This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Gould, B. A. Articles by Raftery, E. B. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Gould, B. A. Articles by Raftery, E. B. Pubmed/NCBI databases Compound via MeSH Substance via MeSH Hazardous Substances DB PRAZOSIN HYDROCHLORIDE VERAPAMIL HYDROCHLORIDE

Hypertension, Vol 8, 267-271, Copyright © 1986 by American Heart Association

ARTICLES

An evaluation of self-recorded blood pressure during drug trials

BA Gould, RS Hornung, H Kieso, PM Cashman and EB Raftery

To our knowledge, there have been no published comparisons of different techniques for measuring blood pressure during clinical trials. We undertook a comparison during clinical trials with verapamil and prazosin. During an open trial of verapamil we compared the treatment- induced blood pressure reductions as measured by clinic, intra- arterial, and self-recorded methods. The mean reduction in blood pressure was 38 +/- 13.6/20 +/- 10.1 mm Hg for clinic blood pressure, 24 +/- 17.9/16 +/- 7.3 mm Hg for self-recorded blood pressure, and 23 +/- 12.3/19 +/- 10.1 mm Hg for mean daytime intra-arterial blood pressure. During prazosin treatment the mean reduction in blood pressure was 28 +/- 21.5/18 +/- 8.5 mm Hg for clinic blood pressure, 21 +/- 20.5/6 +/- 13.7 mm Hg for self-recorded blood pressure, and 18 +/- 19.2/5 +/- 9.6 mm Hg for mean daytime intra-arterial blood pressure. There was little agreement between methods within individual patients and for group comparisons of intra-arterial or clinic methods. There was, however, good agreement between intra-arterial and self-recorded methods. This study suggests that self-recorded blood pressure recording is suitable for monitoring efficacy of antihypertensive agents in a group of patients, although caution must be exercised when interpreting the effects of therapy when measured by indirect methods in an individual patient.