scholarly journals A novel protocol to assess the impact of prescription stimulants on blood pressure in adults using ambulatory blood pressure monitoring

Author(s):  
Jennifer L. Cluett ◽  
Anthony M. Ishak ◽  
Kenneth J. Mukamal ◽  
Stephen P. Juraschek
Hypertension ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 76 (Suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer L Cluett ◽  
Anthony Ishak ◽  
Kenneth J Mukamal ◽  
Stephen P Juraschek

Background: Prescription stimulant medications are an important cause of secondary hypertension (HTN) and use is increasing in US adults. Although stimulants are known to increase blood pressure (BP), a systematic approach to assess impact in individual patients is lacking. Further, treating HTN secondary to stimulant use may differ from treatment of essential HTN. Objective: To develop a protocol using ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) to differentiate HTN secondary to stimulant use from essential HTN. Methods: We used ABPM to evaluate pre- and post-stimulant systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) for patients referred to the BIDMC Hypertension Center. Patient charts were reviewed by a clinical pharmacist to ensure the safety of holding the stimulant medication and to determine the duration of action. Average daytime BP on day 1 (off stimulant) was compared to day 2 (on stimulant) to assess the impact of stimulant on BP. We defined normotension as BP <135/<85 on both days, sustained HTN as BP ≥135/≥85 on both days and stimulant-induced HTN as BP <135/<85 on Day 1 and ≥135/≥85 on Day 2. We also defined an increase of SBP≥10 and/or DBP≥ 5 while taking the stimulant as a clinically significant effect on BP. Results: Eleven patients were assessed (see Table). Four had sustained normotension, six had sustained HTN, and one had stimulant-induced HTN. In addition, four of the patients had a clinically significant increase in their BP while on a stimulant. Overall, average increase in SBP was 6.7 mmHg and average increase in DBP was 3.2 mmHg. Conclusion: This novel ABPM protocol was useful for differentiating secondary HTN from stimulant use from essential HTN.


Blood ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 106 (11) ◽  
pp. 5124-5124
Author(s):  
Angelika Pyszel ◽  
Monika Biedron ◽  
Rafal Poreba ◽  
Tomasz Wrobel ◽  
Grzegorz Mazur ◽  
...  

Abstract BACKGROUND: Corticosteroids are still a cornerstone in multiple myeloma (MM) therapy, both as a single agent and as a part of many protocols, including VAD regimen (vincristine, adriblastine, dexamethasone). Corticosteroids are known to be involved in blood pressure (BP) regulation and to affect this parameter. The impact of dexamethasone (Dex) administration on BP in MM patients during VAD protocol treatment is poorly documented. AIM: The purpose of the study was to evaluate the blood pressure changes during Dex administration in patients treated with VAD protocol due to MM. METHODS: Thirteen patients with MM (7 men and 6 women; mean age 62,45 ± 8,14) were assessed. Primary hypertensive patients (7 persons) were not excluded. They were administered Dex in standard dose of 40 mg (day 1–4, 9–12, 17–21) according to VAD protocol. Blood pressure was assessed by the use of commercially available instruments of Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring (ABPM). The BP recordings lasted 48 hours, were started on the day before the first day of VAD and were obtained every 10 minutes during mornings, every 15 minutes during the rest of days and every 20 minutes during nights. Average of systolic and diastolic blood pressure (SBP/DBP) were estimated for the 2-hour time before Dex and for the 14-hour time in the 2-hour periods after Dex. Minimal and maximal range of SBP/DBP increase and the mean amount of SBP/DBP increase were also determined. RESULTS: 48-hour BP recordings revealed a significant increase in systolic and diastolic blood pressure after Dex administration in all patients. SBP and DBP began to increase after 3 hours after Dex, then rose continually and reached the peak in the period from 6 to 10 hour after Dex. In comparison to 2-hour period before Dex, in which SBP/DBP amounted 139,63/82,92 ± 23,47/9,38 mmHg, the mean SBP/DBP increase rate was: in the 2–4 hour period after Dex - 146,68/88,15 ± 24,38/10,51 mmHg (p&lt;0,05), in the 6–8 – 148,07/92,66 ± 14,07/9,04 mmHg (ns), in the 8–10 – 147,8/87,99 ± 14,07/9,04 mmHg (p&lt;0,01), in the 10–12 – 143,44/86,12 ± 17,22/9,77 mmHg (p&lt;0,05) and in the 12–14 – 144,47/88,59 ± 17,04/12,54 mmHg (p&lt;0,01). The minimal range of SBP/DBP increase was 10,50/−2,00 mmHg, maximal range of SBP/DBP increase was 35,43/40,00 mmHg and the mean amount of SBP/DBP increase was 20,06/11,6 ± 8,36/14,23 mmHg. CONCLUSION: Our preliminary study revealed that Dex administration causes an increase in BP in all patients. The mean increase in BP amounted 20,06/11,6 ± 8,36/14,23 mmHg and was similar in all patients, regardless their initial value of BP. So our study demonstrates the need of individualized hypertension treatment with strict control of BP in hypertensive patients when corticosteroid therapy is indicated.


2018 ◽  
Vol 17 (8) ◽  
pp. 742-750 ◽  
Author(s):  
Artur Dalfó-Pibernat ◽  
Antoni Dalfó Baqué ◽  
Francisco Javier Pelegrina Rodríguez ◽  
Olatz Garin ◽  
Xavier Duran ◽  
...  

Introduction: Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) is fundamental to diagnosing and monitoring arterial hypertension (HTN), yet it is not known how effective training could be in improving knowledge of ABPM. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate ABPM knowledge before and after a training activity. Methodology: A before-and-after intervention study of 116 professionals. Data was collected on age, sex, occupational category, work setting, and work experience. ABPM knowledge was determined by a questionnaire to evaluate expertise in understanding and interpreting ABPM results. Results: Multivariate regression analysis showed that, pre-intervention, having more than 20 years’ experience (odds ratio (OR): 5.9; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.3–33.9; p = 0.049) and being a doctor (OR: 5.7; 95% CI: 1.8–18.3; p = 0.004) were associated with greater ABPM knowledge. Training increased the number of professionals with adequate ABPM knowledge: 85.3% after training vs 26.7% before training. Training increased the questionnaire mean (SD) score by almost 3 (1.7) points: 9 (2.2) after training vs 6.3 (2.2) before training ( p < 0.05). Of the 116 professionals, 90.5% achieved a higher overall score after training. The impact of the intervention was greatest on women nurses older than 45 years and with more years of experience, employed in primary care, and with prior experience of ABPM. Conclusions: Knowledge of ABPM is deficient but can be easily improved by training that is most effective in primary care and among nurses.


2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francisco Javier Vilchez-Lopez ◽  
Isabel Mateo-Gavira ◽  
Florentino Carral-San Laureano ◽  
Maria Victoria Garcia-Palacios ◽  
Jose Ortego-Rojo ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 111 (6) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ramón C. Hermida ◽  
Artemio Mojón ◽  
José R. Fernández ◽  
Alfonso Otero ◽  
Juan J. Crespo ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document