Abstract
It has been shown that in most people there is a physiological reduction in blood pressure during nighttime sleep, it falling by approximately 10% compared to daytime values (dippers). On the other hand, in some people, there is no nighttime reduction (non‐dippers). Various studies have found an association between being a non‐dipper and a higher risk of cardiovascular disease, but few have assessed whether the nocturnal pattern is maintained over time. From the database of the TAHPS study, data were available on 225 patients, each of whom underwent 24‐hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) on four occasions over a period of 5 months. We studied the reproducibility of the nocturnal BP dipping pattern with mixed linear analysis and also calculated the concordance in the classification of patients as dippers or non‐dippers. The intraclass correlation coefficients between the different ABPM recordings were 0.482 and 0.467 for systolic and diastolic blood pressure, respectively. Two‐thirds (67%) and 70% of the patients classified, respectively, as dippers or non‐dippers based on systolic and diastolic blood pressure readings in the first ABPM recording were found to have the same classification based on the subsequent recordings. We conclude that the reproducibility of nocturnal dipping patterns and concordance of dipper vs non‐dipper status in individual patients is modest and therefore that we should be cautious about recommending treatments or interventions based on these patterns.
Keywords: ABPM, blood pressure, dipper, nocturnal dipping, prospective study
1. INTRODUCTION
Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) allows us to measure blood pressure (BP) values and heart rate for periods of 24 and even 48 hours while people go about their normal daily activities. For this reason, this approach is extremely useful for confirming a diagnosis of hypertension, as well as for monitoring the response to antihypertensive treatment. 1 , 2 , 3
Values of BP measured using ABPM are more strongly correlated with target organ damage and have greater prognostic value for cardiovascular events than those measured in the consultation room. 4 Further, this type of monitoring provides data on circadian changes in BP, such as decreases during sleep, which are of great importance as prognostic factors. 5
It has been shown that in most people there is a physiological reduction in BP during nighttime sleep, it falling by approximately 10% compared to daytime values (dippers). On the other hand, in some people, it falls by more than 20% (extreme dippers), while in some there is no nighttime reduction (non‐dippers), and in others, BP does not fall but rather increases (risers). 6
Some studies have demonstrated that non‐dippers and especially risers have an elevated risk of cardiovascular disease and are more likely to have target organ damage. 5 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 A meta‐analysis published in 2019 analyzing 17 312 patients with hypertension concluded that, regardless of 24‐hour BP levels, the nocturnal BP pattern is predictive of cardiovascular events, non‐dipper individuals and especially risers having a poorer prognosis. On the other hand, being an extreme dipper appeared to be protective in patients with treated hypertension, but not in untreated patients. 14
Nonetheless, several studies have suggested that when the ABPM is repeated after some time, dipper vs non‐dipper status is only moderately reproducible. 15 , 16 , 17 There is a scarcity of studies on reproducibility, and however, and most that have been published are based on data from two ABPM recordings and mixed populations of patients with treated and untreated hypertension and with or without target organ damage. 15 , 18 , 19 , 20 This explains why scientific societies have yet to state what therapeutic approach they consider most appropriate in such patients.
In this study, we assessed the reproducibility of the circadian BP pattern in a population of patients with medically treated hypertension and a history of cardiovascular events who underwent ABPM on four occasions.
2. MATERIALS AND METHODS
We conducted a study on nocturnal BP dipping. For this, we calculated the nocturnal BP fall expressed as a percentage of the daytime BP ((daytime BP – nighttime BP)/daytime BP)*100) to classify participants as dippers (a decrease of ≥ 10% or more of blood pressure at night) or non‐dippers.
Data were obtained as part of the Effectiveness of Night Administration of Low Dose Aspirin in Hypertensive Patients (TAHPS) study (ClinicalTrial.gov identifier, NCT01741922), approved by the Clinical Research Ethics Committee of Euskadi (Ref: 115/2011). This clinical trial assessed whether acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) at low doses taken at bedtime had an effect on BP or nocturnal fall in BP and concluded that the time when ASA was taken did not have an effect on patients’ BP or the dipper/non‐dipper pattern. 21
The population was 225 patients on antihypertensive therapy and low doses of ASA for secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease. Data were collected in 20 health centers in Bizkaia, Gipuzkoa and Barcelona, between 1 November 2011 and 31 December 2015. The systolic and diastolic BP was measured every 20 min between 07:00 and 23:00 and every 30 min between 23:00 and 07:00 in all patients. These times were used to define/calculate the mean daytime and mean nighttime BP levels. We used the WatchBP® ABPM device in all centers. For data from a given ABPM recording to be included, it was required that there were no more than 2 consecutive hours with no readings and at least 70% of readings were considered valid. As there may be a potential loss in external validity or generality using this restrictive criteria, we perform a sensitivity analysis using the International Database of Ambulatory Blood Pressure in Relation to Cardiovascular Outcome [IDACO] criteria 22 (≥10 daytime and ≥ 5 nighttime readings).
Patients included were adults with a high risk of cardiovascular events whose treatment for hypertension had not been changed within 6 months before the study. On the other hand, patients were excluded if they were shift workers; on long‐term NSAID therapy, anticoagulants or antiplatelet agents, or ASA at doses other than 100‐150 mg; heavy drinkers (>280 g/week in men and 170 g/week in women) or women who were pregnant or breastfeeding; or if they had any serious or terminal disease, NYHA class III heart failure, glomerular filtration < 45 ml/min, or any physical or mental condition that might hinder their collaboration.
Patients were recruited at random, by the research unit using a computer program to randomly select patients who a priori met the criteria based on coded data and doctors then contacting patients in the order they appeared the list provided by the research unit. At the first visit, doctors confirmed, by taking a medical history, that the selected patients met all the inclusion criteria and none of the exclusion criteria. They then invited them to participate in the study and, having informed them about the research, asked them to give written informed consent. If any patients had their antihypertensive therapy changed or its dose or regime modified, they were excluded from the analysis. The first ABPM recording was performed at recruitment and the following recordings 2, 3, and 5 months later.
The primary objective of this study was to assess the real reproducibility of the nocturnal fall in BP as a percentage of the daytime value ((daytime BP – nighttime BP)/daytime BP)*100) observed in the patient's first ABPM recording, which was the information that would normally be available when they were seen, compared to the percentage fall obtained from subsequent recordings and to the mean value. Further, we studied the agreement in the classification of the dipper pattern between measurements, including an aggregate measure in which patients are considered to be dippers when the mean percentage fall in the three subsequent recordings was ≤ 10%.
As a secondary objective, we analyzed whether the reproducibility was higher or lower in various subgroups of the population (>70‐year‐olds and patients with diabetes, obesity, or hypertension).
2.1. Statistical analysis
To analyze the reproducibility of the nocturnal pattern, we used various different approaches. On the one hand, exploiting the fact that we had four measurements per patient, we calculated intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) for the percentage fall using two‐level (recording and patient) linear mixed models. The ICC measures the correlation between measurements in a given patient, estimating the fraction of the variance that corresponds to differences between measurements in the same patient compared to those between measurements in different patients.
On the other hand, we followed the strategy of Bland and Altman 23 which involves calculating Pearson's correlation coefficients and Bland‐Altman repeatability coefficients between the first recording and the others as well as the means.
The percentage repeatability coefficients, defined as the ratio of the within‐person standard deviation to the between‐person standard deviation, were obtained by dividing the standard deviation of the differences between pairs of repeated measurements by two times the pooled standard deviation of the measurements and multiplying the result by 100. 24 Because the repeatability coefficient is the inverse of the reproducibility, a high repeatability coefficient indicated a low reproducibility and vice versa.
Further, to assess the reproducibility of the classification of patients as dippers or non‐dippers, we have calculated the level of concordance (percentage of patients whose classification remained unchanged) between two measurements and the corresponding Kappa statistics.
All the analyses were performed in SAS (vs 9.4) and R.
3. RESULTS
A total of 225 patients were included of which 206 completed the second recording, 200 the third and 192 the last recording. The ABPM data were considered invalid in 11, 21, 20, and 27 cases at the time of the first, second, third, and fourth recordings, respectively. Giving a total of 214, 185, 180, and 165 valid ABPM measurements at each recording. During the study, 140 patients had valid ABPM in all recordings. Table 1 summarizes the baseline characteristics of the 225 patients included in the study. According to the first recording, 48.1% of the patients were dippers based on their systolic blood pressure (SBP) and 64.5% based on their diastolic blood pressure (DBP).
TABLE 1.
Baseline characteristics
| Sample size | Mean | Standard deviation | |
|---|---|---|---|
| SBP, mm Hg | 214 | 125.55 | 11.62 |
| DBP, mm Hg | 214 | 70.62 | 6.94 |
| Nocturnal fall in SBP (% of daytime value) | 214 | 8.66 | 9.01 |
| Nocturnal fall in DBP (% of daytime value) | 214 | 12.59 | 9.96 |
| Age, years | 225 | 68.24 | 9.19 |
| Body mass index, kg/m2 | 224 | 29.16 | 3.94 |
| N | % | ||
|---|---|---|---|
|
SBP dippers (including extreme dippers) |
214 | 103 | 48.1 |
|
DBP dippers (including extreme dippers) |
214 | 138 | 64.5 |
| Female | 225 | 67 | 29.8 |
| Smokers | 222 | 22 | 9.9 |
| Diabetes | 222 | 80 | 36.6 |
| Heart disease | 222 | 145 | 65.3 |
| Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease | 222 | 20 | 9 |
| Arterial disease | 222 | 41 | 18.5 |
| Congestive heart failure | 222 | 5 | 2.2 |
| Stroke | 222 | 55 | 24.8 |
| Dyslipidemia | 222 | 147 | 66.2 |
| Statins | 222 | 178 | 80.2 |
| Enzyme inhibitors | 222 | 170 | 76.6 |
| Calcium antagonists | 222 | 58 | 26.1 |
| Beta‐blockers | 222 | 83 | 37.4 |
Abbreviations: DBP, Diastolic blood pressure; SBP, Systolic blood pressure.
3.1. Reproducibility of the day‐to‐night change in BP
Analyzing the percentage fall in BP across the four recordings, we obtained ICCs of 0.482 for SBP and 0.467 for DBP, indicating that the variance in measurements taken in the same patient (ie, the variance due to the inconsistency or lack of reproducibility) is slightly more than half the variance in measurements taken in different patients.
Figure 1 illustrates the relationship between the percentage fall in BP measured in the first and subsequent ABPM recordings. The strength of the linear correlation decreases the further in time the subsequent recording is from the first, changing from r = 0.52/0.48 (SBP/DBP) comparing the baseline recording with that at 2 months, to r = 0.42/0.41 comparing with that at 5 months (see Table 2), and is higher when comparing the first recording with the mean of the three subsequent ones (r = 0.55/0.5). Table 2 shows how this pattern is also seen on analyzing the repeatability coefficients, with slightly better reproducibility (lower repeatability coefficient) for SBP than DBP.
FIGURE 1.
Relationship between the percentage fall in blood pressure measured in the first and subsequent ABPM recordings
TABLE 2.
Reproducibility of the day‐to‐night percentage change in BP
| Nocturnal fall in blood pressure (% of daytime value) | SBP | DBP | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | Sd | ICC | Correlation | Repeatability | Mean | Sd | ICC | Correlation | Repeatability | |
| 1st recording | 8.66 | 9.02 | 0.482 | 12.6 | 9.96 | 0.467 | ||||
| 2nd recording | 7.69 | 8.56 | 0.515 | 48.9 | 11.9 | 9.69 | 0.487 | 50.6 | ||
| 3rd recording | 8.1 | 9.22 | 0.485 | 50.6 | 12.8 | 9.66 | 0.476 | 51.5 | ||
| 4th recording | 7.33 | 9.32 | 0.418 | 54.9 | 12 | 9.75 | 0.412 | 55.4 | ||
| Mean | 7.47 | 8.06 | 0.549 | 47.5 | 12.1 | 8.61 | 0.5 | 49.9 | ||
Abbreviations: DBP, Diastolic blood pressure; ICC, Intraclass correlation coefficient; SBP, Systolic blood pressure; SD, Standard deviation.
3.2. Reproducibility of the dipper vs non‐dipper classification
From the results in Table 3, it can be seen that the percentage of patients whose classification did not change from that assigned after the first ABPM recording was never higher than 72%. All the kappa coefficients except one are below the 0.40 mark which indicates poor agreement. The reproducibility was slightly better for DBP than SBP.
TABLE 3.
Reproducibility of the dipper vs non‐dipper classification
| Dippers | SBP | DBP | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| n | % | Agreement (%) | Kappa | n | % | Agreement (%) | Kappa | |
| 1st recording | 103 | 48.1 | 138 | 64.5 | ||||
| 2nd recording | 77 | 41.6 | 65.9 | 0.31 | 116 | 62.7 | 68.2 | 0.31 |
| 3rd recording | 68 | 37.8 | 68.4 | 0.34 | 108 | 60 | 71.8 | 0.41 |
| 4th recording | 63 | 38.2 | 57.9 | 0.15 | 96 | 58.2 | 63.5 | 0.24 |
| Mean | 69 | 34 | 67.3 | 0.34 | 123 | 60.6 | 69.9 | 0.36 |
Abbreviations: DBP, Diastolic blood pressure; SBP, Systolic blood pressure.
Analyzing the reproducibility considering the extreme patterns, we found that 10%/23% of patients classified as risers (with a negative percentage fall, ie, BP being higher at night than in the day) after the first recording (n = 37 for SBP and 21 for DBP) were classified as dippers based on SBP/DBP considering the three subsequent recordings. Further, among patients classified as extreme dippers (percentage fall > 20%) at the first recording (n = 21/43), 14%/16% were subsequently classified as non‐dippers.
3.3. Reproducibility in subgroups
Analyzing the circadian pattern in different subgroups of the study population, we observed that the reproducibility of day to night change in BP was poorer in patients with diabetes (ICC: 0.434/0.343 SBP/DBP) and in those with obesity (body mass index > 30 kg/m2) (ICC: 0.324/0.339) and better in patients who had high daytime SBP at the first recording (>135 mmHg) (ICC: 0.562/0.604) as well as in over 70‐year‐olds (CCI: 0.581/0.518) (Appendix).
3.4. Sensitivity analysis
Using the IDACO criteria, ABPM data were considered valid in 224, 199, 199, and 187 cases at the time of the first, second, third, and fourth recordings, respectively. Using these data, we observed a modest improvement in the reproducibility of day to night change in BP (ICC: 0.512/0.483 SBP/DBP) and dipper classification (Appendix) respect to the results with the more restrictive criteria.
4. DISCUSSION
Since devices for ABPM have been available and it has been known that BP follows a circadian pattern with a nocturnal fall, numerous studies have been performed showing that the lack of such a dip (non‐dipper or riser patterns) is associated with a significantly higher risk of cardiovascular events. 25 , 26 , 27 , 28
For this reason, it is essential to know how reproducible this pattern is, but nonetheless, this question has been poorly studied. Specifically, the studies carried out to date have not reported more than two ABPM recordings. 18 , 29 , 30 , 31 In contrast, we report data from 225 patients who underwent ABPM on four occasions over a period of 5 months. During this study period, no changes in antihypertensive therapy or the time of its administration were allowed, this being closely monitored. All patients received treatment for hypertension and ASA 100 mg as an antiplatelet agent given their diagnosed high blood pressure and a history of cardiovascular events.
We believe, therefore, that this is the first study reporting four ABPM recordings for each individual in a homogeneous controlled group, this enabling us to study the reliability of the dipper pattern in this type of patient, not only by repeating the ABPM but by checking the classification over four ABPM recordings. We found that for both SBP and DBP the variation in nocturnal fall between different measurements in the same patient, which ideally would be very low, is about half that of the variation between measurements in different patients, indicating a low or at most modest reproducibility. These findings are confirmed on analyzing Pearson's correlation coefficients and reproducibility coefficients which were only higher than 0.5 and lower than 0.4 in a few cases. This yields concordance values very similar to those in the study of Ben‐DOV et al 32 who obtained Pearson's r of 0.52 for reproducibility of the SBP pattern.
Except in the case of comparing baseline DBP with that at 4 months (71.8%), the concordance in the classification of the dipper pattern between measurements is no higher than 70% and even considering those classified as extreme dippers or risers the pattern may change. Previous publications have reported figures for reproducibility that are similar to those found in our study or slightly lower. 29 , 31 , 33 Omboni et al observed a reproducibility of 60.3% considering SBP and 60.9% considering DBP. 18
Gorostidi et al 34 and at Booth et al study 35 noted that the non‐dipper pattern is more common and the reproducibility is slightly higher in high‐risk patients than in other groups. Given that the patients in the TAHPS study had high cardiovascular risk and 52% of them were non‐dippers, we expected to find better reproducibility than in the aforementioned studies. Nonetheless, the values we found are not much higher, though we did find better reproducibility in patients who had high daytime SBP (>135 mm Hg).
It has also been reported that the reproducibility of the non‐dipper pattern is better in patients with diabetes than in the other patients with hypertension, 28 but in our study, the reproducibility in patients with diabetes was actually lower than in the overall study population.
As a limitation of our study, we should recognize that it involves patients with hypertension and high cardiovascular risk, and hence, the findings cannot be extrapolated to other populations. On the other hand, it is precisely in this population that we are interested in reducing cardiovascular risk and optimizing treatments. Another limitation is that we opted for a fixed timetable for the sleep/wake period and did not take into account daytime naps. Nonetheless, research related to this issue has not detected differences in reproducibility related to the day/night pattern or approach to delimiting the sleep period. 36
5. CONCLUSIONS
This study, based on 225 patients each of whom underwent ABPM on four occasions, confirms the modest reproducibility of circadian BP patterns, and therefore, we should be cautious about initiating or modifying treatments based on these patterns, above all if ABPM is only performed once.
Nonetheless, there is evidence that the non‐dipper pattern is associated with a higher cardiovascular risk, and hence, there is a need for further research to develop methods allowing us to establish circadian BP patterns more reliably.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
We declare no competing interests.
AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS
Maria Victoria Ruiz Arzalluz and Gonzalo Grandes conceived the idea and are the study guarantors. They were responsible for the study design and planningand obtained funding. Natalia Burgos Alonso was responsible for project coordination and supervision, analysis, and interpretation of results, and manuscript preparation. Arturo Garcia Alvarez and Daniel Fernandez Fernandez de Quincoces were in charge of performing the analysis of results and critically reviewed the manuscript. All contributors have approved this version submitted for publication to Journal of Clinical Hypertension.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
TAHPS Group: Ernest Vinyoles, Maria Cruz Gomez Ruiz, Monika Salgueiro Macho, Rosa Morros Pedros, Helena Pera Pujadas, Anna Garcia Sangenis, Mª Jose Oyarbide Mondaluce, Mª Luz Rodríguez Ibáñez, Ricardo San Vicente Blanco, Mikel Luque Jiménez, Maria Jesus Arzuaga Arambarri, Nerea Alonsotegi Larrinaga, Marta Cobos Rozadilla, Arritxu Zialtzeta Aduriz, Amaia Aguirre Azpiazu, Maria Jose Garcia Gil, Remedios Vega Iñigo, Santiago Ayechu Redín, Oihana Ezkurra Galdos, Jose Francisco Egido Arroyo, Iosune Alberdi Buruaga, Mª Jesus Bernaras Iturrioz, Amaia Arruti Querejeta, Juan Carlos Marlasca García, Ana Teresa Martínez Rementería, Loreto Palacio Elua, Violeta Gonzalez Urcelay, Itziar Hernando Mendibil, Mª Carmen Gonzalez Temprano, Julián Bajo García, Jose Antonio Quindimil Vázquez, Jose Félix Zuazagoita Nubla, Mª Teresa Amondarain Arratibel, Mª Dolores Marin Vicuña, Idoia Larrañaga Cortabarria, Magdalena Cuesta Ortiz, Kizkitza Alustiza Arteaga, Maria Carmen AraneguiLasue, Ane Marin Lacarta, Amaia Telleria Astarloa, Maria Luisa Garcia Aramaio, Elena Lizaso Guerrico, Josune Madariaga Jurrebaso, Mercedes Armendáriz Múgica, Ana Roncero Gascón, Mª Soledad Romera Alegría, Ana OrmaetxeMerodio, Azucena Ruiz Meléndez, Maria Aranzazu Anza Asurmendi, Mª Teresa González Sanchoyerto, María Mercedes Dolores Ferreras Castrillo, Mencía Benitez Camps, Jordi Ingla Más, Xavier Cos Claramunt, Jose Manuel Escudero Ibánez, Antonio Negrete Palma, August Huertas Campistol Carolina Guiriguet Capdevila, Mª Rosa Benedicto Acebo, Eva Acerboni Flores, and Francisco Barrio Torrell.
APPENDIX 1.
Results using the IDACO criteria
TABLE 1.
Reproducibility of the day‐to‐night percentage change in BP in patients with diabetes
| Nocturnal fall in blood pressure (% of daytime value) | SBP | DBP | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | SD | ICC | Correlation | Repeatability | Mean | SD | ICC | Correlation | Repeatability | |
| 1st recording | 7.3 | 7.68 | 0.434 | 11.1 | 8.47 | 0.343 | ||||
| 2nd recording | 7.6 | 7.43 | 0.508 | 47.1 | 10.8 | 7.95 | 0.461 | 49.3 | ||
| 3rd recording | 6.22 | 9.34 | 0.604 | 45.1 | 11.6 | 8.78 | 0.534 | 49.1 | ||
| 4th recording | 5.51 | 8.92 | 0.337 | 58.3 | 11.2 | 9.09 | 0.193 | 63.7 | ||
| Mean | 6.11 | 7.4 | 0.629 | 43.4 | 10.9 | 6.9 | 0.488 | 50.3 | ||
Abbreviations: DBP, Diastolic blood pressure; ICC, Intraclass correlation coefficient; SBP, Systolic blood pressure; SD, Standard deviation.
TABLE 2.
Reproducibility of the dipper vs non‐dipper classification in patients with diabetes
| Dippers | SBP | DBP | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| n | % | Agreement (%) | Kappa | n | % | Agreement (%) | Kappa | |
| 1st recording | 32 | 41 | 34 | 52.3 | ||||
| 2nd recording | 29 | 43.9 | 66.1 | 0.3 | 35 | 53 | 69.2 | 0.38 |
| 3rd recording | 19 | 29.2 | 76.6 | 0.48 | 34 | 52.3 | 71.8 | 0.44 |
| 4th recording | 19 | 31.7 | 54.2 | 0.02 | 30 | 50 | 57.6 | 0.15 |
| Mean | 19 | 26.4 | 67.6 | 0.28 | 37 | 51.4 | 66.2 | 0.32 |
Abbreviations: DBP, Diastolic blood pressure; SBP, Systolic blood pressure.
TABLE 3.
Reproducibility of the day‐to‐night percentage change in BP in patients with obesity (BMI > 30)
| Nocturnal fall in blood pressure (% of daytime value) | SBP | DBP | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | Sd | ICC | Correlation | Repeatability | Mean | Sd | ICC | Correlation | Repeatability | |
| 1st recording | 7.77 | 7.28 | 0.324 | 10.71 | 8.95 | 0.339 | ||||
| 2nd recording | 6.68 | 8.31 | 0.383 | 55.1 | 9.34 | 10.4 | 0.414 | 54.5 | ||
| 3rd recording | 7.21 | 7.78 | 0.326 | 58.4 | 10.76 | 8.43 | 0.357 | 57.7 | ||
| 4th recording | 6.68 | 7.28 | 0.19 | 64.7 | 9.53 | 9.47 | 0.195 | 64.9 | ||
| Mean | 6.78 | 6.38 | 0.371 | 57.1 | 9.8 | 8.07 | 0.338 | 57.3 | ||
Abbreviations: BMI, body mass index; DBP, Diastolic blood pressure; ICC, Intraclass correlation coefficient; SBP, Systolic blood pressure; SD, Standard deviation.
TABLE 4.
Reproducibility of the dipper vs non‐dipper classification in patients with obesity (BMI > 30)
| Dippers | SBP | DBP | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| n | % | Agreement (%) | Kappa | n | % | Agreement (%) | Kappa | |
| 1st recording | 34 | 41.5 | 45 | 54.9 | ||||
| 2nd recording | 28 | 38.4 | 61.4 | 0.18 | 40 | 54.8 | 67.1 | 0.34 |
| 3rd recording | 19 | 27.1 | 68.7 | 0.29 | 37 | 52.9 | 68.7 | 0.37 |
| 4th recording | 18 | 28.6 | 53.3 | ‐0.045 | 30 | 47.6 | 45 | ‐0.1 |
| Mean | 19 | 24.1 | 65.8 | 0.25 | 41 | 51.9 | 63.2 | 0.26 |
Abbreviations: BMI, Body Mass Index; DBP: Diastolic Blood Pressure; SBP: Systolic Blood Pressure.
TABLE 5.
Reproducibility of the day‐to‐night percentage change in BP in patients with age > 70
| Nocturnal fall in blood pressure (% of daytime value) | SBP | DBP | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | Sd | ICC | Correlation | Repeatability | Mean | Sd | ICC | Correlation | Repeatability | |
| 1st recording | 7.76 | 9.72 | 0.581 | 12.48 | 9.98 | 0.518 | ||||
| 2nd recording | 7.12 | 9.63 | 0.58 | 44.6 | 12.75 | 10.15 | 0.473 | 50.7 | ||
| 3rd recording | 5.69 | 10.24 | 0.612 | 44.3 | 11.49 | 10.4 | 0.499 | 51 | ||
| 4th recording | 6.22 | 10.29 | 0.649 | 42.6 | 12.17 | 10.18 | 0.643 | 43.3 | ||
| Mean | 5.77 | 9.11 | 0.708 | 38 | 11.83 | 8.95 | 0.607 | 44.7 | ||
Abbreviations: DBP, Diastolic blood pressure; ICC, Intraclass correlation coefficient; SBP, Systolic blood pressure; SD, Standard deviation.
TABLE 6.
Reproducibility of the dipper vs non‐dipper classification in patients with age > 70
| Dippers | SBP | DBP | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| n | % | Agreement (%) | Kappa | n | % | Agreement (%) | Kappa | |
| 1st recording | 39 | 45.3 | 53 | 61.6 | ||||
| 2nd recording | 29 | 37.7 | 73 | 0.45 | 52 | 67.5 | 67.6 | 0.29 |
| 3rd recording | 19 | 26.4 | 71 | 0.38 | 36 | 50 | 69.6 | 0.39 |
| 4th recording | 24 | 36.9 | 64.5 | 0.28 | 38 | 58.5 | 77.4 | 0.53 |
| Mean | 29 | 33.7 | 74.7 | 0.48 | 48 | 55.8 | 69.9 | 0.38 |
Abbreviations: DBP, Diastolic blood pressure; SBP, Systolic blood pressure.
TABLE 7.
Reproducibility of the day‐to‐night percentage change in BP in patients with hypertension: SBP daytime > 135mmHG
| Nocturnal fall in blood pressure (% of daytime value) | SBP | DBP | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | Sd | ICC | Correlation | Repeatability | Mean | Sd | ICC | Correlation | Repeatability | |
| 1st recording | 11.1 | 9.27 | 0.562 | 14.58 | 11.35 | 0.604 | ||||
| 2nd recording | 7.98 | 9.12 | 0.631 | 40.8 | 12.1 | 11.66 | 0.682 | 39.1 | ||
| 3rd recording | 9.67 | 9.97 | 0.528 | 48.6 | 14.4 | 10.9 | 0.472 | 51.3 | ||
| 4th recording | 9.44 | 10.12 | 0.631 | 42.6 | 14.24 | 10.69 | 0.651 | 42.9 | ||
| Mean | 8.22 | 8.7 | 0.709 | 38 | 13 | 10.11 | 0.678 | 39.7 | ||
Abbreviations: DBP, Diastolic blood pressure; ICC, Intraclass correlation coefficient; SBP, Systolic blood pressure; SD, Standard deviation.
TABLE 8.
Reproducibility of the dipper vs non‐dipper classification in patients with hypertension: SBP > 135mm Hg
| Dippers | SBP | DBP | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| n | % | Agreement (%) | Kappa | n | % | Agreement (%) | Kappa | |
| 1st recording | 37 | 57.8 | 43 | 67.2 | ||||
| 2nd recording | 23 | 43.4 | 73.6 | 0.49 | 37 | 69.8 | 83 | 0.59 |
| 3rd recording | 22 | 40.7 | 61.1 | 0.25 | 36 | 66.7 | 70.4 | 0.31 |
| 4th recording | 21 | 47.7 | 61.4 | 0.24 | 28 | 63.6 | 77.3 | 0.48 |
| Mean | 21 | 35.6 | 69.5 | 0.42 | 38 | 64.4 | 74.6 | 0.43 |
Abbreviations: DBP, Diastolic blood pressure; SBP, Systolic blood pressure.
TABLE 9.
Reproducibility of the day‐to‐night percentage change in BP using the IDACO criteria
| Nocturnal fall in blood pressure (% of daytime value) | SBP | DBP | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | SD | ICC | Correlation | Repeatability | Mean | SD | ICC | Correlation | Repeatability | |
| 1st recording | 8.73 | 8.9 | 0.512 | 12.7 | 9.92 | 0.483 | ||||
| 2nd recording | 7.4 | 8.7 | 0.524 | 48.3 | 11.6 | 9.93 | 0.513 | 48.9 | ||
| 3rd recording | 8.1 | 9.2 | 0.503 | 49.8 | 12.9 | 9.57 | 0.486 | 50.7 | ||
| 4th recording | 7.23 | 9.82 | 0.453 | 52.3 | 12.1 | 9.88 | 0.433 | 53.4 | ||
| Mean | 7.44 | 7.96 | 0.562 | 46.8 | 12 | 8.33 | 0.536 | 48.3 | ||
Abbreviations: DBP, Diastolic blood pressure; ICC, Intraclass correlation coefficient; SBP, Systolic blood pressure; SD, Standard deviation.
TABLE 10.
Reproducibility of the dipper vs non‐dipper classification using the IDACO criteria
| Dippers | SBP | DBP | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| n | % | Agreement (%) | Kappa | n | % | Agreement (%) | Kappa | |
| 1st recording | 107 | 47.8 | 145 | 64.7 | ||||
| 2nd recording | 81 | 40.5 | 65.5 | 0.3 | 121 | 60.5 | 69 | 0.34 |
| 3rd recording | 75 | 37.7 | 68.8 | 0.37 | 121 | 60.8 | 72.4 | 0.41 |
| 4th recording | 72 | 38.3 | 61.2 | 0.21 | 111 | 59 | 67.6 | 0.31 |
| Mean | 68 | 33.3 | 66.7 | 0.32 | 123 | 60.3 | 71.1 | 0.38 |
Abbreviations: DBP, Diastolic blood pressure; SBP, Systolic blood pressure.
Burgos‐Alonso N, Ruiz Arzalluz MV, Garcia‐Alvarez A, Fernandez‐Fernandez de Quincoces D, Grandes G. Reproducibility study of nocturnal blood pressure dipping in patients with high cardiovascular risk. J Clin Hypertens. 2021;23:1041–1050. 10.1111/jch.14222
Funding information
A grant was received from the Department of Pharmacy of the Spanish Health Ministry.
DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT
The TAHPS study data are available only to the collaborating scientists from the respective TAHPS participating centers. The data may be available upon request for some of the participating centers but not for all due to relevant data protection laws.
REFERENCES
- 1. JCS Joint Working Group . Guidelines for the Clinical Use of 24 Hour Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring (ABPM) (JCS 2010). Circ J. 2012;76(2):508‐519. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2. Myers MG. Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring for routine clinical practice. Hypertension. 2005;45(4):483‐484. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3. Pickering TG, Shimbo D, Haas D. Ambulatory blood‐pressure monitoring. N Engl J Med. 2006;354(22):2368‐2374. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4. Mancia G, Di Rienzo M, Parati G, Grassi G. Sympathetic activity, blood pressure variability and end organ damage in hypertension. J Hum Hypertens. 1997;11(suppl 1):S3‐8. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5. Mancia G, Parati G. Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring and organ damage. Hypertension. 2000;36(5):894‐900. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6. Mancia G, Fagard R, Narkiewicz K, et al. 2013 ESH/ESC Guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension: the Task Force for the management of arterial hypertension of the European Society of Hypertension (ESH) and of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). J Hypertens. 2013;31(7):1281‐1357. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7. Fagard RH, Celis H, Thijs L, et al. Daytime and nighttime blood pressure as predictors of death and cause‐specific cardiovascular events in hypertension. Hypertension. 2008;51(1):55‐61. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8. Fagard RH, Thijs L, Staessen JA, Clement DL, De Buyzere ML, De Bacquer DA. Night‐day blood pressure ratio and dipping pattern as predictors of death and cardiovascular events in hypertension. J Hum Hypertens. 2009;23(10):645‐653. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9. Kikuya M, Ohkubo T, Asayama K, et al. Ambulatory blood pressure and 10‐year risk of cardiovascular and noncardiovascular mortality. Hypertension. 2005;45(2):240‐245. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10. Zhang J, Wen R, Yin J, et al. Nocturnal pulse rate correlated with ambulatory blood pressure and target organ damage in patients with chronic kidney disease. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich, Conn). 2019;21(1):77‐87. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11. Li S, Wang X, Zhao L, et al. The characteristics of 24‐hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring and its relationship with cardiovascular target organ damage in Chinese Han patients with concomitant type 2 diabetes and hypertension. Blood Press Monit. 2019;24(4):167‐173. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12. Bello NA, Jaeger BC, Booth JN 3rd, et al. Associations of awake and asleep blood pressure and blood pressure dipping with abnormalities of cardiac structure: the Coronary Artery Risk Development in Young Adults study. J Hypertens. 2020;38(1):102–110. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13. Gong S, Liu K, Ye R, Li J, Yang C, Chen X. Nocturnal dipping status and the association of morning blood pressure surge with subclinical target organ damage in untreated hypertensives. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich, Conn). 2019;21(9):1286‐1294. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14. Salles GF, Reboldi G, Fagard RH, et al. Prognostic Effect of the Nocturnal Blood Pressure Fall in Hypertensive Patients: The Ambulatory Blood Pressure Collaboration in Patients With Hypertension (ABC‐H) Meta‐Analysis. Hypertension. 2016;67(4):693‐700. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15. Hernandez‐del Rey R, Martin‐Baranera M, Sobrino J, et al. Reproducibility of the circadian blood pressure pattern in 24‐h versus 48‐h recordings: the Spanish Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring Registry. J Hypertens. 2007;25(12):2406‐2412. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16. Hinderliter AL, Routledge FS, Blumenthal JA, et al. Reproducibility of blood pressure dipping: relation to day‐to‐day variability in sleep quality. J Am Soc Hypertens. 2013;7(6):432‐439. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17. McGowan NJ, Gough K, Padfield PL. Nocturnal dipping is reproducible in the long term. Blood Press Monit. 2009;14(5):185‐189. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18. Omboni S, Parati G, Palatini P, et al. Reproducibility and clinical value of nocturnal hypotension: prospective evidence from the SAMPLE study. Study on Ambulatory Monitoring of Pressure and Lisinopril Evaluation. J Hypertens. 1998;16(6):733‐738. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19. Palatini P, Mormino P, Canali C, et al. Factors affecting ambulatory blood pressure reproducibility. Results of the HARVEST Trial. Hypertension and Ambulatory Recording Venetia Study. Hypertension. 1994;23(2):211‐216. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20. Morrin NM, Stone MR, Henderson KJ. Reproducibility of 24‐h ambulatory blood pressure and measures of autonomic function. Blood Press Monit. 2017;22(3):169‐172. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21. Ruiz‐Arzalluz MV, Fernandez MC, Burgos‐Alonso N, Vinyoles E, San Vicente Blanco R, Grandes G. Protocol for assessing the hypotensive effect of evening administration of acetylsalicylic acid: study protocol for a randomized, cross‐over controlled trial. Trials. 2013;14(1):236. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22. Thijs L, Hansen TW, Kikuya M, et al. The International Database of Ambulatory Blood Pressure in relation to Cardiovascular Outcome (IDACO): protocol and research perspectives. Blood Press Monit. 2007;12(4):255‐262. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet (London, England). 1986;1(8476):307‐310. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24. Staessen J, Bulpitt CJ, O'Brien E, et al. The diurnal blood pressure profile. A population study. Am J Hypertens. 1992;5(6 Pt 1):386‐392. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25. Schillaci G, Battista F, Settimi L, Schillaci L, Pucci G. Antihypertensive drug treatment and circadian blood pressure rhythm: a review of the role of chronotherapy in hypertension. Curr Pharmaceutical Design. 2015;21(6):756‐772. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26. Sousa F, Neves J, Ferreira R, Polonia J, Bastos JM. 1B.05: in hypertension the change from a non‐dipper to a dipper pattern is associated with a better cardiovascular prognosis than the persistence within the non‐dipper pattern. J Hypertens. 2015;33(Suppl 1):e6. [Google Scholar]
- 27. Mahabala C, Kamath P, Bhaskaran U, Pai ND, Pai AU. Antihypertensive therapy: nocturnal dippers and nondippers. Do we treat them differently? Vasc Health Risk Manag. 2013;9:125‐133. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28. Ayala DE, Moya A, Crespo JJ, et al. Circadian pattern of ambulatory blood pressure in hypertensive patients with and without type 2 diabetes. Chronobiol Int. 2013;30(1–2):99‐115. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29. Ash GI, Walker TJ, Olson KM, et al. Reproducibility of ambulatory blood pressure changes from the initial values on two different days. Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil). 2013;68(12):1509‐1515. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30. Cuspidi C, Meani S, Valerio C, et al. Reproducibility of dipping/nondipping pattern in untreated essential hypertensive patients: impact of sex and age. Blood Press Monit. 2007;12(2):101‐106. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31. Bo Y, Kwok KO, Chung VC, et al. Short‐term reproducibility of ambulatory blood pressure measurements: a systematic review and meta‐analysis of 35 observational studies. J Hypertens. 2020;38(11):2095‐2109. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32. Ben‐Dov IZ, Ben‐Arieh L, Mekler J, Bursztyn M. Blood pressure dipping is reproducible in clinical practice. Blood Press Monit. 2005;10(2):79‐84. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33. Felicio JS, Pacheco JT, Ferreira SR, et al. Reproducibility of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Arquivos Bras Cardiol. 2007;88(2):206‐211. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34. Gorostidi M, Sobrino J, Segura J, et al. Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in hypertensive patients with high cardiovascular risk: a cross‐sectional analysis of a 20,000‐patient database in Spain. J Hypertens. 2007;25(5):977‐984. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35. Booth JN 3rd, Muntner P, Abdalla M, et al. Differences in night‐time and daytime ambulatory blood pressure when diurnal periods are defined by self‐report, fixed‐times, and actigraphy: Improving the Detection of Hypertension study. J Hypertens. 2016;34(2):235‐243. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36. Dimsdale JE, von Kanel R, Profant J, Nelesen R, Ancoli‐Israel S, Ziegler M. Reliability of nocturnal blood pressure dipping. Blood Press Monit. 2000;5(4):217‐221. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Data Availability Statement
The TAHPS study data are available only to the collaborating scientists from the respective TAHPS participating centers. The data may be available upon request for some of the participating centers but not for all due to relevant data protection laws.