You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 161 No. 22, December 10, 2001 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  Editorial
 This Article
 •Full text
 •PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Citing articles on Web of Science (8)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Related article
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Topic Collections
 •Hypertension
 •Alert me on articles by topic
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

White-Coat Hypertension—To Treat or Not to Treat

A Clinical Dilemma

Arch Intern Med. 2001;161:2655-2656.

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

IN THIS ISSUE OF THE ARCHIVES, Grandi et al1 describe changes in left ventricular (LV) function and size in isolated office hypertensives compared with matched groups of normotensives and sustained hypertensives. Patients with in-office blood pressures (BPs) greater than 140/90 mm Hg but daytime ambulatory BPs less than 130/80 mm Hg were compared with normotensive individuals (in-office systolic BP <135 and/or diastolic <85 mm Hg and daytime ambulatory BP <130/80 mm Hg) and sustained or persistent hypertensives (in-clinic and daytime ambulatory systolic BP >140 and/or diastolic >90 mm Hg). Their findings are of more than academic interest.

Whether isolated office or clinic hypertension is of clinical importance and should be treated poses a dilemma—"to treat or not to treat." In the past 10 years, numerous studies have addressed this problem. Some studies have suggested that casual office BP elevations with normal at-home or ambulatory BPs do not pose an important . . . [Full Text of this Article]

EVIDENCE FOR USING CASUAL BPs FOR MONITORING TREATMENT DECISIONS


WHICH BPs SHOULD BE USED TO GUIDE TREATMENT DECISIONS?


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?

RELATED ARTICLE

Left Ventricular Changes in Isolated Office Hypertension: A Blood Pressure–Matched Comparison With Normotension and Sustained Hypertension
Anna M. Grandi, Roberta Broggi, Sara Colombo, Rosa Santillo, Daniela Imperiale, Andrea Bertolini, Luigina Guasti, and Achille Venco
Arch Intern Med. 2001;161(22):2677-2681.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  


THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Systolic Hypertension in Older Persons
Chaudhry et al.
JAMA 2004;292:1074-1080.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Isolated Office Hypertension: Ambulatory BP Monitoring Is the Only Answer
Gupta
Arch Intern Med 2002;162:1526-1526.
FULL TEXT  

ABPM Is Valuable for the Management of Hypertension
Krakoff et al.
Arch Intern Med 2002;162:1528-1530.
FULL TEXT  

Treatment of IOH and Risk of Visual Complications
Hayreh
Arch Intern Med 2002;162:1526-1528.
FULL TEXT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 2001 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.