This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on ISI (2)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related article  • Similar articles in this journal  Topic Collections  • Evidence-Based Medicine  • Hypertension  • Alert me on articles by topic

Arch Intern Med. 1998;158:425.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

THE SIXTH REPORT of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation and Treatment of High Blood Pressure has encouraged the use of patients' self-recording of blood pressure (BP).¹ It is noted that measurement of BP outside the clinician's office may provide valuable information for the initial assessment of patients with hypertension and for monitoring the response to therapy. Unfortunately, there is no universal agreement on upper limits of normal for self-recorded home BP readings, despite the increasing use of many available and relatively inexpensive devices.

In this issue of the ARCHIVES, Thijs and colleagues² present a meta-analysis of summary data for self-recorded BPs. The use of out-of-office recordings of BP has grown despite a relative absence of standards for normalcy and thresholds for treatment. The authors have applied rigid criteria in an effort to identify a total of 18 publications meeting their inclusion criteria. The scarcity of available information . . . [Full Text of this Article]

RELATED ARTICLE

Reference Values for Self-recorded Blood Pressure: A Meta-analysis of Summary Data
Lutgarde Thijs, Jan A. Staessen, Hilde Celis, Régis de Gaudemaris, Yutsuka Imai, Stevo Julius, and Robert Fagard
Arch Intern Med. 1998;158(5):481-488.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT