English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Open

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Insights

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Background/Objectives. The objective of this study was to compare casual BP taken in a bariatric clinic to standardized guideline-concordant BP. Subjects/Methods. A cross sectional analysis was performed using baseline data from a weight management trial. Patients were recruited from a Canadian bariatric care program. Standardized BP was performed using a Watch BP oscillometric device. Casual in-clinic BP single readings, taken using a Welch Allyn oscillometric device, were chart-abstracted. Paired t -tests, Bland-Altman plots, and Pearson’s correlations were used for analysis. Results. Data from 134 patients were analyzed. Mean age was 41.5 ± 8.9 y, mean BMI was 46.8 ± 6.5 kg/m2, and 40 (30%) had prior hypertension. Mean casual in-clinic BP was 128.8 ± 14.1/81.6 ± 9.9 mmHg and mean standardized BP was 133.2 ± 15.0/82.0 ± 10.3 mmHg (difference of −4.3 ± 12.0 for systolic ( p < 0.0001 ) and −0.4 ± 10.0 mmHg for diastolic BP ( p = 0.6 )). Pearson’s coefficients were 0.66 ( p < 0.0001 ) for SBP and 0.50 ( p < 0.0001 ) for DBP. 28.4% of casual versus 26.9% of standardized measurements were ≥140/90 mmHg ( p < 0.0001 ). Conclusion. In this bariatric clinic, casual BP was unexpectedly lower than standardized BP. This could potentially lead to the underdiagnosis of hypertension.

A Comparison of Casual In-Clinic Blood Pressure Measurements to Standardized Guideline-Concordant Measurements in Severely Obese Individuals