Automated blood pressure monitoring

Preview

Blood pressure measurements obtained through 24-hour automated monitoring are more reliable than office measurements and more strongly correlated with target-organ damage from hypertension. Yet broad use of automated monitoring remains controversial. The authors discuss areas of debate, explain why they favor broader use, and provide practical information for clinicians who want to try this relatively new technology.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Peter B. Bottini

Peter B. Bottini, PharmD L. Michael Prisant, MD Albert A. Carr, MD Dr Bottini (pictured) is assistant professor of medicine, section of hypertension and vascular diseases; Dr Prisant is associate professor of medicine, section of hypertension and vascular diseases and section of cardiology; and Dr Carr is professor of medicine and pharmacology and chief, section of hypertension and vascular diseases, Medical College of Georgia School of Medicine, Augusta.

L. Michael Prisant

Peter B. Bottini, PharmD L. Michael Prisant, MD Albert A. Carr, MD Dr Bottini (pictured) is assistant professor of medicine, section of hypertension and vascular diseases; Dr Prisant is associate professor of medicine, section of hypertension and vascular diseases and section of cardiology; and Dr Carr is professor of medicine and pharmacology and chief, section of hypertension and vascular diseases, Medical College of Georgia School of Medicine, Augusta.

Albert A. Carr

Peter B. Bottini, PharmD L. Michael Prisant, MD Albert A. Carr, MD Dr Bottini (pictured) is assistant professor of medicine, section of hypertension and vascular diseases; Dr Prisant is associate professor of medicine, section of hypertension and vascular diseases and section of cardiology; and Dr Carr is professor of medicine and pharmacology and chief, section of hypertension and vascular diseases, Medical College of Georgia School of Medicine, Augusta.