Pulse lineResearch With Heart Logo

Measurement Repeatability of Central and Peripheral Blood Pressures: The ARIC Study.

TitleMeasurement Repeatability of Central and Peripheral Blood Pressures: The ARIC Study.
Publication TypeJournal Article
Year of Publication2017
AuthorsYong F, Heiss G, Couper DJ, Meyer ML, Cheng S
Secondary AuthorsTanaka H
JournalAm J Hypertens
Volume30
Issue10
Pagination978-984
Date Published2017 Oct 01
ISSN1941-7225
KeywordsAged, Aged, 80 and over, Blood Pressure, Blood Pressure Determination, Brachial Artery, Cardiovascular Diseases, Female, Humans, Male, Patient Positioning, Predictive Value of Tests, Reproducibility of Results, Supine Position, Tibial Arteries, United States
Abstract

BACKGROUND: Central systolic and pulse pressures are markers of risk for small vessel disease in the brain and kidneys. The extent to which these markers are reproducible in the setting of population studies is less well established. We estimated short-term repeatability of central systolic and pulse pressures, and those of their peripheral measures for comparison.

METHODS: Participants aged 65 years and over (n = 79, 56% women) were drawn from the 2011-2013 examination of the ARIC cohort. Measurements were obtained with automated devices in the supine position, except for conventional sitting pressures, from paired measurements at each of 2 visits separated by 4 to 8 weeks. Three-level variance component models with between-participant, between-visit, and within-visit components estimated reliability metrics.

RESULTS: Mean central systolic and pulse pressures were higher than conventional brachial measures, yet their 4 to 8 week measurement repeatability was similar: reliability coefficients were 0.62 (95% confidence interval: 0.49, 0.74) and 0.63 (0.51, 0.76) for central and sitting brachial systolic pressures, and 0.66 (0.54. 0.77) and 0.73 (0.63, 0.82) for their corresponding pulse pressures. Between-participant variation contributed to two-thirds of the short-term repeatability for all measures. Within-visit variation remained uniformly low across visits.

CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that the average of 2 standardized measurements obtained at a single visit can provide reliable estimates of central systolic and pulse pressures. The reliability coefficients of central and peripheral blood pressure measures were comparable. Estimates are presented of minimal detectable change and difference to aid in study design and evaluation of analytic results.

DOI10.1093/ajh/hpx084
Alternate JournalAm J Hypertens
PubMed ID28531255
PubMed Central IDPMC5654294
Grant ListHHSN268201100012C / HL / NHLBI NIH HHS / United States
HHSN268201100009I / HL / NHLBI NIH HHS / United States
HHSN268201100010C / HL / NHLBI NIH HHS / United States
HHSN268201100008C / HL / NHLBI NIH HHS / United States
HHSN268201100005G / HL / NHLBI NIH HHS / United States
HHSN268201100008I / HL / NHLBI NIH HHS / United States
HHSN268201100007C / HL / NHLBI NIH HHS / United States
R01 AG053938 / AG / NIA NIH HHS / United States
R01 HL134168 / HL / NHLBI NIH HHS / United States
R00 HL107642 / HL / NHLBI NIH HHS / United States
HHSN268201100006C / HL / NHLBI NIH HHS / United States
HHSN268201100005I / HL / NHLBI NIH HHS / United States
R01 HL131532 / HL / NHLBI NIH HHS / United States
HHSN268201100009C / HL / NHLBI NIH HHS / United States
HHSN268201100005C / HL / NHLBI NIH HHS / United States
HHSN268201100007I / HL / NHLBI NIH HHS / United States
T32 HL007055 / HL / NHLBI NIH HHS / United States