In order to bring you the best possible user experience, this site uses Javascript. If you are seeing this message, it is likely that the Javascript option in your browser is disabled. For optimal viewing of this site, please ensure that Javascript is enabled for your browser.
Did you know that your browser is out of date? To get the best experience using our website we recommend that you upgrade to a newer version. Learn more.

Automated office blood pressure measurement in the management of hypertension - fourth in series.

An article from the e-journal of the ESC Council for Cardiology Practice

Recent guidelines recommend that manual blood pressure (BP) measurement should be replaced by automated electronic sphygmomanometers. Semi-automated oscillometric BP recorders reduce some aspects of measurement error but still provoke a white coat effect. For automated office BP (AOBP) multiple BP readings are being taken with a fully automated sphygmomanometer with the patient resting alone quietly. AOBP eliminates the white coat effect and provides readings which are more accurate and similar to the awake ambulatory BP and home BP.



In 2013, a joint task force of the European Society of Cardiology and the European Society of Hypertension published new guidelines for the management of hypertension (1). A highlight was the statement that “BP can no longer be estimated using a mercury sphygmomanometer in many - although not all - European countries. Auscultatory or oscillometric semi-automated sphygmomanometers are used instead”. A similar statement was made in the 2014 guidelines of the International Society of Hypertension/American Society of Hypertension (2): “The electronic device is preferred (to record BP) because it provides more reproducible results than the older (auscultatory) method and is not influenced by variations in technique or by the bias of observers”. These guidelines recognise several realities:

  1. The use of mercury in healthcare settings in the European Community and elsewhere is now severely curtailed.
  2. More importantly is the recognition that manual BP measurement, regardless of the type of sphygmomanometer used, is inferior because it is subject to multiple sources of error in routine clinical practice. 

Furthermore, automated devices which have been properly validated for accuracy are now readily available as an alternative to manual BP.


1. Use of semi-automated electronic sphygmomanometers in the office

Most semi-automated sphygmomanometers are basically home BP recorders adapted for use in the office. Some devices such as the Omron HEM 705CP were worked with in major clinical trials such as the ASCOT study (3). Semi-automated recorders generally call on the oscillometric method to record BP with some units also being capable of performing auscultatory readings if, for some reason, the oscillometric mode does not give a satisfactory BP. The devices are semi-automatic since they must be activated by the patient or health professional to take one or more readings. This approach eliminates sources of measurement error related to the observer and should provide a more accurate reading than with manual BP.
However, semi-automated devices still seem to provoke some white coat effect. Several studies (table 1) have compared semi-automated electronic office BP to ABPM or home BP. In each instance, the semi-automated office BP readings performed under research study conditions with strict adherence to BP measurement guidelines were higher than the awake ambulatory BP.

Table 1. Studies comparing semi-automated BP readings with awake ambulatory or home BP (8-11)

Study # patients Semi-automated BP Awake Ambulatory BP
Myers et al (8) 27 157/83 145/78
Myers et al (9) 139 146/86 142/81
Stergiou et al (10) 30 137/88 128/83
Al-Karkhi et al (11) 133 140/86 133/83

2. Automated office BP measurement (AOBP)

Considering that (self-) measurement of BP using a semi-automated device does not eliminate the white coat effect, Gelfer and colleagues at VSM Medtech in Vancouver, Canada postulated that a fully automated oscillometric sphygmomanometer might go one-step further by recording an accurate office BP with little or no white coat effect (8). The company went on to develop the BpTRU which is capable of automatically taking five BP readings with the patient resting quietly alone. An initial ‘test’ reading (not included in the mean of five readings) is added to verify that the cuff has been properly applied and that a valid BP reading is present. The BpTRU was validated (9) according to the BHS and AAMI standards. 
In studies (table 2) comparing AOBP using the BpTRU with awake ambulatory BP in family practice, hypertension clinic, ABPM unit and research setting, the AOBP was similar to the awake ambulatory BP.

Table 2. Studies comparing automated office BP with awake ambulatory BP

Study # Subjects Settings AOBP  Awake ABP 
Beckett and Godwin (14) 481 Family practice 140/80  142/80
Myers et al (15)  309 ABPM 132/75  134/77
Myers et al (16) 62 Hypertension Clinic 140/77  141/77
Myers et al (16) 254 ABPM 133/80  135/81
Godwin et al (17) 654 Family Practice 139/80  141/80
Myers et al (9) 139 ABPM 141/82  142/81
Myers et al (18) 303 Family Practice 136/78  133/74
Mean     138/79  139/79

The correlation between the awake ambulatory BP and the AOBP is consistently stronger than the comparable manual office BP (table 3). AOBP also substantially reduces the digit preference (rounding off BP readings to the nearest zero value) associated with manual office BP (11,14).
Other aspects of AOBP have now been examined. AOBP readings taken either one or two minutes apart using the BpTRU are similar (15). Unlike manual BP, AOBP is similar in both the physician’s office and in non-treatment settings such as in an ABPM unit or pharmacy (16,17). 

Table 3. Coefficients of correlation for either routine manual BP or automated office BP versus systolic /diastolic awake ambulatory BP in different patient settings.

StudyN Setting N Coefficient (r) versus awake ambulatory BP
 Automated Office BP Manual Office BP 
Beckett and Godwin (14) Community family practice 481 0.57/0.61 0.15/0.32
Myers et al (15) Ambulatory BP unit 309 0.62/0.72 0.32/0.48
Myers et al (18) Community family practice 303 0.34/0.56 0.10/0.40

The elimination of the white coat effect is not simply due to the patient resting quietly alone for five minutes. No period of rest is required before the first AOBP reading is taken. Most of the fall in BP occurs within one minute of the physician leaving the examining room and higher BP levels return as soon as the physician re-enters the room (18). Other fully automated oscillometric sphygmomanometers such as the Omron HEM-907 produce AOBP readings which are comparable to the BpTRU (19).

3. A randomised controlled trial of AOBP in clinical practice

The Conventional versus Automated Measurement of BP in the Office (CAMBO) study was designed to evaluate the impact of AOBP measurement on the management of patients in routine, community-based, clinical practice (14). In this study, 67 practices (555 patients) in eastern Canada were randomised to either ongoing use of manual BP measurement (control group) or AOBP (intervention group) using the BpTRU. In ‘real-world’ practice, AOBP reduced office BP significantly more than the decrease in BP from baseline seen in the control, usual practice group. Introduction of AOBP in the intervention group reduced the routine manual pre-enrollment mean BP of 150/81 mmHg to 136/78 mmHg with the awake ambulatory BP being 132/74 mmHg. The CAMBO study also examined the impact AOBP might have on the prevalence of masked hypertension (normal office BP and hypertension on ABPM). In a sub-study (20) involving 140 patients in the AOBP intervention group and 112 patients in the control group who had no changes in drug therapy during the first three post-enrollment office visits, the prevalence of masked hypertension was significantly lower in AOBP patients than in the control patients who continued to be followed with manual BP measurements. The reduction in masked hypertension with AOBP occurred despite the AOBP (131/76 mmHg) being similar to the awake ambulatory BP (131/74 mmHg) whereas the manual BP was higher (138/79 mmHg).

4. Automated office BP and target organ damage

In a predominantly normotensive population (n=176), Campbell et al (21) noted a significantly stronger correlation between AOBP and the intima media wall thickness of the carotid artery compared to manual BP readings. Andreadis et al (22) examined the correlation between left ventricular mass index and awake ambulatory BP, AOBP and clinic BP recorded by research staff in 90 patients attending a hypertension clinic. The correlation with left ventricular mass index was significantly stronger for both the awake systolic ambulatory BP (r=0.37) and AOBP (r=0.37) compared to the clinic BP (r=0.12).  
The Cardiovascular Health Awareness Program (CHAP) used the BpTRU to screen BP status in older persons residing in 39 communities in the Province of Ontario, Canada (23). Communities were randomised to a pharmacy-based BP screening program using the BpTRU (intervention group) or to a control group. Residents who underwent BP screening with the BpTRU results reported to their own physicians had significantly fewer cardiovascular events during the subsequent year than those who were not screened for BP status. CHAP is the only BP screening study to report that BP screening reduces cardiovascular morbidity and mortality.

5. Automated BP in population surveys

In Canada, the BpTRU has been used in two large-scale surveys assessing the BP status of residents in the community (24,25). In the Ontario Survey on the Prevalence of High Blood Pressure (ON-BP), 2,551 subjects had their BP recorded using the BpTRU. The Canadian Health Measures Survey also included an automated BP by the BpTRU in the 3,943 participants randomly selected from the community. The findings in both surveys were similar with the prevalence of hypertension being unchanged from the early 1990’s but control rates had improved markedly to about 65%. The use of the AOBP technique has several advantages over manual BP, in particular greater accuracy and consistency. Moreover, use of the automated device precludes the need for intensive training of observers in auscultatory BP measurement and repeated testing to ensure consistent manual BP readings during the period of the survey. 


6. Rationale for using AOBP instead of semi-automated electronic sphygmomanometers 

The ESH/ESC guidelines (1) state that when feasible, AOBP should be considered as the preferred electronic sphygmomanometer because it improves reproducibility and provides office BP readings which are close to the awake ambulatory BP and home BP. The feasibility of AOBP is no longer an obstacle to its use in clinical practice. AOBP can be taken at one minute intervals without having the patient resting for five minutes before the first AOBP reading (26). Resting for one minute or perhaps even less before the first AOBP is sufficient. Thus, AOBP readings should take no longer than a proper manual BP, providing that the patient rests for five minutes before the first manual BP reading, as recommended in the guidelines.
The initial recommendation for AOBP stated that the readings should be taken with the patient resting alone in a quiet room. More recent reports suggest that the patient only needs to be left alone in a quiet place which could be a waiting area or other location in the office. AOBP recorded in the office waiting room, an ABPM unit or in a community pharmacy were similar to AOBP readings obtained with the patient alone in the examining room (16,17,27). 
The relatively high cost of devices available for recording AOBP compared to semi-automated home BP sphygmomanometers adapted for professional use has been a limitation of AOBP. The BpTRU, Omron-HEM 907 and Microlife WatchBP Office are indeed relatively expensive (US$ 600-1000), especially if several recorders are needed for one practice. The recent introduction of lower cost ‘basic’ devices specifically designed for AOBP has brought the cost of adopting AOBP into clinical practice much closer to the semi-automated electronic devices which require activation of the recorder by the patient or health professional.
Thus, the time required for recording AOBP, the need for a separate examining room and the cost of AOBP devices are no longer limiting factors in the use of AOBP in clinical practice.

Table 4: Principles of automated office BP measurement

Principles of automated office BP measurement
1.Use fully automated, validated, electronic sphygmomanometer
2.Device should take multiple readings without requiring activation of readings by the patient or health professional
3.Patient should be resting in a quiet place without possibility of conversation, preferably alone in a room

7. Anticipated future Research Involving AOBP

Studies to date have documented the advantages of AOBP over manual and semi-automated electronic sphygmomanometers when used in the office setting. Based upon studies comparing AOBP with the awake ambulatory BP and home BP, it appears that all three methods of measurement should have the same cut-point for diagnosing hypertension, 135/85 mmHg. Ideally, there should be clinical outcome data relating AOBP to cardiovascular end-points in order to confirm the AOBP reading for defining hypertension. However, it should be noted that the relationship between BP and cardiovascular risk is a continuous one with any cut-points separating normal from high BP being somewhat arbitrary. After all, there is still disagreement as to the appropriate value for defining hypertension using ABPM, even after numerous outcome studies conducted over two decades (28).
More population surveys need to be performed using AOBP with sub-sets of the subjects also having manual BP taken in order to achieve a better understanding of the relationship between AOBP readings and manual BP in this setting.
AOBP has already been used in clinical trials examining pharmacotherapy in hypertension (29) and more such studies are anticipated.


Involvement of humans in recording BP is a major source of measurement error and bias. Regardless of the type of sphygmomanometer used, BP readings taken by doctors and nurses tend to be higher due to increased patient anxiety, conversation with the patient, digit preference, single readings and non-standardised measurement technique. The simple act of a patient pushing a button to activate a semi-automated electronic recorder also appears to increase BP, even if the patient is alone.
The replacement of manual sphygmomanometers and semi-automated electronic devices with AOBP eliminates many of the causes of inaccurate office BP measurement and provides a reading which closely approximates the awake ambulatory BP and home BP, gold standards for predicting future cardiovascular risk associated with hypertension. Given that an electronic device is now recommended for office BP measurement, AOBP should become the standard method for obtaining BP readings in clinical practice with only a few simple procedures needed to be followed (table 4). 
Thus, AOBP offers the opportunity to maintain an important role for office BP in the management of hypertension. The combination of ABPM to make a definitive diagnosis of hypertension with AOBP and home BP to detect hypertension and to monitor the progress of patients on drug therapy brings the management of hypertension into the twenty-first century.


1 - 2013 ESH/ESC guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension. Mancia G, Fagard R, Krzysztof N, Redon J, Zanchetti A, Bohm M et al. J Hypertens 2013; 31:1281-1357.
2 - Clinical practice guidelines for the management of hypertension in the community – a statement of the American Society of Hypertension and the International Society of Hypertension. Weber ME, Schiffrin EL, White WB, Mann S, Lindholm LH, Kenerson KG et al. J Hypertens 2014; 32:3-15.
3 - Prevention of cardiovascular events with an antihypertensive regimen of amlodipine adding perindopril as required versus atenolol, adding bendroflumethazide as required, in the Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial - Blood pressure lowering arm (ASCOT-BPLA): a multicenter randomized controlled trial. Dahlhof B, Sever PS, Poulter NR, Wedel H, Beevers DG, Caulfield M et al. Lancet 2005; 366:895-906.
4 - The impact of physician vs automated blood pressure readings on office-induced hypertension. Myers MG, Meglis G, Polemidiotis G.  J Hum Hypertens 1997; 11:491-493. 
5 - Can sphygmomanometers designed for self-measurement of blood pressure in the home be used in office practice? Myers MG, Valdivieso M, Chessman M, Kiss A.  Blood Press Monit 2010; 15:300-304.
6 - Home or self blood pressure measurement? What is the correct term? Stergiou GS, Efstathiou SP, Alamara CV, Mastorantonakis SE, Roussias LG. J Hypertens 2003; 21:2259-2264.
7 - Comparisons of automated blood pressures in a primary health care setting with self-measurements at the office and at home using the Omron i-C10 device. Al-Karkhi I, Al-Rubaiy R, Rosenqvist U, Falk M, Nystrom FN. Blood Press Monit (Published on-line 2014) 
8 - BpTRU blood pressure monitor for use in a physician’s office. [Issues in emerging health technology. Allison C. Ottawa: Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health 2006; 86:1-4.
9 - Validation of a new algorithm for the BPM-100 electronic oscillometric office blood pressure monitor.  Wright JM, Mattu GS, Perry Jr TL, Gelfer ME, Strange KD, Zorn A, Chen Y.  Blood Press Monit 2001; 6:161-165.
10 - The BpTRU automatic blood pressure monitor compared to 24-h ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in the assessment of blood pressure in patients with hypertension. Beckett L, Godwin M.  BMC Cardiovasc Disord 2005 ;5:18.
11 - Use of automated office blood pressure measurement to reduce the white coat response. Myers MG, Valdivieso M, Kiss A.  J Hypertens 2009; 27:280-286 
12 - A proposed algorithm for diagnosing hypertension using automated office blood pressure measurement. Myers MG.  J Hypertens 2010; 28:703-708. 
13 - Manual and automated office measurements in relation to awake ambulatory blood pressure monitoring.  Godwin M, Birtwhistle R, Delva D, Lam M, Casson I, MacDonald S, et al. Fam Pract 2011; 28:110-117.
14 - Conventional versus automated measurement of blood pressure in primary care patients with systolic hypertension: randomized parallel design controlled trial.  Myers MG, Godwin M, Dawes M, Kiss A, Tobe SW, Grant FC, Kaczorowski J.  BMJ 2011; doi:10.1136/bmj.d286
15 - Optimum frequency of automated blood pressure measurements using an automated sphygmomanometer. Myers MG, Valdivieso M, Kiss A:  Blood Press Monit 2008; 13:333-338.  
16 - Consistent relationship between automated office bloodpressure recorded in different settings. Myers MG, Valdivieso M, Kiss A. Blood Press Monit 2009; 14:108-111.
17 - Comparison of blood pressure measurements using an automated blood pressure device in community pharmacies and family physicians' offices: a randomized controlled trial. Chambers LW, Kaczorowski J, O’Reilly S, Ignagni S, Hearps SJC. CMAJ Open 2013; 1:E37-E42.
18 - Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring for routine clinical practice.  Myers MG. Hypertension 2005; 45:483-484. 
19 - Comparison of two automated sphygmomanometers for use in the office setting. Myers MG, Valdivieso M, Kiss A, Tobe SW.  Blood Press Monit 2009; 14:45-47. 
20 - The conventional versus automated measurement of blood pressure in the office (CAMBO) trial: masked hypertension sub-study.  Myers MG, Godwin M, Dawes M, Kiss A, Tobe SW, Kaczorowski J. J Hypertens 2012; 30:1937-1941.  
21 - Automated oscillometric blood pressure versus auscultatory blood pressure as a predictor of carotid intima-medial thickness in male firefighters.  Campbell NR, McKay DW, Conradson H, Lonn E, Title LM, Anderson T.  J Hum Hypertens  2007; 21:588-590.
22 - Automated office blood pressure and 24-h ambulatory measurements are equally associated with left ventricular mass index. Andreadis EA, Agaliotis GD, Angelopoulos ET, Tsakanikas AP, Chaveles IA, Mousoulis GP. Am J Hypertens 2011; 24:661-666
23 - Cardiovascular health awareness program (CHAP):  A community cluster-randomised trial among elderly Canadians. Kaczorowski J, Chambers LW, Karwalajtys T, Dolovich L, Farrell B, McDonough B et al.  Prevent Med 2008; 46:537-544.
24 - Results of the Ontario survey on the prevalence and control of hypertension. Leenen FHH, Dumais J, McInnis N, Turton P, Stratychuk L, Nemeth K et al. CMAJ 2008; 178:1441-1449.
25 - Changes in the rates of awareness, treatment and control of hypertension in Canada over the past two decades. McAlister FA, Wilkins K, Joffres M, Leenen FH, Fodor G, Gee M, Tremblay MS, Walker R, Johansen H, Campbell N. CMAJ  2011; 183:1007-1013.
26 - What is the optimal interval between successive blood pressure readings using an automated oscillometric device. Eguchi K, Kuruvilla S, Ogedegbe G, Gerin W, Schwartz JE, Pickering TG. J Hypertens 2009; 27:1172-1177.
27 - Where should automated blood pressure measurements be taken? Greiver M, White D, Kaplan DM, Katz K, Moineddin R, Doabchian E. Blood Press Monit 2012; 17:137-138.
28 - Ambulatory blood pressure for cardiovascular risk stratification. Verdecchia P, Angeli F, Cavallini C. Circulation 2007;115:2091-2093.
29 - Divergent results using clinic and ambulatory blood pressures: report of a darusentan-resistant hypertension trial. Bakris GL, Lindholm LH, Black HR, Krum H, Linas S, Linseman JV, Arterburn S, Sager P, Weber M. Hypertension 2010;56:824-830

Notes to editor

Martin G. Myers, MD, FRCPC (Corresponding Author)

Division of Cardiology
Schulich Heart Program
Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre
Toronto, Canada, 

Frans H. H. Leenen, MD, PhD, FRCPC, FAHA
Hypertension Unit
University of Ottawa Heart Institute
Ottawa, Canada

Research by the authors was supported by operating grants from the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Ontario.  Frans Leenen holds the Pfizer Chair in Hypertension Research, an endowed chair supported by Pfizer Canada, University of Ottawa Heart Institute Foundation, and Canadian Institutes of Health Research.  The authors would like to acknowledge Mrs. Danielle Oja for her excellent skills in assisting in the preparation and formatting of this article. 

The content of this article reflects the personal opinion of the author/s and is not necessarily the official position of the European Society of Cardiology.