Normal Infrarenal Aortic Diameter in Men and Women in a Mediterranean Area.

BACKGROUND: Infrarenal aortic diameter (AD) values currently considered normal are based on measurements from epidemiologic studies performed over 20 years ago. Knowledge of expected normal AD is important for understanding the relevance of abdominal aortic dilatation. The aim of this study was to define contemporary reference values for normal infrarenal AD and build a predictive model based on individual features. METHODS: A cross-sectional study of participants in a population-based screening program for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) was performed in a healthcare district with 400,000 inhabitants. Men and women aged 65 years were invited to participate. Cardiovascular (CV) risk factors, family history of AAA, personal history of other aneurysms, CV disease, and anthropometric parameters were evaluated. The largest anteroposterior inner-inner diameter of the infrarenal aorta was measured by ultrasound. Multiple linear regressions were used to determine independent predictors of AD. The best-fit model was obtained by randomly selecting 70% of the sample and validating the results in the remaining 30%. RESULTS: A total of 4,730 people (2,089 men and 2,641 women) were invited. The participation rate was 50.4% for men and 44.0% for women. Mean AD (standard deviation, SD) was 16.51 (3.2) mm in the overall group, 17.91 (3.51) mm in men, and 15.25 (2.32) mm in women (P < 0.001). Male sex (P < 0.001), body surface area (P < 0.001), smoking habit (P = 0.012), and history of arterial aneurysms (P = 0.013) were independently associated with increased AD. Dyslipidemia was associated with decreased AD (P < 0.001). The findings were used to build a model for predicting AD based on individual characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: ADs in our study population are smaller than those described in classic epidemiological studies. Men have a significantly larger diameter than women and the strongest predictor of increased AD is body surface area. A greater understanding of factors associated with AD will help predict expected sizes in individual members of the population.

Clinical profile and management of rivaroxaban in patients with atrial fibrillation in routine practice in Spain: data from six nationwide studies.

AIMS: To analyze the clinical profile and management of patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation taking rivaroxaban in routine practice in Spain. METHODS: Clinical data from the observational studies HEROIC (cardiology and hematology; n=1,727), EMIR (cardiology; n=1,493), BRONCE-AP (primary care; n=133), SILVER-AP (primary care; n=457), ALADIN (internal medicine and neurology; n=249), and ESPARTA (internal medicine; n=110) of patients taking rivaroxaban were analyzed. The clinical profile was compared with those of the XANTUS and ROCKET-AF studies. RESULTS: Overall, mean age was 74.9±9.4 years, CHA2DS2-VASc score was 3.7±1.5, and 43.2% had a HAS-BLED score ≥3. Patients included in the HEROIC and EMIR studies were older and more frequently had a creatinine clearance <50 mL/min and a higher thromboembolic risk than those in the XANTUS study, and patients included in the ALADIN study were older and had more prior cerebrovascular disease, but a lower thromboembolic risk than those in the ROCKET-AF trial. In those studies with available data, medication adherence and satisfaction with rivaroxaban were high. CONCLUSION: Bearing in mind differences according to the clinical setting of each study, atrial fibrillation patients taking rivaroxaban in Spain were elderly and had a high thromboembolic risk. Medication adherence and satisfaction with rivaroxaban were high.

[Clinical characteristics of patients with atrial fibrillation treated with direct oral anticoagulants attended in primary care setting. The SILVER-AP study]. / Perfil clínico de pacientes con fibrilación auricular tratados con anticoagulantes orales de acción directa atendidos en atención primaria. Estudio SILVER-AP.

OBJECTIVE: To analyse the clinical characteristics and management of patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) treated with direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC). DESIGN: Observational, cross-sectional and multicentre study. LOCATION: Autonomous Communities in which the general practitioner can prescribe DOAC (n=9). PARTICIPANTS: The study included a total of 790 patients on chronic treatment with anticoagulants, and on whom therapy was changed, as well as being currently on treatment with DOAC for at least for 3 months. MAIN MEASURES: A record was made of the sociodemographic and clinical management date. RESULTS: Mean age was 78.6±8.4 years, and 50.5% of patients were men. Mean CHADS2 score was 2.6±1.2, mean CHA2DS2-VASc score was 4.3±1.6, and the mean HAS-BLED score was 2.3±1.0. Mean duration of treatment with DOAC was 15.8±12.5 months. Rivaroxaban was the DOAC most frequently prescribed (57.8%), followed by dabigatran (23.7%), and apixaban (18.5%). Of the patients receiving rivaroxaban, 70.2% were taking the dose of 20mg/daily. Of the patients receiving dabigatran, 41.7% were taking the dose of 150mg twice daily, and in the case of apixaban, 56.2% were taking the dose of 5mg twice daily. Satisfaction (ACTS Burdens scale 52.0±7.2 and ACTS Benefits scale 12.1±2.2), and therapeutic adherence (97.8% of patients took their medication regularly) with DOAC were high. CONCLUSIONS: Patients treated with DOAC in Spain have a high thromboembolic risk. A significant proportion of patients receive a lower dose of DOAC than that recommended according to their clinical profile. Satisfaction and medication adherence are high.

Professionals' perception of circuits of care for hypertensive or diabetic patients between primary and secondary care.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the flow of care for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and hypertension between primary care (PC) and specialized care (SC) in clinical practice, and the criteria used for referral and follow-up within the Spanish National Health System (NHS). DESIGN: A descriptive, cross-sectional, multicenter study. PLACEMENT: A probability convenience sampling stratified by number of physicians participating in each Spanish autonomous community was performed. Nine hundred and ninety-nine physicians were surveyed, of whom 78.1% (n=780) were primary care physicians (PCPs), while 11.9% (n=119) and 10.0% (n=100) respectively were specialists in hypertension and diabetes. KEY MEASUREMENTS: was conducted using two self administered online surveys. RESULTS: A majority of PCPs (63.7% and 55.5%) and specialists (79.8% and 45.0%) reported the lack of a protocol to coordinate the primary and specialized settings for both hypertension and T2DM respectively. The most widely used method for communication between specialists was the referral sheet (94.6% in PC and 92.4% in SC). The main reasons for referral to a specialist were refractory hypertension (80.9%) and suspected secondary hypertension (75.6%) in hypertensive patients, and suspicion of a specific diabetes (71.9%) and pregnancy (71.7%) in T2DM patients. CONCLUSIONS: Although results showed some common characteristics between PCPs and specialists in disease management procedures, the main finding was a poor coordination between PC and SC.

Prognostic value of non-specific ST-T changes and left ventricular hypertrophy electrocardiographic criteria in hypertensive patients: 16-year follow-up results from the MINACOR cohort.

BACKGROUND: Non-specific electrocardiographic ST-T wave changes and voltage criteria for left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) have been associated with cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. The aim of the cohort study was to evaluate the prognostic value of non-specific ST-T changes and LVH electrocardiographic criteria on cardiovascular events and mortality in hypertensive patients. METHODS: A cohort study of 352 non-diabetic hypertensive patients, without associated cardiovascular disease, randomly selected from 1,780 hypertensive patients attended in a primary care center. An electrocardiogram was performed at the baseline visit (classified according to the Minnesota Code). Cardiovascular events and death from any cause during the follow-up period were evaluated. A multivariate analysis adjusted for gender, age and cardiovascular risk factors was performed. RESULTS: Data of 273 patients were analyzed: 58.2% women, age 44.1 (7.9) years, 27.8% smokers, blood pressure at baseline 142.7 (15.3)/89.3 (9.6) mmHg. During the 197.5 (59.24) month follow-up, 62 patients (22.7%) had a cardiovascular event. On multivariate analysis, age, systolic blood pressure, incidence of diabetes, smoking and electrocardiographic LVH criteria (HR 2.66 [CI 95% 1.39 - 5.10]), were significantly associated with cardiovascular events, but the presence of non-specific ST-T abnormalities (HR 0.97 [CI 95% 0.49 -1.90]) was not significantly associated with cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Hypertensive patients with LVH electrocardiographic criteria have significantly higher cardiovascular mortality and morbidity, but non-specific electrocardiographic ST-T changes are not associated with cardiovascular morbidity and mortality.

Variability and concordance of Cornell and Sokolow-Lyon electrocardiographic criteria in hypertensive patients.

AIM: To assess the variability and concordance of left ventricular hypertrophy electrocardiographic (LVH-ECG) criteria. METHODS AND RESULTS: Convenience sampling of hypertensive subjects without coronary disease or bundle branch blocks. Two electrocardiograms (ECGs) were performed on each patient. Two investigators carried out two blind-readings of each ECG (Cornell and Sokolow-Lyon criteria). The between-rater and within-rater reliability were assessed (intraclass correlation coefficient, ICC). Poor concordance was defined: mean voltage difference between both ECGs >2 mm; 824 ECG readings were performed in 103 subjects (58.3% females), aged 66.8±8.8 years, mean blood pressure 141±15.10/78±9.0 mmHg. The between-rater ICCs of the baseline ECG were 0.97(95% CI 0.96-0.98) and 0.98 (95% CI 0.97-0.99) for Cornell and Sokolow-Lyon criteria, respectively. Poor concordance was found in 39.8% and in 41.7% of the cases for Cornell and Sokolow-Lyon criteria, respectively. Systolic blood pressure was found to be significant and positively associated with both criteria. Elderly hypertensive subjects, with higher ECG voltages and lower pulse pressure presented poor concordance of Cornell criteria. CONCLUSIONS: The between-rater and within-rater reliability of Cornell and Sokolow-Lyon criteria is minimal. Approximately 40% of hypertensive subjects presented poor concordance in a second ECG. Older patients with lower pulse pressure and higher baseline voltages presented poorer reproducibility of LVH-ECG criteria.

[Suitability and performance of echocardiogram in primary care]. / Adecuación y rendimiento del ecocardiograma en atención primaria.

OBJECTIVE: The echocardiogram (ECC) is not available to all Spanish General Practitioners (GP) despite its proven benefits in prevalent diseases, such as hypertension and heart failure. STUDY OBJECTIVE: To analyse the clinical adequacy of the application, performance, and diagnostic and therapeutic decisions of ECC indicated by the GP. DESIGN: Descriptive, cross-sectional, retrospective, multicentre study. SETTING: Primary care. Four health centres (HC). PARTICIPANTS: A total of 684 patients over 18 years who had an ECC performed in 2006-2007. MAIN MEASUREMENTS: A review of medical records and the ECC report. The socio-demographic variables, clinical and diagnostic performance were also evaluated. RESULTS: The majority of patients (62.3%) were ≥ 65 years, of which 61.8% were female The most frequent reasons for performing ECC were (but not limited to): heart failure: 30%, suspected valvular disease: 26%; suspected cardiomyopathy: 24.3%. Adequacy of the ECC: 84% (95% CI: 81.09-86.7%) with differences by age (p=.02), HC teaching (p<.001), comorbidity (p<.001) and abnormal ECC (p<.001). A disease was found in 80% of ECC, with differences according to age (p<.001), comorbidity (p=0.02), cardiovascular risk factors (p<.001) and degree of appropriateness of ECC (p=.001). The most common findings (but not limited to) included: valvular heart disease (61.6%) left ventricular hypertrophy (43%) diastolic dysfunction (28.2%). The results of the ECC helped make decisions in 35.2%, with 17.1% referred to cardiology, 10.5% treatment change and 9.6% other tests. CONCLUSIONS: We found that the application of ECC was highly appropriate. The results of ECC drive clinical decisions in a high percentage of cases. The ECC should be accessible to all GP.

Patients with atrial fibrillation in a primary care setting: Val-FAAP study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the clinical characteristics of patients with atrial fibrillation in the primary care setting. METHODS: This was a 2-phase, cross-sectional, multicenter study: phase A assessed the proportion of atrial fibrillation patients assisted in primary care over 5 days; phase B analyzed atrial fibrillation patients' clinical characteristics and management. RESULTS: In phase A, 119 526 subjects (age 52.9 [15.2] years; 40.9% male) received primary care in participating centers; 6.1% had atrial fibrillation. This proportion increased with age, hypertension, and male sex. In phase B, we analyzed 3287 atrial fibrillation patients (age 71.9 [10.1] years; 52.3% male). Risk factors were hypertension (92.6%), hypercholesterolemia (70.6%), related cardiovascular disease, heart failure (21.3%), and ischemic heart disease (20.9%). Permanent atrial fibrillation was the most frequent type of atrial fibrillation (45.3%). Age and cardiac and renal diseases were related to permanent atrial fibrillation development. Although more than two-thirds of patients had a CHADS(2) score ≥2, about one-third of them were not taking anticoagulants; by contrast, 46.8% of patients with CHADS(2)=0 were taking oral anticoagulants. CONCLUSIONS: In primary care, 6.1% of patients had atrial fibrillation. Patients with atrial fibrillation had high comorbidity. Anticoagulant treatment is far from optimal for atrial fibrillation patients in primary care.

Physician perception of blood pressure control and treatment behavior in high-risk hypertensive patients: a cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVE: We examined physician perception of blood pressure control and treatment behavior in patients with previous cardiovascular disease and uncontrolled hypertension as defined by European Guidelines. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted in which 321 primary care physicians throughout Spain consecutively studied 1,614 patients aged ≥18 years who had been diagnosed and treated for hypertension (blood pressure ≥140/90 mmHg), and had suffered a documented cardiovascular event. The mean value of three blood pressure measurements taken using standardized procedures was used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: Mean blood pressure was 143.4/84.9 mmHg, and only 11.6% of these cardiovascular patients were controlled according to 2007 European Guidelines for Hypertension Management target of <130/80 mmHg. In 702 (49.2%) of the 1426 uncontrolled patients, antihypertensive medication was not changed, and in 480 (68.4%) of these cases this was due to the physicians judgment that blood pressure was adequately controlled. In 320 (66.7%) of the latter patients, blood pressure was 130-139/80-89 mmHg. Blood pressure level was the main factor associated (inversely) with no change in treatment due to physician perception of adequate control, irrespective of sociodemographic and clinical factors. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians do not change antihypertensive treatment in many uncontrolled cardiovascular patients because they considered it unnecessary, especially when the BP values are only slightly above the guideline target. It is possible that the guidelines may be correct, but there is also the possibility that the care by the physicians is appropriate since BP <130/80 mmHg is hard to achieve, and recent reviews suggest there is insufficient evidence to support such a low BP target.

Multicenter cluster-randomized trial of a multifactorial intervention to improve antihypertensive medication adherence and blood pressure control among patients at high cardiovascular risk (the COM99 study).

BACKGROUND: Medication nonadherence is common and results in preventable disease complications. This study assessed the effectiveness of a multifactorial intervention to improve both medication adherence and blood pressure control and to reduce cardiovascular events. METHODS AND RESULTS: In this multicenter, cluster-randomized trial, physicians from hospital-based hypertension clinics and primary care centers across Spain were randomized to receive and provide the intervention to their high-risk patients. Eligible patients were ≥ 50 years of age, had uncontrolled hypertension, and had an estimated 10-year cardiovascular risk greater than 30%. Physicians randomized to the intervention group counted patients' pills, designated a family member to support adherence behavior, and provided educational information to patients. The primary outcome was blood pressure control at 6 months. Secondary outcomes included both medication adherence and a composite end point of all-cause mortality and cardiovascular-related hospitalizations. Seventy-nine physicians and 877 patients participated in the trial. The mean duration of follow-up was 39 months. Intervention patients were less likely to have an uncontrolled systolic blood pressure (odds ratio 0.62, 95% confidence interval 0.50 to 0.78) and were more likely to be adherent (odds ratio 1.91, 95% confidence interval 1.19 to 3.05) than control group patients at 6 months. After 5 years, 16% of the patients in the intervention group and 19% in the control group met the composite end point (hazard ratio 0.97, 95% confidence interval 0.67 to 1.39). CONCLUSIONS: A multifactorial intervention to improve adherence to antihypertensive medication was effective in improving both adherence and blood pressure control, but it did not appear to improve long-term cardiovascular events.

Cognitive function and blood pressure control in hypertensive patients over 60 years of age: COGNIPRES study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The aim of the COGNIPRES study was to analyze the prevalence of cognitive impairment in hypertensive individuals over 60 years of age, treated in primary care centres in the context of routine clinical practice. Degree of blood pressure control and treatment compliance, as well as other possible factors that influence cognitive function, were also evaluated. METHODS: An epidemiological, multicentre cross-sectional study was made. Demographic, clinical, therapeutic and blood pressure data for the first three hypertensive patients aged over 60 years seen in the primary care centre, and for the first patient visited at home by the physician were recorded. The study was carried out by 477 physicians in 333 primary care centres throughout Spain. Cognitive impairment was assessed using the Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE), and therapeutic compliance was assessed using the Haynes-Sacket and Morisky-Green tests. RESULTS: Of 1579 patients included in the study, 12.3% (95%CI 10.7-14.0) (n=195) had cognitive impairment. This was significantly associated with patients over 80 years of age (OR 4.97; 95%CI 2.98-8.29), exclusive home care (OR 1.84; 95%CI 1.19-2.83), anxiety (OR 1.84; 95%CI 1.19-2.83), stroke or transient ischemic attack (OR 4.37; 95%CI 2.81-6.78), Parkinson's disease (OR 8.15; 95%CI 2.54-26.12), essential tremor (OR 2.25; 95%CI 1.34-3.79), uncontrolled blood pressure (OR 0.60; 95%CI 0.39-0.94) and poor treatment compliance (OR 0.53; 95%CI 0.37-0.75). Overall, 28.3% of the patients showed controlled blood pressure, and 33.6% showed poor adherence to antihypertensive treatment. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, the prevalence of cognitive impairment in hypertensive patients aged over 60 years was 12.3%. Less than a third of the patients had good blood pressure control. Compliance with therapy and good control of blood pressure are associated with better MMSE scores.

[Prediction of glucose and insulin resistance disorders by using anthropometric parameters of central adiposity: PRED-IR study]. / Predicción de la glucemia basal alterada y resistencia a la insulina mediante el uso de medidas antropométricas de adiposidad central: estudio PRED-IR.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: To assess the predictive value of some anthropometric parameters of central adiposity for the diagnosis of hyperglycemia and insulin resistance (IR) in the Spanish population. PATIENTS AND METHOD: Multicenter, cross-sectional study carried out in patients visited in primary care and in specialist clinics, of both sexes, between 18 and 79 years of age. IR was estimated in a subsample of patients by the Homeostasis Model Assessment (HOMA-IR). Patients with diagnosis of diabetes were excluded from the study. RESULTS: A total of 3,638 patients were evaluated, 690 out of these participated in the IR substudy. Waist circumference (WC) was the parameter with a better correlation with hyperglycemia and with IR (r = 0.29 and 0.38; p < 0.001). Each increase of 15 cm in the WC was associated with an increase of the risk hyperglycemia and IR (65% and 123%, respectively). The cut-off points that better discriminated men and women, with and without IR, were 105 and 91 cm, with a sensitivity of 62% (95% confidence interval [CI], 46-77%) and 71% (95% CI, 54-85%), and a specificity of 72% (95% CI, 66-78%) and 68 (95% CI, 63-73%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: WC is a useful anthropometric measure for the detection of hyperglycemia and IR, and the optimal cut-off points for the Spanish population from which IR could be detected are 105 cm for men and 91 for women.

Tolerability of high doses of lercanidipine versus high doses of other dihydropyridines in daily clinical practice: the TOLERANCE Study.

The TOLERANCE study was aimed to compare the tolerability of high doses of lercanidipine (20 mg) with that of other frequently used dihydropyridines (amlodipine 10 mg/nifedipine GITS 60 mg) in the treatment of essential hypertension in daily clinical practice. It was an observational, transversal, multicentre study performed in a Primary Care Setting. A total of 650 evaluable patients with essential hypertension and age > or = 18 years were included. They had been treated with high doses of lercanidipine (n= 446) or amlodipine/nifedipine GITS (n= 204) during at least 1 month and previously with low doses (10 mg, 5 mg, and 30 mg, respectively) of the same drugs. The main objective was to compare the rates of vasodilation-related adverse events between both groups. Rates of signs and symptoms related to vasodilation were significantly higher (P < 0.001) in the amlodipine/nifedipine GITS group (76.8%, CI 95%[70.7; 82.9]) than in lercanidipine group (60.8%, [56.1;65.5]). Blood pressure control (< 140/90 mmHg or <130/80 for diabetics) and type of concomitant antihypertensive medications were similar in both groups. Treatment compliance was good (around 93%) and fairly comparable in both groups. Most adverse events with lercanidipine were mild (74.5% vs. 64% in amlodipine/nifedipine GITS group, P= 0.035) whereas severe adverse event rates did not differ significantly between groups (2.8% vs. 3.6%). In conclusion, treatment with lercanidipine at high doses is associated with a lower rate of adverse events related to vasodilation compared to high doses of amlodipine or nifedipine GITS in clinical practice.

Clinical characteristics of isolated clinic hypertension.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the clinical characteristics of patients with isolated clinic hypertension (ICH) compared with other hypertensive patients, and to evaluate the capacity of physicians to predict a diagnosis of ICH. METHODS: A cross-sectional, comparative multicenter descriptive study was made of 6176 hypertensive individuals without pharmacological treatment, subjected to ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM). In 2611 cases, ABPM was prescribed due to suspected ICH. The participants were consecutively selected in primary care centers and hospital hypertension units in all Spanish Autonomous Communities. ICH was defined by clinical blood pressure (BP) >or= 140 mmHg (systolic) or >or= 90 mmHg (diastolic), with diurnal ambulatory BP < 135 and < 85 mmHg (ICH1) or BP < 130 and < 80 mmHg (ICH2) or 24-h BP < 125 and < 80 mmHg (ICH3). RESULTS: ICH1, ICH2 and ICH3 criteria were met by 1807 (29.2%), 960 (15.5%) or 1133 (18.3%) subjects, respectively. Total sample mean age (SD) was 51.8 (14.1) years, and clinical BP 145.7 +/- 17.3/89.3 +/- 11.3 mmHg. Compared with the rest of the hypertensive individuals, the patients with ICH were predominantly female, of older age, with fewer smokers, and increased frequency of obesity. Moreover, they were more frequently nondippers, and with greater systolic BP in the office (P < 0.05), except when we used ICH3 criteria. The sensitivity and specificity of the physician predictions in relation to suspected ICH1, ICH2 and ICH3 were 48.7 and 60.4%, 52.9 and 59.7%, and 52.3 and 60.0%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of ICH is between 15 and 29%, depending on the defining criterion used. The 24-h ICH criteria are not affected by awake/sleep biases, and should be preferred. Clinical capacity for predicting ICH is low.

[Stratification and degree of control of cardiovascular risk factors in hypertensive Spanish population. Results of the DICOPRESS study]. / Estratificación y grado de control del riesgo cardiovascular en la población hipertensa española. Resultados del estudio DICOPRESS.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Hypertension, together with other contributing risk factors, is a major risk for cardiovascular disease. The aim of this study was to assess the cardiovascular risk in the Spanish hypertensive population according to the 2003 European Society of Hypertension-European Society of Cardiology (ESH/ESC) guidelines criteria and to determine the control rate of the main cardiovascular risk factors (CVRF). PATIENTS AND METHOD: Observational and transversal study including 22,639 patients with essential hypertension, who have been admitted to primary care units and hypertension units in Spain. RESULTS: Dyslipemia (52.1%), diabetes (36.6%) and smoking (22.3%) were the most prevalent CVRF. Cardiovascular risk stratification according to the ESH/ESC guidelines showed that more than 70% patients were considered at high added risk (36.9%) or at very high added risk (35.8%), whereas only 7.6% were classified in the low-risk stratum. Blood pressure was the worst controlled risk factor among hypertensive patients (80.6%). Total cholesterol was also poorly controlled in a high percentage of the analyzed population (66.4%). Diabetes was the best predictor of uncontrolled blood pressure with an odds ratio of 5.25 (99% confidence interval, 4.57-6.06). CONCLUSIONS: Coexistence of several cardiovascular risk factors, as well as the presence of target organ damage and associated cardiovascular conditions in the Spanish hypertensive population, increase the vascular risk, complicate the control in the hypertensive population and show the convenience of using ESH/ESC 2003 guidelines to estimate the cardiovascular risk.

[Measuring blood pressure in the forearm of obese patients: concordance with arm measurement]. / Concordancia de la determinación de la presión arterial en el brazo y en el antebrazo de pacientes obesos.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The occasional forearm blood pressure (BP) measurement has been accepted for some obese patients. However, few studies have compared the concordance between arm and forearm BP measurements. Our aim was to know whether the forearm BP measurement displays a good concordance with the arm BP measurement in obese patients. SUBJECTS AND METHOD: Cross-sectional descriptive study in an ambulatory setting. By means of convenience sampling, a sample of 54 patients with a body mass index > 26 kg/m2 was selected. The study unit was the upper limb (n = 108). BP was measured 3 times in each arm and forearm (12 measurements in each patient using an automated validated device OMRON 705CP) in a randomized order. RESULTS: Women: 77.8%; mean (SD) aged: 60.2 (12.7) years; body mass index: 38.6 (5.5) kg/m2; 79.6% were hypertensive. BP was higher in forearm than in arm: mean (SD) 137.7 (16.9) mmHg versus 132.1 (18) mmHg, for systolic (S) BP (p < 0.001) and 79.8 (11.2) mmHg versus 78.3 (9.9) mmHg for diastolic (D) BP (p = 0.04), respectively. Intraclass correlation coefficients for arm/forearm measurements were 0.83 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.77-0.88) and 0.74 (95% CI, 0.65-0.82) for SBP and DBP, respectively. Mean differences between arm and forearm measurements were 5.5 mmHg (95% CI, -14.5 to 25.5) mmHg for SBP and 1.53 mmHg [95% CI, -13.5 to 16.5] for DBP. CONCLUSIONS: BP differences between arm/forearm measurements are clinically outstanding. Therefore, forearm BP measurement does not seem advisable in obese patients.