Skip to main content
. 2007 Nov 16;28(2):304–310. doi: 10.1159/000111386

Table 2.

Association between stress reactivity measures and eGFR <60 ml/min/1.73 m2

Hemodynamic measure Unadjusted Model 1 Model 2 Model3 Test for task–eGFR interaction
ΔSBP 8.5 (2.4, 14.6) 7.8 (2.0, 13.6) 8.0 (2.3, 13.6) 7.0 (0.6, 13.4) 0.6
p = 0.005 p = 0.009 p = 0.007 p = 0.03
ΔDBP 3.3 (−0.8, 7.5) 2.2 (−1.5, 5.9) 2.4 (−1.4, 6.2) 1.8 (−2.0, 5.7) 0.9
p = 0.12 p = 0.2 p = 0.2 p = 0.3
ΔHeart rate 2.5 (−0.8, 5.9) 3.3 (0.1, 6.4) 3.6 (0.3, 6.8) 3.1 (−0.8, 6.2) 0.3
p = 0.14 p = 0.04 p = 0.03 p = 0.056
ΔPulse pressure 5.7 (1.5, 9.9) 5.9 (1.8, 9.9) 5.8 (1.7, 10.0) 5.5 (1.0, 10.0) 0.5
p = 0.008 p = 0.004 p = 0.006 p = 0.018

Regression coefficients represent the adjusted average difference in stress reactivity between those with an eGFR of <60 ml/min/1.73 m2 or ≥60 ml/min/1.73 m2. Stress reactivity measures were computed for all 3 stressors.

Model 1: adjusted for age, gender, race, body mass index (kg/m2), aspirin use, and hypertension.

Model 2: additionally adjusted for fasting glucose and plasma glucose 120 min following an oral glucose load. Model 3: Adjusted for covariates in model 1 and additionally for HDL-C, triglycerides, and LDL-C.