Comparison of 3 Devices for 24-Hour Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring in a Nonclinical Environment Through a Randomized Trial.

Tatiana Nwankwo, Sallyann M Coleman King, Yechiam Ostchega, Guangyu Zhang, Fleetwood Loustalot, Cathleen Gillespie, Tiffany E Chang, Elin B Begley, Mary G George, Daichi Shimbo, Joseph E Schwartz, Paul Muntner, Ian M Kronish, Yuling Hong, Robert Merritt

Journal: American journal of hypertension 2021;33(11):1021-1029

PMID: 32701144

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommends the use of 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) as part of screening and diagnosis of hypertension. The optimal ABPM device for population-based surveys is unknown.

METHODS

We compared the proportion of valid blood pressure (BP) readings, mean awake and asleep BP readings, differences between awake ABPM readings and initial standardized BP readings, and sleep experience among three ABPM devices. We randomized a convenience sample of 365 adults to 1 of 3 ABPM devices: Welch Allyn Mobil-O-Graph (WA), Sun Tech Classic Oscar2 (STO) and Spacelabs 90227 (SL). Participants completed sleep quality questionnaires on the nights before and during ABPM testing.

RESULTS

The proportions of valid BP readings were not different among the 3 devices (P > 0.45). Mean awake and asleep systolic BP were significantly higher for STO device (WA vs. STO vs. SL: 126.65, 138.09, 127.44 mm Hg; 114.34, 120.34, 113.13 mm Hg; P < 0.0001 for both). The difference between the initial average standardized mercury systolic BP readings and the ABPM mean awake systolic BP was larger for STO device (WA vs. STO. vs. SL: -5.26, -16.24, -5.36 mm Hg; P < 0.0001); diastolic BP mean differences were ~ -6 mm Hg for all 3 devices (P = 0.6). Approximately 55% of participants reported that the devices interfered with sleep; however, there were no sleep differences across the devices (P > 0.4 for all).

CONCLUSION

Most of the participants met the threshold of 70% valid readings over 24 hours. Sleep disturbance was common but did not interfere with completion of measurement in most of the participants.

© Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of American Journal of Hypertension Ltd 2020.

Address: Division of Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys, National Center for Health Statistics, CDC, Hyattsville, Maryland, USA.; Division for Heart Disease and Stroke Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, CDC, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.; Division of Research and Methodology, National Center for Health Statistics, CDC, Hyattsville, Maryland, USA.; Department of Medicine, Center for Behavioral Cardiovascular Health, Columbia University, Medical Center, New York, New York, USA.; Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Science, Applied Behavioral Medicine Research Institute, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, New York, USA.; Department of Epidemiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama, USA.
Bant logo

© Copyright 2026, Nutrition Evidence

NED wishes to thank the following organisations for their support:

We use cookies to improve your experience and analyze site traffic with Google Analytics. By continuing to use our site, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more.