4.1 Article

Tracking of Blood Pressure in Children and Adolescents in Germany in the Context of Risk Factors for Hypertension

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HYPERTENSION
卷 2018, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

HINDAWI LTD
DOI: 10.1155/2018/8429891

关键词

-

资金

  1. Robert Koch Institute
  2. DZHK
  3. Institute for Sports and Sport Science

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Blood pressure (BP) tracking from childhood to adulthood has two aspects: the ranking stability relative to others over time and the prediction of future values. This study investigates BP tracking in children and adolescents in Germany in the context of hypertension risk factors. BP was measured and analyzed in 2542 participants of the German Health Examination Survey for Children and Adolescents (t(0) 2003-2006; 3 to 17-year olds) and of a six year follow-up Motorik Modul (t(1) 2009-2012; 9 to 24-year olds). BP tracking coefficients were calculated from Spearman's rank-order correlations. Predictive values and logistic regression models were used to forecast t(1)-BP above the hypertension threshold from t(0)-BP as well as from baseline and follow-up hypertension risk factors. BP tracking was moderate (0.33-0.50 for SBP and 0.19-0.39 for DBP) with no statistically significant differences between sex and age groups. Baseline hypertensive BP was the strongest independent predictor of hypertensive BP at follow-up (OR 4.3 and 3.4 for age groups 3-10 and 11-17 years) after adjusting for sex, BMI trajectories, birthweight, parental hypertension, and age-group dependent-sports/physical activity. However, the positive predictive value of baseline hypertensive BP for hypertensive BP at follow-up in 3- to 10-year olds was only 39% (34% in 11- to 17-year olds) and increased only moderately in the presence of additional risk factors. Our analysis with population-based data from Germany shows that BP in children and adolescents tracks only moderately over six years. BP in childhood is the strongest independent predictor of future BP but its predictive value is limited.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据