4.5 Article

Blood pressure response to psychological stressors in adults after prenatal exposure to the Dutch famine

期刊

JOURNAL OF HYPERTENSION
卷 24, 期 9, 页码 1771-1778

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/01.hjh.0000242401.45591.e7

关键词

blood pressure; maternal nutrition; psychological stress; starvation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective There is increasing evidence that restricted prenatal growth is associated with exaggerated blood pressure responses to stress. We investigated the effect of maternal undernutrition on the adult offspring's stress response. Design A historical cohort study. Methods We performed continuous blood pressure and heart rate measurements during a battery of three 5-min physiological stress tests (Stroop test, mirror-drawing test and a public speech task) in 721 men and women, aged 58 years, born as term singletons in Amsterdam at about the time of the Dutch 1944-1945 famine. Results During the stress tests, the systolic blood pressure (SBP) rose from baseline by 20 mmHg during the Stroop test, by 30 mmHg during the mirror-drawing test and by 47 mmHg during the public speech task. The SBP and diastolic blood pressure increase during stress was highest among individuals exposed to famine in early gestation compared with unexposed subjects (4 mmHg extra systolic increase, P = 0.04; 1 mmHg diastolic increase, P = 0.1, both adjusted for sex). Exposure during mid and late gestation was not associated with a stress-related increment of blood pressure (P adjusted for sex > 0.6). Correcting for confounders in a multivariable model did not attenuate the association between famine exposure in early gestation and the SBP increment. The heart rate increment was not related to famine exposure during any part of gestation. Conclusion We found a greater blood pressure increase during stress among individuals exposed to famine in early gestation. Increased stress responsiveness may underlie the known association between coronary heart disease and exposure to famine in early gestation.

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

4.5
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