Influence of the hospital environment and presence of the physician on the white-coat effect

Cutoffs for white-coat and masked blood pressure effects: an ambulatory blood pressure monitoring study

The values used to define white-coat and masked blood pressure (BP) effects are usually arbitrary. This study aimed at investigating the accuracy of various cutoffs based on the differences (ΔBP) between office BP (OBP) and 24h-ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) to identify white-coat (WCH) and masked (MH) hypertension, which are phenotypes coupled with adverse prognosis. This cross-sectional study included 11,350 [Derivation cohort; 45% men, mean age = 55.1 ± 14.1 years, OBP = 132.1 ± 17.6/83.9 ± 12.5 mmHg, 24 h-ABPM = 121.6 ± 11.4/76.1 ± 9.6 mmHg, 25% using antihypertensive medications (AH)] and 7220 (Validation cohort; 46% men, mean age = 58.6 ± 15.1 years, OBP = 136.8 ± 18.7/87.6 ± 13.0 mmHg, 24 h-ABPM = 125.5 ± 12.6/77.7 ± 10.3 mmHg; 32% using AH) unique individuals who underwent 24 h-ABPM. We compared the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values and area under the curve (AUC) of diverse ΔBP cutoffs to detect WCH (ΔsystolicBP/ΔdiastolicBP = 28/17, 20/15, 20/10, 16/11, 15/9, 14/9 mmHg and ΔsystolicBP = 13 and 10 mmHg) and MH (ΔsystolicBP/ΔdiastolicBP = -14/-9, -5/-2, -3/-1, -1/-1, 0/0, 2/2 mmHg and ΔsystolicBP = -5 and -3mmHg). The 20/15 mmHg cutoff showed the best AUC (0.804, 95%CI = 0.794-0.814) to detect WCH, while the 2/2 mmHg cutoff showed the highest AUC (0.741, 95%CI = 0.728-0.754) to detect MH in the Derivation cohort. Both cutoffs also had the best accuracy to detect WCH (0.767, 95%CI = 0.754-0.780) and MH (0.767, 95%CI = 0.750-0.784) in the Validation cohort. In secondary analyses, these cutoffs had the best accuracy to detect individuals with higher and lower office-than-ABPM grades in both cohorts. In conclusion, the 20/15 and 2/2 mmHg ΔBP cutoffs had the best accuracy to detect hypertensive patients with WCH and MH, respectively, and can serve as indicators of marked white-coat and masked BP effects derived from 24 h-ABPM.

White Coat Effect: Is It Because of the Hospital Setting, or Is It Physician-Induced?

INTRODUCTION

White coat hypertension (WCH) patients are those individuals who have high blood pressure (BP) in the medical environment but are normal during their daily activities. White coat hypertensive patients with normal daytime ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) rapidly progress to sustained hypertension. WCH is mainly treated with non-pharmacological methods. Alpha-1 agonists and beta blockers are logical treatment choices for patients with fixed hypertension with the White Coat Effect (WCE). Masked hypertension patients are those individuals who have normal values at the doctor's office but elevated BP at home or during 24-hour ABPM (24-hour or daytime). ABPM is a more practical and reliable method for detecting patients with WCH.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This observational study was conducted at Dayanand Medical College & Hospital, Ludhiana, over the course of one year (December 2015 to November 2016). The primary objective of the study was to determine whether there was a difference in blood pressure readings between the home setting and the hospital setting. The secondary objective was to determine whether the difference, if present, between the hospital and home readings was due to the hospital setting, physician presence, or a combination of both. Patients with stage 1 hypertension were included in the study, irrespective of antihypertensive treatment. Patients with ischemic heart disease, chronic liver failure, and chronic kidney disease who could not follow protocol instructions were excluded.

RESULTS

In our study, the mean age of patients was 53.91±12.86 years. The patient's mean systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) readings at the hospital were higher than their home readings (p-0.012; p-0.001, respectively). Mean hospital SBP and DBP readings recorded by the physician were higher than readings recorded by patients alone at home (p-0.002; p-0.014, respectively) and alone at the hospital (p-0.004; p-0.001, respectively). BP readings taken by the physician with a manual sphygmomanometer were significantly lower than those taken with a digital sphygmomanometer by patients and physicians in all settings (p<0.05). The mean rise in BP was significant in both the physician's presence and the hospital environment (p<0.05 for both), and this rise was more significantly associated with the hospital effect than the physician effect (p<0.05).

CONCLUSION

Misdiagnosis of hypertension results in inappropriate prescription and overuse of antihypertensive medications for individuals who are not persistently hypertensive. So it is very important to rule out WCH in both the hospital setting and the physician's presence, more precisely by ABPM. WCH can be diagnosed with regular BP monitoring by a digital sphygmomanometer at home.

Novel insights into the association between seasonal variations, blood pressure, and blood pressure variability in patients with new-onset essential hypertension

Background

Blood pressure (BP) exhibits seasonal variations, with peaks reported in winter. However, the association between seasonal variations and blood pressure variability in patients with new-onset essential hypertension is not fully understood. This study evaluated the potential association of seasonal variations with new-onset essential hypertension.

Methods

This retrospective observational study recruited a total of 440 consecutive patients with new-onset essential hypertension who underwent 24-h ambulatory electrocardiograph (ECG) and BP measurement at our department between January 2019 and December 2019. Demographic and baseline clinical data including BP variability, heart rate variability, and blood tests were retrieved. Multivariate linear regression analysis was performed to identify factors independently associated with mean BP and BP variability.

Results

Among the 440 patients recruited, 93 cases were admitted in spring, 72 in summer, 151 in autumn, and 124 in winter. Univariate analysis revealed that systolic BP (SBP), diastolic BP (DBP), high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, SBP drop rate, DBP drop rate, 24-h standard deviation of SBP, 24-h standard deviation of DBP, 24-h SBP coefficient of variation, and 24-h DBP coefficient of variation were associated with patients admitted in winter (P < 0.05 for all). Multivariate linear regression analysis showed that winter was the influencing factor of 24-h standard deviation of SBP (B = 1.851, t = 3.719, P < 0.001), 24-h standard deviation of DBP (B = 1.176, t = 2.917, P = 0.004), 24-h SBP coefficient of variation (B = 0.015, t = 3.670, P < 0.001), and 24-h DBP coefficient of variation (B = 0.016, t = 2.849, P = 0.005) in hypertensive patients.

Conclusions

Seasonal variations are closely associated with BP variability in patients with new-onset essential hypertension. Our study provides insight into the underlying pathogenesis of new-onset essential hypertension.

Sources of automatic office blood pressure measurement error: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

Accurate and reliable blood pressure (BP) measurement is important for the prevention and treatment of hypertension. The oscillometric-based automatic office blood pressure measurement (AOBPM) is widely used in hospitals and clinics, but measurement errors are common in BP measurements. There is a lack of systematic review of the sources of measurement errors.

APPROACH

A systematic review of all existing research on sources of AOBPM errors. A search strategy was designed in six online databases, and all the literature published before October 2021 was selected. Those studies that used the AOBPM device to measure BP from the upper arm of subjects were included.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 1365 studies were screened, and 224 studies were included in this final review. They investigated 22 common error sources with clinical AOBPM. Regarding the causes of BP errors, this review divided them into the following categories: the activities before measurement, patient's factors, measurement environment, measurement procedure, and device settings. 13 sources caused increased systolic and diastolic BP (SBP and DBP), 2 sources caused the decrease in SBP and DBP, only 1 source had no significant effect on BPs, and the other errors had a non-uniform effect (either increase or decrease in BPs). The error ranges for SBP and DBP were -14 to 33 mmHg and -6 to 19 mmHg, respectively.

SIGNIFICANCE

The measurement accuracy of AOBPM is susceptible to the influence of measurement factors. Interpreting BP readings need to be treated with caution in clinical measurements. This review made comprehensive evidence for the need for standardized BP measurements and provided guidance for clinical practitioners when measuring BP with AOBPM devices.

"What if It's not Just an Item of Clothing?" - A Narrative Review and Synthesis of the White Coat in the Context of Aged Care

Although increasingly disputed, the white coat uniform is ubiquitous in geriatric care, which may reflect a phenomenon called medicalisation of ageing. This narrative review is the first attempt at integrating several theoretical approaches, such as the "white coat effect" and "enclothed cognition", in order to gain a comprehensive understanding of the use of this clothing item. Based on extensive empirical evidence, we will examine the consequences of wearing a uniform, not only on patients (in this case, older patients) and healthcare professionals, but also on their relationship. The white coat has powerful symbolic functions for healthcare professionals and is still preferred by older adults. However, the negative repercussions of wearing a uniform require us to question its use, particularly in environments where older persons live, such as nursing homes.

Unattended versus attended automated office blood pressure: Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies using the same methodology for both methods

There is increasing interest in unattended automated office blood pressure (OBP) measurement, which gives lower blood pressure values than the conventional auscultatory OBP. Whether unattended automated OBP differs from standardized attended automated OBP performed using the same device and measurement protocol remains uncertain. A systematic review and meta-analysis of studies (aggregate data) comparing unattended vs attended automated OBP using the same device and measurement protocol (conditions, number of measurements, visits) was performed. Ten eligible studies (n = 1004, weighted age 60.8 ± 4.2 [SD] years, 55% males) were analyzed. Unattended OBP (pooled systolic/diastolic 133.9 [95% CI: 129.7, 138]/80.6 [95% CI: 77, 84.2] mm Hg) did not differ from attended OBP (135.3 [95% CI: 130.9, 139.6]/81 [95% CI: 77.6, 84.3] mm Hg); pooled systolic OBP difference -1.3, 95% CI: -4.3, 1.7 mm Hg and diastolic -0.4, 95% CI: -1.2, 0.3 mm Hg. Nine of ten studies achieved high quality score and no publication bias was identified. Meta-regression analysis did not reveal any effect of age, gender, or attended systolic OBP on the unattended-attended systolic OBP difference (P = NS for all). However, there was a trend toward higher attended than unattended OBP at higher OBP levels. These data suggest that, when the same device and measurement protocol are used, attended automated OBP provides similar blood pressure values as unattended automated OBP. Although unattended automated OBP is theoretically advantageous as it ensures that standardized conditions and measurement protocol are used, attended automated OBP, if carefully performed, appears to be a reasonable and practical alternative.

Effect of anticipation and cuff inflation on blood pressure during self-measurement

BACKGROUND

Self-measurement of blood pressure (BP) is increasingly being used for the diagnosis of hypertension and to monitor BP at home. Whenever compared with ambulatory BP measurements, home BP values are frequently higher and less predictive for incident cardiovascular events. We hypothesized that this could be caused by a pressor response elicited by the self-measurement of BP.

METHODS

A total of 50 patients (mean age 62.0 ± 11.2 years, 44% women) were included, 25 with and 25 without at least 10/5 mmHg higher home BP compared with daytime ambulatory BP. All patients performed 10 consecutive oscillometric BP measurements after 10 min of rest, followed by another resting period of 10 min, while continuously monitoring BP and central hemodynamics using finger photoplethysmography. Baseline BP before the start of the self-measurements was compared with the average BP during the first 10 s of inflation of the cuff.

RESULTS

In both groups, we observed a significant increase in SBP and DBP during cuff inflation. The mean rise in average BP was 6.9 ± 6.3/4.5 ± 4.3 mmHg in the group with and 4.4 ± 9.4/2.7 ± 5.3 mmHg in the group without a BP difference between home and daytime ambulatory BP compared with baseline, whereas the maximum increase in average BP was 17.4/8.4 mmHg and 17.7/7.5 mmHg (P < 0 01). The increase in BP coincided with an increase in heart rate and cardiac output. BP differences attenuated after multiple readings, but did not disappear.

CONCLUSION

Our results support the existence of a pressor response during self-BP measurement that remains present after multiple BP readings.

White coat effect in hypertensive patients: the role of hospital environment or physician presence

This study was to evaluate the role of hospital environment or physician presence for white coat effect (WCE) in hypertensive patients. At first, 54 hypertensive outpatients diagnosed on office blood pressure (OBP) were included for 2-week placebo run in. During the second week of the run in period, home BP was measured using electronic BP monitors for 5-7 days. Finally, 26 sustained hypertensive patients with home systolic BP/diastolic BP over 135/85 (but <180/110) mm Hg were enrolled for 8-week treatment of nifedipine controlled-release tablet. In the visit day, BP was measured by patient-self (OBP-p) or by doctor (OBP-d) according to order determined with randomization method. The self-BP measurement was performed in a reception room of hospital. The differences between home BP and OBP-d or OBP-p were calculated as WCE calculated on doctor-measurement (WCE-d) or WCE calculated on patient-measurement (WCE-p), respectively. The home and OBP were measured with the same BP device for each patient during the study period. In the total 54 outpatients received placebo, the WCE-d was similar to the WCE-p (for systolic BP 6.6 ± 14.4 vs. 6.8 ± 15.8 mm Hg, NS; for diastolic BP 3.3 ± 8.8 vs. 2.9 ± 9.2 mm Hg, NS). Meanwhile, the 26 sustained hypertensive patients had similar systolic WCE-d and WCE-p (4.8 ± 10.3 vs. 5.0 ± 12.2 mm Hg, NS) at placebo stage. Similarly, these values were comparable (3.0 ± 14.0 vs. 2.2 ± 14.4 mm Hg, NS) in treatment stage. Hospital environment plays a main role for the WCE in hypertensive patients.