ABC | Volume 113, Nº5, November 2019

Original Article Barroso et al. Telemedicine in hypertension diagnosis Arq Bras Cardiol. 2019; 113(5):970-975 Figure 1 – Flowchart for the selection of individuals for the analysis. PH: pre-hypertension, AH: arterial hypertension. Total sample n = 4350 Normal BP or stage 2 or 3 AH n = 559 Antihypertensive drug use n = 2518 PH or stage 1-AH Without antihypertensive drugs n = 1273 Pre-hypertensive patients n = 703 Stage 1-hypertensive patients n = 570 Figure 2 – Comparison of systolic and diastolic blood pressure measurements between casual methods and the home blood pressure measurement, n = 1273. Paired t-test *(p < 0.001). SBP: systolic blood pressure; DBP: diastolic blood pressure; HBPM: home blood pressure monitoring. 133.2 ± 11.0 125.5 ± 11.7 84.1 ± 8.0 78.9 ± 8.0 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 SBP DBP * * mmHg Casual measurement HBPM is, in this population, 33.3% of the diagnoses by casual measurement were wrong. When analyzing only the prehypertensive group, there were 145 individuals (20.6%) who actually had masked hypertension, and if we separate those individuals with SBP ≥ 130 mmHg and < 140 mmHg , and/or DBP ≥ 85 mmHg and < 90 mmHg (n = 364), the prevalence of MH increases to 27.8% (Table 2). In the stage 1 hypertensive group, 279 individuals (48.9%) with WCH were identified (Figure 3). Discussion The present study confirmed that the BP measurements obtained through HBPM is very useful in the diagnosis of AH phenotypes and allowed the reclassification of 33.3% of the assessed individuals, thus adding important information to the 972