[Skip to Navigation]
Views 216
Citations 0
Comment & Response
June 2019

Methodological Issues in Determining the Accuracy of Automated Office Blood Pressure Readings for Diagnosing Hypertension—Reply

Author Affiliations
  • 1Institute for Mental Health Policy Research, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  • 2Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  • 3Department of Family and Emergency Medicine, Université de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
  • 4University of Montreal Hospital Research Centre, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
  • 5Division of Cardiology, Schulich Heart Program, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  • 6Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
JAMA Intern Med. 2019;179(6):850-851. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2019.1221

In Reply We agree with Etyang’s assertion that the accurate assessment of blood pressure (BP) is an important step in determining cardiovascular risk and that efforts to improve the accuracy of BP measurement should be encouraged. This accuracy is equally important for screening, diagnosis, and ongoing management of patients because the consequences of inaccurate readings often lead to misdiagnosis and inappropriate treatment. However, Etyang also seems to imply that patients cannot be identified as having hypertension if they already have a diagnosis of hypertension. If correct, this belief would preclude a diagnosis of resistant hypertension, which currently describes many patients with high BP readings who are already receiving antihypertensive therapy.

Limit 200 characters
Limit 25 characters
Conflicts of Interest Disclosure

Identify all potential conflicts of interest that might be relevant to your comment.

Conflicts of interest comprise financial interests, activities, and relationships within the past 3 years including but not limited to employment, affiliation, grants or funding, consultancies, honoraria or payment, speaker's bureaus, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, royalties, donation of medical equipment, or patents planned, pending, or issued.

Err on the side of full disclosure.

If you have no conflicts of interest, check "No potential conflicts of interest" in the box below. The information will be posted with your response.

Not all submitted comments are published. Please see our commenting policy for details.

Limit 140 characters
Limit 3600 characters or approximately 600 words