Skip to main content
Log in

Multiple office blood pressure measurement: a novel approach to overcome the weak cornerstone of blood pressure measurement in children. Data from the SPA project.

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Pediatric Nephrology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

A Correction to this article was published on 23 November 2020

This article has been updated

Abstract

Background

This contribution aims to report and analyze a novel approach for office blood pressure measurement in children.

Methods

Healthy children 5 to 8 years of age were eligible. After 5 minutes rest, 10 unattended blood pressure readings were taken at 3-minute intervals using a validated automated oscillometric device. After discarding outlier values (< 5th or > 95th percentile of the recorded values), the coefficient of variation and the mean of the 10 readings were calculated. The single readings #1 to #10 were compared with this elaborated average of the 10 measurements.

Results

Two hundred eighty-one healthy, non-obese children (137 females, 49%), median age 5.7 (IQR 5.3–6.1) years, were analyzed. The median coefficients of variation were 7% (IQR 5–9) for systolic and 4% (IQR 3–6) for diastolic blood pressure. The first 3 measurements were significantly different from the average, while the readings #4 to #10 were not. Based on the average, only nine subjects had a systolic or diastolic blood pressure > 90th centile (n = 3 > 95th percentile).

Conclusions

Although most guidelines advise three blood pressure readings, these findings suggest that in children, office blood pressure measurement might be improved by including ten measurements. In situations of time constraints, the fourth blood pressure reading might be used as a reliable approximation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Change history

  • 23 November 2020

    The authors regret that the name of the author Bertrand Tchana was incorrectly rendered as ���Bertrand Tchane���. The original article has been corrected.

References

  1. Flynn JT, Kaelber DC, Baker-Smith CM, Blowey D, Carroll AE, Daniels SR, de Ferranti SD, Dionne JM, Falkner B, Flinn SK, Gidding SS, Goodwin C, Leu MG, Powers ME, Rea C, Samuels J, Simasek M, Thaker VV, Urbina EM, SUBCOMMITTEE ON SCREENING AND MANAGEMENT OF HIGH BLOOD PRESSURE IN CHILDREN (2017) Clinical practice guideline for screening and management of high blood pressure in children and adolescents. Pediatrics 140:e20171904

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Lurbe E, Agabiti-Rosei E, Cruickshank JK, Dominiczak A, Erdine S, Hirth A, Invitti C, Litwin M, Mancia G, Pall D, Rascher W, Redon J, Schaefer F, Seeman T, Sinha M, Stabouli S, Webb NJ, Wühl E, Zanchetti A (2016) 2016 European Society of Hypertension guidelines for the management of high blood pressure in children and adolescents. J Hypertens 34:1887–1920

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Brady TM, Stefani-Glücksberg A, Simonetti GD (2019) Management of high blood pressure in children: similarities and differences between US and European guidelines. Pediatr Nephrol 34:405–412

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Kulaga Z, Litwin M, Grajda A, Kulaga K, Gurzkowska B, Góźdź M, Pan H, OLAF Study Group (2012) Oscillometric blood pressure percentiles for Polish normal-weight school-aged children and adolescents. J Hypertens 30:1942–1954

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Whelton PK, Carey RM, Aronow WS, Casey DE Jr, Collins KJ, Dennison Himmelfarb C, DePalma SM, Gidding S, Jamerson KA, Jones DW, MacLaughlin EJ, Muntner P, Ovbiagele B, Smith SC Jr, Spencer CC, Stafford RS, Taler SJ, Thomas RJ, Williams KA Sr, Williamson JD, Wright JT Jr (2018) 2017 ACC/AHA/AAPA/ABC/ACPM/AGS/APhA/ASH/ASPC/NMA/PCNA guideline for the prevention, detection, evaluation, and management of high blood pressure in adults: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association task force on clinical practice guidelines. Hypertension 71:e13–e115

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Wilton A, De Greef A, Shennan A (2007) Rapid assessment of blood pressure in the obstetric day unit using Microlife MaM technology. Hypertens Pregnancy 26:31–37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Santi M, Lava SA, Simonetti GD, Stettbacher A, Bianchetti MG, Muggli F (2016) Clustering of cardiovascular disease risk factors among male youths in Southern Switzerland: preliminary study. Swiss Med Wkly 146:w14338

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Tschumi S, Noti S, Bucher BS, Simonetti GD (2011) Is childhood blood pressure higher before or after clinic consultation? Acta Paediatr 100:775–7777

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Negroni-Balasquide X, Bell CS, Samuel J, Samuels JA (2016) Is one measurement enough to evaluate blood pressure among adolescents? A blood pressure screening experience in more than 9000 children with a subset comparison of auscultatory to mercury measurements. J Am Soc Hypertens 10:95–100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Sun J, Steffen LM, Ma C, Liang Y, Xi B (2017) Definition of pediatric hypertension: are blood pressure measurements on three separate occasions necessary? Hypertens Res 40:496–503

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Veloudi P, Blizzard CL, Srikanth VK, Breslin M, Schultz MG, Sharman JE (2017) Age-dependent changes in blood pressure over consecutive office measurements: impact on hypertension diagnosis and implications for international guidelines. J Hypertens 35:753–760

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Du T, Fernandez C, Barshop R, Chen W, Urbina EM, Bazzano LA (2019) 2017 pediatric hypertension guidelines improve prediction of adult cardiovascular outcomes. Hypertension 73:1217–1223

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Sorof JM, Cardwell G, Franco K, Portman RJ (2002) Ambulatory blood pressure and left ventricular mass index in hypertensive children. Hypertension 39:903–908

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. National Institute for Health and Care Excllence (NICE). Hypertension in adults: diagnosis and management. Clinical guideline. https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg127 (lastly accessed on February 14th, 2019)

  15. O’Brien E, White WB, Parati G, Dolan E (2018) Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in the 21st century. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich) 20:1108–1111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Krmar RT, Ferraris JR (2018) Clinical value of ambulatory blood pressure in pediatric patients after renal transplantation. Pediatr Nephrol 33:1327–1336

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Palatini P (2002) Too much of a good thing? A critique of overemphasis on the use of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in clinical practice. J Hypertens 20:1917–1923

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Stergiou G, Kollias A, Parati G, O’Brien E (2018) Office blood pressure measurement: the weak cornerstone of hypertension diagnosis. Hypertension 71:813–815

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Johnson KC, Whelton PK, Cushman WC, Cutler JA, Evans GW, Snyder JK, Ambrosius WT, Beddhu S, Cheung AK, Fine LJ, Lewis CE, Rahman M, Reboussin DM, Rocco MV, Oparil S, Wright JT Jr, SPRINT Research Group (2018) Blood pressure measurement in SPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial). Hypertension 71:848–857

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Banegas JR, Ruilope LM, de la Sierra A, Vinyoles E, Gorostidi M, de la Cruz JJ, Ruiz-Hurtado G, Segura J, Rodríguez-Artalejo F, Williams B (2018) Relationship between clinic and ambulatory blood-pressure measurements and mortality. N Engl J Med 378:1509–1520

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Shah L, Hossain J, Xie S, Zaritsky J (2019) Poor adherence to early childhood blood pressure measurement guidelines in a large pediatric healthcare system. Pediatr Nephrol 34:697–701

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We are very thankful for the precious support provided by “Progetto Alice ONLUS. Associazione per la Lotta alla Sindrome Emolitica Uremica.”

SPA Project investigators (in addition to the already listed authors): Angelina Ardissino, Francesco Argirò, Patrizia Bardelli, Alessandra Bianchi, Annalisa Bosco, Patrizia Bonatesta, Milena Bonvissuto, Gabriella Bosetti, Marta Brambilla, Rosaria Cambria, Giovanni Capobianco, Valentina Capone, Giorgio Casani, Graziella Catanese, Dario Consonni, Ivan Cortinovis, Cristina Cauda, Paola Cinquepalmi, Silvana Coletta, Antonella Daverio, Gabriella De Amicis, Maria Elisabetta Di Pietro, Irene Felicetta, Angela Fornaro, Stefano Francario, Vera Gandini, Stefania Genoni, Antenore Giussani, Gabriella Grimaldi, Tommaso Lettera, Laura Loguercio, Alessandra Magnelli, Maria Cristina Mancuso, Paolo Marchetto, Alessio Magnani, Rita Maiavacca, Roberto Marinello, Laura Martelli, Lorena Martignoni, Martino Marsciani, Silvano Milani, Annalisa Monolo, Maura Morelli, Manuela Musetti, Filomena Napolitano, Rita Nardi, Sandro Paparone, Giuseppina Parlagreco, Giovannina Pastorelli, Giovanni Pieri, Marina Picca, Cristina Poletti, Roberto Romano, Stefania Rotondo, Pier Francesco Savina, Mirella Scarazzati, Loredana Simionato, Adelisa Spalla, Francesca Tel, Valeria Valdambrini, Laura Vento, Maria Lidia Vinciguerra, Loris Xaiz.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Consortia

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sebastiano A. G. Lava.

Ethics declarations

Ethical approval was granted by the institutional review board (Comitato Etico Milano Area B, approval number 746-2015). The study was performed in accordance with the ethical standards laid down in the Declaration of Helsinki and its amendments.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ardissino, G., Ghiglia, S., Salice, P. et al. Multiple office blood pressure measurement: a novel approach to overcome the weak cornerstone of blood pressure measurement in children. Data from the SPA project.. Pediatr Nephrol 35, 687–693 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00467-019-04368-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00467-019-04368-7

Keywords

Navigation