Poor Accuracy of Triage Blood Pressure Measurements in a Pediatric Obesity Hypertension Clinic
Wen, W. W.; Psoter, K. J.; Solomon, B. S.; Urbina, E. M.; Brady, T. M.
Show abstract
Accurate triage blood pressure (BP) measurements are essential for clinical decision making. We investigated the agreement and diagnostic accuracy of usual triage vs. standardized BP measurements in an obesity-related hypertension clinic. This was a retrospective study of paired triage and standardized BP measurements from patients 4-21 years old. Triage BPs are measured by a medical assistant or nurse, often by automated device. Triplicate manual BP measurements are obtained by the clinic physician. Bland-Altman analyses determined mean differences between paired triage and mean standardized BPs. GEE- based multivariable relative risk (RR) regression determined the RR of triage BP overestimation by [≥]5mmHg. Overall agreement, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of usual triage BP measurements identifying hypertensive BP were determined. 130 participants with 347 clinic encounters were included. Mean age was 13.3 years (standard deviation 3.94), 76% were Black race, 58% were male. Overall mean systolic and diastolic BP difference was 8.7 mmHg (95% limits on agreement: -16.66, 34.07) and 4.1 mmHg (95% limits on agreement: -18.56, 26.68), respectively. Triage systolic BP was more likely overestimated by [≥]5mmHg when a large adult (RR=1.49; 95% confidence interval: 1.00, 2.21) or thigh cuff (RR=1.94; 95% confidence interval: 1.08, 3.51) was required vs. when a child/adult cuff was required. Overall agreement in identifying hypertensive BP was 57.6%. Sensitivity (52.6%), specificity (63.4%), positive predictive value (60.8%), and negative predictive value (55.3%) were low across all cuff sizes. There was poor agreement between usual triage and standardized BP measurements, with potential for significant clinical implications. Clinical Trial RegistrationReNEW Clinic Cohort Study (ReNEW), NCT03816462, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03816462
Matching journals
The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Trends in Awareness, Antihypertensive Medication Use and Blood Pressure Control by Race and Ethnicity Among Adults with Hypertension in the United States: A National Health and Nutrition Examination Analysis from 2011 to 2018 97%
- Hypertension Management Dynamics in Pediatric CKD: Insights from the 4C Study 96%
- Prediction of Preeclampsia from Clinical and Genetic Risk Factors in Early and Late Pregnancy Using Machine Learning and Polygenic Risk Scores 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Within-visit Blood Pressure Variability in Children and Adolescents in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (2013-2020) 99%
- Factors Associated with Treatment-Resistant Hypertension: Results of a prospective observational Study 95%
- Differences between brachial and aortic blood pressure in adolescence and their impact on classification of hypertension 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Association of Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors and Angiotensin Receptor Blockers with the Risk of Hospitalization and Death in Hypertensive Patients with Coronavirus Disease-19 93%
- Joint associations of pregnancy complications and postpartum maternal renal biomarkers with severe cardiovascular morbidities: A US racially diverse prospective birth cohort study 92%
- High amino-acid intake in early life is associated with systolic but not diastolic arterial hypertension at 5-years of age in children born very preterm 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Heritability of cardiovascular health across three generations in South Africa: the Birth to Twenty-Plus cohort 92%
- Tuberculosis infection and hypertension: Prevalence estimates from the US National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 91%
- Cohort profile: The LipidCardio Study - Role of Lipoproteins in Cardiovascular Disease 90%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.