I agree ABPM vs usual sphyg has yet to prove it's case, but I do find it
useful to prove normal "white coat" BP at a single sitting rather than the
usual anxiety provoking average 3 readings over 3 months, or whatever you
use.
Interested to see that, could you send me a word attachment? I will pass it
to David Ebb who is heavily into OXAM.
Yours Paul :-)
-----Original Message-----
From: Iain Kewley <[log in to unmask]>
To: internet:[log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
Date: 23 April 1998 09:09
Subject: Re: Dream on........
Paul,
re the ABPMs - ditch them. A very large systematic review has shown:-
1. They do not record BP accurately. Minor (unannounced )software
changes between various models of the same make & time occur & make a
difference.
2. The degree of inaccuracy is variable even within one patient
3. There is no consistent relationship between 24h mean, nocturnal mean
or daytime mean BP & end organ damage.
4. There are no agreed treatment levels - certainly using the same
levels of BP for treatment on ABPM as office readings appears to miss
people who are at significant risk.
One of our Masters students did a super 20K word review - interestingly
2 smaller published reviews over the last year or two came up with
similar results. Copy of the 20K version available!
Iain
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|