Gender differences in office and ambulatory control of hypertension.

BACKGROUND: Gender differences in hypertension control have not been explored fully. METHODS: We studied 15,212 white men and 13,936 white women with treated hypertension who were drawn from the Spanish Ambulatory Blood Pressure Registry. For each participant, we obtained office blood pressure (BP) (average of 2 readings) and 24-hour ambulatory BP (average of measurements performed every 20 minutes during day and night). RESULTS: Only 16.4% of women and 14.7% of men had both office (<140/90 mm Hg) and ambulatory (<130/80 mm Hg) BP controlled (P<.001). Women had a lower frequency of masked hypertension (office BP<140/90 mm Hg and ambulatory BP> or =130/80 mm Hg) than men (5.9% vs 7.9%, P<.001). Women had a higher frequency of isolated office hypertension (office BP> or =140/90 mm Hg and ambulatory BP<130/80 mm Hg) (32.5% vs 24.2%, P<.001). Although office BP control (office BP<140/90 mm Hg, regardless of ambulatory values) was similar in women and men (22.3% vs 22.6%, P=.542), ambulatory BP control (ambulatory BP<130/80 mm Hg, regardless of office values) was higher in women than in men (48.9% vs 38.9%, P<.001). After adjustment for age, number of antihypertensive drugs, hypertension duration, and risk factors, gender differences in BP control remained practically unchanged. CONCLUSION: Ambulatory BP control was higher in women than in men. This may be due to the higher frequency of isolated office hypertension in women, and it is not explained by gender differences in other important clinical characteristics.

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.