有人值守的标准化测量血压模式在社区高血压筛查中的应用

目的研究诊室血压标准化测量（简称“标准化测压”）模式用于社区高血压筛查的效果。方法从上海市奉贤区简单随机抽取4个社区，根据社区来源不同将筛查对象分为干预组和对照组，以社区非高血压患者作为筛查对象人群，干预前两组均采用常规测压方法，从2021年1月1日—2021年12月31日进行为期1年的干预研究。干预组采用有人值守的标准化测量血压方法作为干预措施，对照组采取常规测压方法。采用SPSS 20.0进行χ2检验分析干预组与对照组间血压末位数分布均衡性，通过正态性检验比较两组间血压值分布情况，通过倍差法分析干预措施前后血压升高率的变化。结果参与干预组标准化测量血压的社区居民共15 368人；参与对照组常规测压社区居民共19 811人。干预组干预后血压末位数值频率范围为9.55%~10.41%，收缩压（SBP）和舒张压（DBP）末位数值均显示分布均衡（P值分别为0.932和0.871），对照组干预后末位数值频率范围为1.31%~42.58%，SBP和DBP末位数值均显示分布不均衡 （P均<0.001）。通过为期1年的标准化测量干预，干预组干预后血压升高率为26.29%，与人群抽样调查结果接近，干预组血压升高率增幅是对照组增幅的7.61倍（OR=7.55，95%CI:6.75~8.57，P<0.001）。结论诊室血压标准化测量模式适用于社区高血压筛查测压，数据质量高于常规测压模式。

Evaluation on the application of community hypertension screening model by automated blood pressure measurement

ObjectiveTo evaluate the effect of standardized blood pressure measurement in consulting room （SBPM） model on blood pressure screening of non-hypertensive patients in community.MethodsFour communities were randomly selected from Fengxian District of Shanghai， and non-hypertensive patients in the communities were included for screening. Based on the communities， participants were further classified into the intervention group and control group. A one-year intervention study was conducted from January 1， 2021 to December 31， 2021. The intervention group received the intervention measures of standardized measurement， and the control group remained the routine measurement. The distribution of blood pressure values and last digit of the values between the intervention group and control group were tested using Chi-square test and normality test. Then changes in abnormal blood pressure rate before and after the intervention were determined by double difference method. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS 20.0.ResultsA total of 15 368 participants were included in the intervention group， and 19 811 participants in the control group. After the intervention， range of the last digit of blood pressure values in the intervention group was 9.55%?10.41%， of which that of systolic and diastolic blood pressure were equally distributed （P=0.932 and 0.871， respectively）. The range of the last digit in the control group was 1.31%?42.58%， of which that of systolic and diastolic blood pressure showed unequal distribution （P<0.001）. Through one-year standardized measurement intervention， the abnormal rate of blood pressure in the intervention group was 26.29%， which was 7.61 times as high as that in the control group （OR=7.55， 95%CI: 6.75?8.57， P<0.001）.ConclusionStandardized blood pressure measurement in consulting room is suitable for the screening of blood pressure measurement in community， which has higher data quality than that of routine measurement.