home-based BP monitoring in comparison to ABPM among chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients on hemodialysis.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the ability of home-based BP monitoring to detect hypertension among CKD patients on hemodialysis.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a prospective observational study carried out in the Department of Medicine in a tertiary care hospital. The total duration of the study was 24 months. Fifty-two CKD patients on hemodialysis fulfilling the eligibility criteria were taken up for the study after informed consent. Blood pressure was measured using a standardized BP measuring equipment at home, thrice a day for 3 days in the interdialysis period. Also, all these patients were subjected to 24 hours of ABPM in the interdialysis period. Home-based BP monitoring records are then compared with the one-time ABPM records. All statistical calculations were done using computer programs Microsoft Excel 2007 (Microsoft Corporation, NY, USA) and SPSS (Statistical Product and Service Solutions; SPSS Inc., Chicago, Illinois, USA) version 21.
RESULT: In our study, the mean awake, asleep, and average ABPM readings of systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) were 141.69/81.33, 139.39/80.04, and 141.23/80.67 mm Hg, respectively, while the mean SBP and DBP recorded on home-based measurements were 143.6 and 82.69 mm Hg, respectively. All the subjects showing mean SBP ≥140 mm Hg as per ABPM had home-based readings of above 140 mm Hg while 23 out of 27 patients (85.2%) with mean SBP <140 mm Hg as per ABPM had similar observation by home-based monitoring (kappa 0.847; p<0.01). All the subjects showing mean DBP ≥90 mm Hg as per ABPM had home-based readings of above 90 mm Hg while 42 out of 44 patients (95.5%) with mean DBP <90 mm Hg as per ABPM had similar observation by home-based monitoring (kappa 0.866; p<0.01).
CONCLUSION: Our study shows that there is no difference between BP readings as observed by ABPM and home-based BP monitoring. Also, home-based BP monitoring can detect hypertension as effectively as ABPM among patients on hemodialysis, thereby making home-based BP monitoring a safe and reliable method of BP measurement in clinical practice.
PMID:36082723 | DOI:10.5005/japi-11001-0069
