Comparison of nurse- and physician-determined clinic blood pressure levels in patients referred to a hypertension clinic
- 1 April 2000
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wolters Kluwer Health in Journal Of Hypertension
- Vol. 18 (4) , 391-398
- https://doi.org/10.1097/00004872-200018040-00006
Abstract
When measuring BP, the physician induces a transient pressor response triggered by an alarm reaction. This 'white-coat effect' can influence therapeutic decisions. Whether it depends on the characteristics of the physician has not been evaluated. To assess the 'white-coat effect' induced by several physicians in a large sample of patients, using the blood pressure measured by trained nurses as a reference. Referral hypertension clinic. Patients were selected for the study if they had been referred for the first time to the clinic and if they had had their supine systolic/diastolic blood pressure measured by a trained nurse (mean of the last two of three measurements taken every 1 min by an oscillometric device) and a physician (auscultatory method using a standard mercury sphygmomanometer). Physicians were included in the study provided they had seen at least 25 patients during the study period. The between-physician difference was assessed using linear regression analysis. Physician blood pressure was the dependent and nurse blood pressure was the independent variable. From 1 January 1997 to 15 September 1997, 1062 patients (50% male, aged 52 +/- 14 years), seen by 10 physicians (26-187 patients per physician) and one nurse were included for analysis. The mean systolic/diastolic blood pressure for physicians was 162 +/- 27/ 97 +/- 15 mmHg and that for the nurse was 155 +/- 24/ 88 +/- 14 mmHg. The nurse-physician differences were -6 mmHg (range -67 to +66) for systolic and -8 mmHg (-44 to +31) for diastolic blood pressures. Major differences were observed between individual physicians. Intercepts of the physician blood pressure versus nurse blood pressure relationship ranged from 0.1 -60.7 mmHg for systolic and from 13.3-55.3 mmHg for diastolic pressures. The slopes of this relationship differed less between physicians for systolic (0.72-1) than for diastolic pressures (0.56-0.97). There was no difference between the patients seen by physicians in patients' age, sex, tobacco consumption, anti-hypertensive treatment or target-organ damage. Large between-physician differences exist in the magnitude of the white-coat effect that cannot be explained by patient characteristics. Physicians should therefore not make any decisions based on blood pressure measured manually during a first encounter.Keywords
This publication has 15 references indexed in Scilit:
- Muscle and Skin Sympathetic Nerve Traffic During the “White-Coat” EffectCirculation, 1999
- Influencia del sexo del médico en la reacción de alerta ante la toma de la presión arterial en el ancianoRevista Espanola de Cardiologia, 1998
- The sixth report of the Joint National Committee on prevention, detection, evaluation, and treatment of high blood pressureArchives of internal medicine (1960), 1997
- White-Coat Resistant HypertensionAmerican Journal of Hypertension, 1997
- Prevalence of white coat effect in treated hypertensive patients in the communityAmerican Journal of Hypertension, 1995
- Short report: An outline of the revised British Hypertension Society protocol for the evaluation of blood pressure measuring devicesJournal Of Hypertension, 1993
- Reproducibility of nurse-measured, exercise and ambulatory blood pressure and echocardiographic left ventricular mass in borderline hypertensionJournal Of Hypertension, 1992
- Statistical methods for assessing observer variability in clinical measures.BMJ, 1992
- Misdiagnosis of systemic hypertension and recommendations for improvementThe American Journal of Cardiology, 1987
- MRC trial of treatment of mild hypertension: principal results. Medical Research Council Working Party.BMJ, 1985