Difference between office and ambulatory blood pressure or real white coat effect: does it matter in terms of prognosis?

Relations between white coat effect of blood pressure and arterial stiffness

The aim of this study was to analyze the relationship between brachial-ankle pulse wave velocity (b-a PWV) and white coat effect (WCE), that is the difference between the elevated office blood pressure (BP) and the lower mean daytime pressure of ambulatory BP, in a mixed population of normotention, untreated sustained hypertension, sustained controlled hypertension, sustained uncontrolled hypertension, white coat hypertension, white coat uncontrolled hypertension. A total of 444 patients with WCE for systolic BP (54.1% female, age 61.86 ± 13.3 years) were enrolled in the study. Patients were separated into low WCE (<9.5 mm Hg) and high WCE (≥9.5 mm Hg) according to the median of WCE. The subjects with a high WCE showed a greater degree of arterial stiffness than those with a low WCE for systolic BP values (P < .05). The b-a PWV were 17.2 ± 3.3 m/s and 18.4 ± 3.4 m/s in low WCE and high WCE, respectively. The b-a PWV increased with the increase of WCE, showing a positive correlation between them (P > .05 for non-linearity). The significant association between the high WCE and the b-a PWV was confirmed by the results of multiple regression analysis after adjusting for confounding factors (β = .78, 95% Cl .25-1.31, P = . 004). Similar results were observed in subgroups. In conclusion, WCE is significantly associated with arterial stiffness. More research is needed to determine the WCE and target organ damage.

Differences in personality between sustained hypertension, isolated clinic hypertension and normotension

The aim of this study was to determine whether there are differences in personality between hypertension and normotension. Forty‐two male patients with essential hypertension were divided into two groups after self‐assessment of blood pressure, 18 with sustained hypertension and 24 with isolated clinic (white coat) hypertension, and were compared with 25 men with normotension on Spielberger's State‐Trait Anxiety Inventory and the Jenkins Activity Survey. In line with hypotheses, the sustained hypertensive group showed higher levels of trait anxiety, Type A behaviour pattern, and hard‐driving behaviours/competitiveness than the normotensive group, whereas isolated clinic hypertensives occupied an intermediate position between those two groups. Results provide support to the hypothesised relationship between personality and hypertension and stress the need of distinguishing sustained hypertension from isolated clinic hypertension. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Target organ complications and prognostic significance of alerting reaction: analysis from the Dallas Heart Study

OBJECTIVE

Noninvasive blood pressure (BP) measurement often triggers a transient rise in BP, known as an alerting reaction. However, the prevalence and prognostic significance of the alerting reaction has never been assessed in the general population.

METHODS

We evaluated the association between the alerting reaction and left ventricular mass by MRI and urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio in the Dallas Heart Study, a large population sample of 3069 individuals. Participants were categorized into four groups based on levels of consecutive BP: first, normal first BP and average third to fifth (avg3-5) BP of less than 140/90 mmHg (control group); second, high first BP of at least 140/90 mmHg and normal (avg3-5) BP (alerting reaction group); third, normal first BP and high (avg3-5) BP; and fourth, high first to fifth BP. Then, associations between BP categories with incident cardiovascular outcomes (coronary heart disease, stroke, atrial fibrillation, heart failure, and cardiovascular death) over a median follow-up period of 9.4 years were assessed.

RESULTS

The sample-weighted prevalence of isolated hypertension during the first BP measurement was 9.6%. Presence of an alerting reaction was independently associated with increased left ventricular mass, urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio, cardiovascular events after adjustment for traditional cardiovascular risk factors, and baseline BP (adjusted hazard ratio 1.24, 95% confidence interval 1.07-1.43).

CONCLUSION

Our study indicated that the alerting reaction is independently associated with increased cardiovascular and renal complications.

Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in the elderly

The incidence of hypertension is high in the elderly and is present in 2/3 of the patients older than 65 years. Prevalence can reach 90% in patients older than 80 years. The presence of isolated systolic hypertension (ISH) is characteristic of this population. However, the prevalence of hypertension by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) is not well known. In this study, we analyzed the special characteristics of hypertension in this population, giving special emphasis on ABPM readings.

Magnitude of the white-coat effect in the community pharmacy setting: the MEPAFAR study

BACKGROUND

There is little information regarding the community pharmacy blood pressure (CPBP) measurement method and their differences with home (HBP) or ambulatory BP (ABP). The aim of this study was to measure such differences and their variation over successive visits.

METHOD

Cross-sectional study carried out in eight pharmacies in Gran Canaria (Spain). The study included 169 treated hypertensive patients. BP was measured at the pharmacy (four visits), at HBP (4 days) and 24-h ABP monitoring. We defined pharmacy white-coat effect (PWCE) as differences between CPBP and HBP (home PWCE) or daytime ABP (ambulatory PWCE).

RESULTS

The overall (pooled values for all visits) ambulatory PWCE was not significantly different from zero for systolic BP (SBP) (-0.4 mm Hg (95% confidence interval (CI): -1.8 to 1.1)), but greater than zero for diastolic BP (DBP) (3.4 mm Hg (95% CI: 2.3 to 4.6)). The overall home PWCE was not significantly different from zero, both for SBP (1.2 mm Hg (95% CI: -0.1 to 2.6)) and DBP (0.1 mm Hg (95% CI: -0.7 to 1.0)). The ambulatory and home PWCE on the first visit were greater than zero (P < 0.001) (SBP/DBP): 3.5/4.8 and 1.9/1.5 mm Hg, respectively; but showed important reductions at the second visit and became not significantly different from zero, except the ambulatory PWCE in DBP, which persisted until the last visit.

CONCLUSION

The trend in the PWCE decreased over the successive visits to the pharmacy. Only the ambulatory PWCE in DBP proved to be statistically greater than zero after the second visit. Repeated CPBP measurements could be a useful alternative to assess the response to antihypertensive treatment.

Reproducibility of blood pressure variability, white‐coat effect and dipping pattern in untreated, uncomplicated and newly diagnosed essential hypertension

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the reproducibility of blood pressure (BP) variability, white-coat effect (WCE) and nocturnal dipping pattern in untreated patients with uncomplicated essential hypertension using 24-hour ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM).

METHODS

Seventy-five newly diagnosed, untreated essential hypertensive subjects (54 men, 21 women 47.6 +/- 9.3 years) were recruited for the study based on conventional measured BP from a total of 180 patients referred for ABPM. Of these, 65 patients underwent repeated ABPM after 4 weeks observation without treatment. Reproducibility of BP, nocturnal dipping pattern, WCE and BP variability were assessed using different methods.

RESULTS

The average 24-hour BP (140.8 +/- 11.9/91.8 +/- 6.4 vs. 140.5 +/- 14.5/90.7 +/- 7.6 mmHg, ns) or PP (49.6 +/- 10.8 vs. 49.8 +/- 9.8 mmHg, ns) did not change, nor did daytime BP or PP. The WCE diminished significantly during the observation period (reduction in SBP WCE delta8.2 +/- 12.5 mmHg, p < 0.0001, in DBP WCE, delta3.3 +/- 9.2 mmHg, p = 0.008 and in PP WCE delta4.8 +/- 11.2 mmHg, p = 0.002). Variability in SBP, DBP and PP decreased consistently and significantly during the observation period. The nocturnal dipping pattern was unchanged in 82% of the patients. In 12% non-dipping pattern was converted to dipping pattern after repeated measurement.

CONCLUSION

Average ABPs are highly reproducible in patients with uncomplicated essential hypertension of limited duration. Similarly, nocturnal dipping pattern reproduced satisfactorily. These measures have important clinical applicability. The white-coat effect as well as variability are greatly attenuated during repeated measurements, and these measures may thus be of less utility in clinical practice.

Orienting-Defense Responses and Psychophysiological Reactivity in Isolated Clinic versus Sustained Hypertension

This study sought to determine whether patients with white-coat or isolated clinic hypertension (ICH) show, in comparison to patients with sustained hypertension (SH), a defense response pattern to novel stimuli and an enhanced psychophysiological reactivity to stress. Forty-three patients with essential hypertension were divided into two groups after 16 days of self-monitoring blood pressure (BP): ICH (24 men; self-measured BP < 135/85 mmHg) and SH (19 men; self-measured BP >or= 135/85 mmHg). Defense responses were measured as the cardiac changes to phasic non-aversive auditory stimuli. Psychophysiological reactivity (heart and breath rate, blood volume pulse, electromyography, and skin conductance) was measured during mental arithmetic and video game tasks. The standard deviation of self-measured BPs and the difference between mean BPs at work and at home were used as indicators of cardiovascular reactivity to daily stress. No significant differences were seen in defense responses or psychophysiological reactivity to laboratory or naturally occurring stressors. These results do not support the hypothesis that ICH can be explained in terms of a generalized hyperreactivity to novel or stressful stimuli.

Factors influencing white-coat effect

BACKGROUND

The transient blood pressure (BP) rise during clinical visits is usually referred to as white-coat effect (WCE). The aim of the present study was to investigate factors that may influence the WCE.

METHODS

A total of 2004 subjects underwent office BP measurements and 24-h ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) on the same day. The WCE was estimated as the difference between office and average daytime ambulatory BP (ABP). According to the office and daytime BP values, the study population was divided into normotensives (NTs), white-coat hypertensives (WCHs), masked hypertensives (MHTs), and sustained hypertensives (SHTs). Statistical analyses were performed using one-way analysis of variance and multiple linear regression models.

RESULTS

The mean systolic and diastolic WCE was 9 +/- 16 and 7 +/- 12 mm Hg, respectively. In the entire group of patients, multiple linear regression models revealed independent determinants of systolic WCE in the following rank order: office systolic BP (SBP) (beta = 0.727; P < 0.001), female gender (beta = 0.166; P < 0.001), daytime SBP variability (beta = 0.128; P < 0.001), age (beta = 0.039, P = 0.020), and smoking (beta = 0.031, P = 0.048). A 1.0 mm Hg increase in daytime SBP variability correlated with an increment of 0.589 mm Hg (95% confidence intervals, 0.437-0.741) in the systolic WCE. The regression analyses for diastolic WCE revealed the same factors as independent determinants. A 1.0 mm Hg increase in daytime diastolic BP (DBP) variability was independently associated with an increment of 0.418 mm Hg (95% confidence intervals, 0.121-0.715) in the diastolic WCE.

CONCLUSIONS

Factors such as gender, age, smoking, office BPV and daytime BPV may exert an important influence on the magnitude of the WCE.

Masked hypertension in diabetes mellitus: a potential risk

The prevalence and clinical significance of masked hypertension (MHT) in diabetics have infrequently been described. The authors assessed the association of MHT (defined using a clinic blood pressure [BP] <140/90 mm Hg and daytime ambulatory BP > or = 135/85 mm Hg) with microvascular and macrovascular end organ damage in 81 clinically normotensive Japanese diabetic persons. The prevalence of silent cerebral infarcts (SCIs), increased left ventricular mass, and albuminuria were evaluated. Of 81 patients, 38 (46.9%) were classified as having MHT and showed significantly more SCIs (mean +/- SE: 2.5+/-0.5 vs 1.1+/-0.2; P=.017), and more albuminuria (39% vs 16%; P=.025), but no increase in left ventricular mass index, than the normotensive persons in office and on ambulatory BP monitoring group. The prevalence of MHT in this diabetic population was high (47%). Diabetic patients with MHT showed evidence of brain and kidney damage. Hence, out-of-office monitoring of BP may be indicated in diabetics whose BP is normal in the clinic.

Anxiety and outcome expectations predict the white-coat effect

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether elevated clinic blood pressure compared with daytime ambulatory blood pressure, referred to as the white-coat effect, is associated with anxiety and increased blood pressure expectancy in the doctor's office.

METHODS

The 24-h ambulatory blood pressure measurements and physicians' blood pressure measurements were obtained in 226 normotensive and hypertensive study participants. Anxiety levels were assessed multiple times during the clinic visit using a Visual Analog Scale. Participants' expectations regarding the clinic visit were assessed using a six-item scale (Expectations of Outcomes Scale). The white-coat effect was computed as the difference between the mean clinic blood pressure and the mean daytime ambulatory blood pressure. Multiple regression analysis was performed to examine the association between anxiety, outcome expectations and the white-coat effect, adjusting for age, sex, and ambulatory blood pressure level.

RESULTS

As predicted, outcome expectations and anxiety during the clinic visit were significantly associated with the white-coat effect. Results of the regression analysis indicated that only expectancy had an independent effect on the systolic white-coat effect; however, both anxiety and expectancy had independent effects on the diastolic white-coat effect.

CONCLUSION

Our results provide empirical support to the hypothesis that anxiety and blood pressure expectancy may elevate clinic blood pressure.

Assessment of the white-coat effect

BACKGROUND

A limitation of blood pressure measurements made in the physician's office is the transient elevation in pressure seen in many patients that does not appear to be linked to target organ damage or prognosis. This has been labeled the 'white-coat effect' (WCE), computed as the difference between blood pressure measurements taken by the physician and the ambulatory level or resting measures. It is unclear, however, which resting measure is most appropriate. The awake ambulatory blood pressure is the most widely used. However, while arguably the most useful measure for prediction of clinical outcomes, it is less appropriate for use as a resting measure, because it is influenced by many factors, including posture and physical activity level. Resting levels taken in the clinic may also be elevated, and will therefore underestimate the WCE.

METHODS

We addressed this question by taking resting measures in a non-medical setting on the day before patients were seen at a Hypertension Clinic (day 1), and comparing these with resting measures taken on the following day, in the clinic before the patient saw the physician.

RESULTS

As predicted, the day 1 resting levels were lower than those taken in the clinic prior to seeing the physician (P < 0.05 and P < 0.001 for systolic and diastolic pressures, respectively) in both normotensive and hypertensive patients. Using the day 1 resting levels, the estimated WCE for hypertensive patients was 5.3/6.9 mmHg (systolic/diastolic blood pressures), compared with estimates, using the clinic resting levels, of 0.3/0.5 mmHg. The pattern of changes was different in normotensive patients and hypertensive patients, with the physician pressures being slightly lower than day 1 pressures in the former, and substantially higher in the latter. Heart rate changes were similar and modest in both groups.

CONCLUSION

The WCE may not just be limited to that narrow interval in which the patient actually sees the physician, but may generalize to the clinic setting, rendering a clinic 'resting' level invalid. While it is strongly positive in most hypertensive patients, it is frequently negative in normotensive patients. Our results suggest that improved methods of measuring blood pressure in the clinic setting are unlikely to resolve the confounding influence of the WCE, and that greater reliance will need to be placed on out-of-office monitoring.

White-coat hypertension: a clinical review

White-coat hypertension (WCHT), also called 'isolated office or clinic hypertension', is defined as the occurrence of blood pressure (BP) values higher than normal when measured in the medical environment, but within the normal range during daily life, usually defined as average daytime ambulatory BP (ABP) or home BP values (<135 mm Hg systolic and <85 mm Hg diastolic). The prevalence of WCHT varies from 15% to over 50% of all patients with mildly elevated office BP (OBP) values. In untreated hypertensive patients, the probability of WCHT especially increases with female gender and a mildly elevated OBP level. The value of other possible determinants such as (non) smoking status, duration of hypertension, left ventricular mass, number of OBP measurements, educational level, etc. is less consistently shown. Although, for various reasons, studies evaluating the long-term effects of WCHT are not always easy to interpret, most data indicate that persons with WCHT have a worse or equal cardiovascular prognosis than normotensives, but a better one than those with sustained hypertension. WCHT is sometimes considered a prehypertensive state, but data on the long-term evolution of subjects with WCHT are scarce. Patients with WCHT and a high cardiovascular risk or proven target organ damage should be pharmacologically treated. Subjects with uncomplicated WCHT should probably not receive medical therapy, but a close follow-up, including regular assessment of other risk factors and measurement of OBP (every 6 months) and ABP (every 1 or 2 years), is warranted.

The white-coat effect is unrelated to the difference between clinic and daytime blood pressure and is associated with greater reactivity to public speaking

OBJECTIVE

To compare the blood pressure (BP) response to doctor's visit with the BP reaction to a psycho-social challenge and with the difference between clinic and daytime BP (DeltaC-D).

SUBJECTS

We studied 64 young stage-1 hypertensive subjects and 33 normotensive controls.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Relationship between direct and surrogate measure of white-coat effect (WCE) and assessment of BP response to public speaking in subjects with normal or increased reaction to BP measurement.

METHODS

The responses to BP measurement by a doctor and to public speaking were assessed with beat-to-beat Finapres recording. DeltaC-D was calculated on the basis of two BP monitorings and used as a surrogate measure of WCE.

RESULTS

BP and heart rate changes elicited by the visit were unrelated to DeltaC-D and were correlated to the changes caused by the speech test [P <0.001 for systolic BP (SBP), P = 0.01 for diastolic BP (DBP), and P <0.001 for heart rate]. Hypertensive subjects with SBP response to doctor's visit above the median (hyper-reactive) showed increased reactivity also to public speaking (61 +/- 15 mmHg), while those with BP response below the median (normo-reactive) had a response to the psycho-social challenge (40 +/- 21 mmHg, 0.001 versus hyper-reactive) similar to that of the normotensive controls (38 +/- 17 mmHg). Epinephrine urinary output was greater in the hyper-reactive than the normo-reactive subjects (23 versus 12 microg/24 h, = 0.01). The SBP response to public speaking was greater in the hypertensive subjects with higher systolic daytime BP than in those with lower daytime BP (55.3 +/- 20.9 versus 45.1 +/- 20.6 mmHg, = 0.046).

CONCLUSIONS

Subjects with increased WCE have an exaggerated response also to psycho-social stimuli. Average daytime BP, which incorporates the BP reactions to many psycho-social triggers can, thus, not be taken as the basal BP of an individual. This helps explain why DeltaC-D does not reflect the true WCE.

Blood pressure response to hyperventilation test reflects daytime pressor profile

Recent studies show that healthy subjects and patients with moderate hypertension have different pressor responses to hyperventilation, depending on their sympathoadrenergic reactivity. In the present study, we investigated whether a different response to the hyperventilation test is related to differences in the daily blood pressure profiles recorded with noninvasive ambulatory monitoring. Forty-five healthy subjects and 67 patients with essential hypertension of grades 1 and 2 (Joint National Committee VI and World Health Organization) were investigated. Healthy subjects and hypertensive patients responding to hyperventilation with an increase in systolic blood pressure had, during daytime ambulatory blood pressure assessment, peak systolic blood pressure values (146.0+/-5.0 mm Hg, 182.2+/-9.0 mm Hg, respectively) similar to the hyperventilation peak systolic blood pressure values (147.2+/-3.5 mm Hg, 183.0+/-4.7 mm Hg, respectively). Hypertensive patients responding to hyperventilation with a decrease in blood pressure showed clinic systolic blood pressure values (178.4+/-3.2 mm Hg) higher than daytime average ambulatory systolic blood pressure (155.2+/-7.1 mm Hg; P<0.01). Our results indicate that a hyperventilation test yields information on daily peak blood pressure values in healthy subjects and hypertensive patients when it induces a pressor increase and can identify hypertensive patients with the so-called "white coat effect" when it induces a pressor decrease.

What is the white-coat effect and how should it be measured?

The white coat effect is conceived as a measure of the blood pressure response to a clinic visit, but there is no agreement as to exactly how it should be defined. The most widely used definition is the difference between the average clinic and daytime ambulatory blood pressures, but other methods that have been used include the difference between clinic and home pressures, measurements using ambulatory blood pressures only, clinic measurements only, and laboratory (reactivity) testing. Few studies have compared the different methods, but the reactivity method has reported bigger changes of blood pressure and heart rate than the others. The effect tends to be greater in older than younger patients, in women than in men, but is present to a greater or lesser degree in almost all hypertensive patients. It is diminished but not obliterated by drug treatment. It is not closely related to overall blood pressure variability, and does not predict cardiovascular risk. The white coat effect appears to be idiosyncratic to the clinic setting.

White coat hypertension: understanding the concept and examining the significance

Because the concept of white coat hypertension is evolving, a variety of definitions appear in the literature. There has also been continuing debate as to whether white coat hypertension is a benign clinical condition or is associated with increased hypertensive complications. This paper summarizes and evaluates the literature on white coat effect/hypertension, with a focus on the following aspects of the concepts: (1) alternative definitions, (2) prevalence and predictors, (3) prognostic significance, and (4) implications for clinical practice. The evidence suggests that white coat hypertension is not a harmless phenomenon. It is frequently associated with increased target-organ damage and often coexists with other cardiovascular risk factors. The extent of the presence of other risk factors may determine the risks associated with white coat hypertension. It is important for clinicians to understand the concept, learn to diagnose it properly, and develop strategies for evaluating risk levels so that patients receive the proper treatment.

A randomised controlled trial of the effect of anticipation of a blood test on blood pressure

Blood pressure is affected by situational anxiety, such as the white coat effect. We hypothesised that blood pressure would also be affected by anticipation of a blood test. Volunteer subjects were recruited on the campus of Birmingham University. Subjects were randomly assigned to intervention and control groups. After a period of rest, three seated blood pressure measurements were taken at 1-min intervals using an electronic sphygmomanometer. Between the second and third measurements subjects in the intervention group were told that a blood test would be carried out after the last measurement. No blood test was carried out. Three blood pressure measurements were made in all 213 randomised subjects. Analysis was by intention-to-treat. In the control group mean systolic and diastolic blood pressure fell in successive measurements. Between the second and third measurements mean systolic blood pressure fell by 1.4 mm Hg in the control group and rose by 2.6 mm Hg in the intervention group (difference 4.0 mm Hg, P < 0.0001). A rise in diastolic blood pressure between the second and third measurements did not reach statistical significance. It was concluded that anticipation of a blood test affects measured systolic blood pressure in volunteers. The practice of taking blood tests at the same time as measuring blood pressure may potentially bias estimations of blood pressure.

Clinical significance of blood pressure response triggered by a doctor's visit in patients with essential hypertension

The clinical significance of the pressor response triggered by blood pressure measurement, the so-called "white-coat effect," was studied in relation to left ventricular structure and function in patients with essential hypertension. We studied 75 consecutive, never-before treated patients with essential hypertension (54 +/- 2 (SE) years; 31 men). Beat-to-beat blood pressure (Finapres) was monitored at rest, during conventional blood pressure measurement by a doctor, and during a mental stress test. The left ventricular mass index and diastolic function (EIA ratio) were determined by echocardiography. The systolic blood pressure response triggered by the doctor's visit (deltaSBP) correlated positively with the left ventricular mass index (r= 0.326, p<0.03) and negatively with the EIA ratio (r=-0.325, p<0.02). A positive relationship between the deltaSBP and left ventricular mass index was observed in men (r=0.556, p<0.01) but not in women. The greater ASBP also was associated with lower EIA ratio in women (r=-0.434, p<0.02). The deltaSBP correlated with the mental stress-induced increase in systolic blood pressure in men (r=0.586, p<0.005) but not in women (r=0.148, n.s.). Blood pressures outside the clinic were higher in men than in women (p<0.05 for systolic and p<0.005 for diastolic) despite the similar level of clinic blood pressures between the sexes. Stepwise multiple linear regression analysis showed that the deltaSBP was an independent predictor of the left ventricular mass index in men (beta=0.783, p=0.0009) and of the EIA ratio in women (beta=-0.003, p=0.05). These data suggest that the pressor response triggered by a doctor's visit has clinical significance in never-before treated hypertensive patients, possibly because it mirrors real-life stress reactivity in men.

[Medical stress and blood pressure]

BP measurement by a physician may trigger a blood pressure and heart rate increase often referred to as the white coat effect. This pressure response may occur both in normotensive and hypertensive subjects. The identification of such individuals is usually not possible on a clinical basis. This identification is however important because white coat effect and permanent hypertension do not share the same prognosis, the white coat effect being associated with a low rate of cardiovascular complications. To avoid an important overestimation of the real blood pressure level due to this white coat effect, it is possible to increase the delay before blood pressure measurements (beyond 15 minutes) or to take into account measurements made by nurses. Reading may also have a favorable consequence. However, a blood pressure recording outside the office, that is an ambulatory or a home blood pressure measurement, is the only way to confirm the presence of a white coat effect. The decision to treat is based on this measurement.