Discordance in National Estimates of Hypertension Among Young Adults

Background: In the United States, where coronary heart disease (CHD) is the leading cause of mortality, CHD risk assessment is a priority and accurate blood pressure (BP) measurement is essential. Methods: Hypertension estimates in the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health (Add Health), Wave IV (2008)—a nationally representative field study of 15,701 participants aged 24–32—was referenced against NHANES (2007–2008) participants of the same age. We examined discordances in hypertension, and estimated the accuracy and reliability of blood pressure in the Add Health study. Results: Hypertension rates (BP: ≥140/90 mm Hg) were higher in Add Health compared with NHANES (19% vs. 4%), but self-reported history was similar (11% vs. 9%) among adults aged 24–32. Survey weights and adjustments for differences in participant characteristics, examination time, use of antihypertensive medications, and consumption of food/caffeine/cigarettes before blood pressure measurement had little effect on between-study differences in hypertension estimates. Among Add Health participants interviewed and examined twice (full and abbreviated interviews), blood pressure was similar, as was blood pressure at the in-home and in-clinic examinations conducted by NHANES III (1988–1994). In Add Health, there was minimal digit preference in blood pressure measurements; mean bias never exceeded 2 mm Hg; and reliability (estimated as intraclass correlation coefficients) was 0.81 and 0.68 for systolic and diastolic BPs, respectively. Conclusions: The proportion of young adults in NHANES reporting a history of hypertension was twice that with measured hypertension, whereas the reverse was found in Add Health. Between-survey differences were not explained by digit preference, low validity, or reliability of Add Health blood pressure data, or by salient differences in participant selection, measurement context, or interview content. The prevalence of hypertension among Add Health Wave IV participants suggests an unexpectedly high risk of cardiovascular disease among US young adults and warrants further scrutiny.

[1]  Andrew Smolen,et al.  The National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health (Add Health) Sibling Pairs Data , 2012, Twin Research and Human Genetics.

[2]  K. Flegal,et al.  The impact of differences in methodology and population characteristics on the prevalence of hypertension in US adults in 1976-1980 and 1999-2002. , 2010, American journal of hypertension.

[3]  B. Egan,et al.  US trends in prevalence, awareness, treatment, and control of hypertension, 1988-2008. , 2010, JAMA.

[4]  L. Tarassenko,et al.  Determining which automatic digital blood pressure device performs adequately: a systematic review , 2010, Journal of Human Hypertension.

[5]  D. Mozaffarian,et al.  Heart disease and stroke statistics--2010 update: a report from the American Heart Association. , 2010, Circulation.

[6]  Simon Capewell,et al.  Cardiovascular risk factor trends and potential for reducing coronary heart disease mortality in the United States of America. , 2010, Bulletin of the World Health Organization.

[7]  K. Flegal,et al.  Prevalence and trends in obesity among US adults, 1999-2008. , 2010, JAMA.

[8]  P. Sorlie,et al.  Assessing the Validity of the Omron HEM‐907XL Oscillometric Blood Pressure Measurement Device in a National Survey Environment , 2010, Journal of clinical hypertension.

[9]  Dohoon Lee,et al.  Obesity in the transition to adulthood: predictions across race/ethnicity, immigrant generation, and sex. , 2009, Archives of pediatrics & adolescent medicine.

[10]  Steven A. Haas,et al.  Validity and Stability of Self-reported Health Among Adolescents in a Longitudinal, Nationally Representative Survey , 2009, Pediatrics.

[11]  D. Makuc,et al.  Health, United States, 2008; with special feature on the health of young adults , 2009 .

[12]  Paul P. Biemer,et al.  Weighting survey data , 2008 .

[13]  D. Altman,et al.  Agreement Between Methods of Measurement with Multiple Observations Per Individual , 2007, Journal of biopharmaceutical statistics.

[14]  L. Chambless,et al.  The reliability of the ankle-brachial index in the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) study and the NHLBI Family Heart Study (FHS) , 2006, BMC cardiovascular disorders.

[15]  R. Asmar,et al.  Validation of two devices for self-measurement of brachial blood pressure according to the International Protocol of the European Society of Hypertension: the SEINEX SE-9400 and the Microlife BP 3AC1-1 , 2005, Blood pressure monitoring.

[16]  K. Reynolds,et al.  Global burden of hypertension: analysis of worldwide data , 2005, The Lancet.

[17]  Daniel W. Jones,et al.  Seventh report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure. , 2003, Hypertension.

[18]  F. Hobbs,et al.  Does changing from mercury to electronic blood pressure measurement influence recorded blood pressure? An observational study. , 2003, The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners.

[19]  Y. Ostchega,et al.  National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 1999-2000: effect of observer training and protocol standardization on reducing blood pressure measurement error. , 2003, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[20]  Ihab Hajjar,et al.  Trends in prevalence, awareness, treatment, and control of hypertension in the United States, 1988-2000. , 2003, JAMA.

[21]  Daniel W. Jones,et al.  Measuring blood pressure accurately: new and persistent challenges. , 2003, JAMA.

[22]  R. Collins,et al.  Age-specific relevance of usual blood pressure to vascular mortality: a meta-analysis of individual data for one million adults in 61 prospective studies , 2002, The Lancet.

[23]  T. Rice,et al.  Reproducibility of resting blood pressure and heart rate measurements. The HERITAGE Family Study. , 2000, Annals of epidemiology.

[24]  S. Mieke,et al.  Blood pressure measurement in epidemiological studies: a comparative analysis of two methods. Data from the EPIC‐Potsdam Study , 1998 .

[25]  G. Berenson,et al.  Utility of an automatic instrument for blood pressure measurement in children. The Bogalusa Heart Study. , 1996, American journal of hypertension.

[26]  Gary G. Koch,et al.  Categorical Data Analysis Using The SAS1 System , 1995 .

[27]  G. Oehlert.  A note on the delta method , 1992 .

[28]  J. Cutler,et al.  The Hypertension Prevention Trial: assessment of the quality of blood pressure measurements. , 1991, American journal of epidemiology.

[29]  P. Rosch.  Risk of coronary artery disease. , 1983, JAMA.

[30]  D. Rubin,et al.  The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects , 1983 .

[31]  W. Elliott.  US Trends in Prevalence, Awareness, Treatment, and Control of Hypertension, 1988-2008 , 2011 .

[32]  W. J. Elliott,et al.  Hypertension Awareness, Treatment, and Control — Continued Disparities in Adults: United States, 2005-2006 , 2009 .

[33]  Yechiam Ostchega,et al.  Hypertension awareness, treatment, and control--continued disparities in adults: United States, 2005-2006. , 2008, NCHS data brief.

[34]  D. Dillman,et al.  International handbook of survey methodology. , 2008 .

[35]  M K Park,et al.  Comparison of auscultatory and oscillometric blood pressures. , 2001, Archives of pediatrics & adolescent medicine.

[36]  ROBERT W. Johnson,et al.  Healthy people. , 1985, Canadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique.