Articles

American Journal of Hypertension (2008);21 2.153–158. doi:10.1038/ajh.2007.43

Factors Influencing White-coat Effect

Efstathios D. Manios1, Eleni A. Koroboki1, Georgios K. Tsivgoulis2, Konstantinos M. Spengos2, Ioanna K. Spiliopoulou1, Fiona G. Brodie3, Konstantinos N. Vemmos1 and Nikolaos A. Zakopoulos1

  1. 1Department of Clinical Therapeutics, Alexandra Hospital, University of Athens, Athens, Greece
  2. 2Department of Neurology, Eginition Hospital, University of Athens, Athens, Greece
  3. 3Department of Ageing and Stroke Medicine, Leicester General Hospital, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK

Correspondence: Efstathios Manios, (stathismanios@yahoo.gr)

Received 12 July 2007; First Decision 18 August 2007; Accepted 1 November 2007; Published online 3 January 2008.

Top

Abstract

Background

 

The transient blood pressure (BP) rise during clinical visits is usually referred to as white-coat effect (WCE). The aim of the present study was to investigate factors that may influence the WCE.

Methods

 

A total of 2004 subjects underwent office BP measurements and 24-h ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) on the same day. The WCE was estimated as the difference between office and average daytime ambulatory BP (ABP). According to the office and daytime BP values, the study population was divided into normotensives (NTs), white-coat hypertensives (WCHs), masked hypertensives (MHTs), and sustained hypertensives (SHTs). Statistical analyses were performed using one-way analysis of variance and multiple linear regression models.

Results

 

The mean systolic and diastolic WCE was 9 plusminus 16 and 7 plusminus 12 mm Hg, respectively. In the entire group of patients, multiple linear regression models revealed independent determinants of systolic WCE in the following rank order: office systolic BP (SBP) (beta = 0.727; P < 0.001), female gender (beta = 0.166; P < 0.001), daytime SBP variability (beta = 0.128; P < 0.001), age (beta = 0.039, P = 0.020), and smoking (beta = 0.031, P = 0.048). A 1.0 mm Hg increase in daytime SBP variability correlated with an increment of 0.589 mm Hg (95% confidence intervals, 0.437–0.741) in the systolic WCE. The regression analyses for diastolic WCE revealed the same factors as independent determinants. A 1.0 mm Hg increase in daytime diastolic BP (DBP) variability was independently associated with an increment of 0.418 mm Hg (95% confidence intervals, 0.121–0.715) in the diastolic WCE.

Conclusions

 

Factors such as gender, age, smoking, office BPV and daytime BPV may exert an important influence on the magnitude of the WCE.

American Journal of Hypertension (2008);21 2.153–158. doi:10.1038/ajh.2007.43

MORE ARTICLES LIKE THIS

These links to content published by NPG are automatically generated.

NEWS AND VIEWS

Prevalence, Causes, and Consequences of Masked Hypertension: A Meta-analysis

American Journal of Hypertension News and Views

Extra navigation

.

naturejobs

natureproducts


ADVERTISEMENT